i saw a weird/creepy thing on the F last night--did you?

Re read 1st post
Nowhere does op state they were a "couple" as in together,
but rather op states they were seated seperately, and at some point when asked, the woman CHOSE to sit next to him. they might merely have been on the same plane heading the same way and he might simply be a horny old man who got a thrill from touching her knee, but on Yom Kippur will pray to God to forgive his transgression ... thats whats Yom Kippur is for right ? becasue even hasidic jews do not expect they are going to be perfect hasids at every moment of their existence ...

I knew 2 hasidic gals when i was a teen in jersey. They had moved with their family from Brooklyn. They HATED the life. They repeatedly ran away,usually back to brooklyn, where a member of the community would let the family know and so they were repeatedly brought back into the fold.
Neither was blond but they did show me polaroids of them dressed to hit the clubs and they looked GOOD yo....

you seem a tad more objective than OP so then im sure this all makes sense too.

The witnesses character, state of mind, and general predispositions are always going to be called out ...

Its entire possible the witness was tired or inebriated.
Its entirely possible that the witness was using hallucinogens and anti depressants.
Its entirely possible witness is a victim , knew someone who , or actually did witness such a crime at some point in the past ,and based on another post in this thread where witness incorrectly reports only men are disagreeing,
witness might be predisposed to jumping to conclusion about such things.
(aka persecution complex)
Its entirely possible that witnesses opinion that the police wont help is because they have chosen to ignore other false allegations witness has made in the past.
Its entirely possible that witness is lying.

are you aware of that eyewitness reports are generally considered unreliable ? this eyewitness didnt actually see a crime . . .

----------
anyways ,
i am disappointed you were unable to or chose not to reply to this query ..
Moreover what are people to do with this info ?
Should everyone assume that every time they see a male hasid not being a perfect Jew that trafficking is occurring ?
more importantly, since "the police wont do anything" are we to simply take matters into our own hands ?

precisely what should one do, hmm ??
-----

ps maybe rasta-woman just bought some stuff at the amish market in midtown and they happen to live off the same train line ....

booklaw wrote: Some possibilities are more likely than others.

I don't know what one should do. If there is any moral/ethical obligation at all, it would vary in degree according to the circumstances.

For instance, if it were possible to recognize that a given child on the subway were being kidnapped by a stranger (rather than just throwing a complete fit because she didn't want to go home from the zoo), the obligation to act would be greater than in the situation observed by the OP (assuming that that situation called for action at all), simply because a helpless child was involved).

It is always better to err on the side of caution when a child is involved. I would hope that OP would have alerted the police or some other authority IMMEDIATELY if that were the case.

This was 2 adults, and no one appeared to be distressed. No we can add Morality Police to the Parent Police and Pregnancy Policy that makes PS (in)famous.

Incorrect.

OP's 1st post ends with the conclusion of possible trafficking.
OP later embellishes account with "he touched her knee" and "she looked uncomfortable", which in the 1st post are "he leaned in close" and "she was emotionless"

so aside from the fact that the OP is either adding details to fit the conclusion or only remembering them later,
suggests that the initial account is not necessarily 100% accurate.

enuff bs let me get to the crux.

Has anyone taken one moment to be concerned about the possible repercussions of making such an accusation in this form ?

You have heard of innocent hasidic men being beaten to death in brooklyn ?
Some at the hands of anti semitism
some at the hands of vengeance seeking mobs ...

the reckless disregard for potential HARM as a result of a making false speculative allegations is stunning.

SO , when you think about it objectively,
its POSSIBLE that antisemitism is at the core of this thread.

now go discuss amongst yourselves because im truly verklempt.

Garfunky wrote:

SO , when you think about it objectively,
its POSSIBLE that antisemitism is at the core of this thread.

Jew bashing or man bashing or maybe both might be at the core of this thread.

raw wrote: [quote=Garfunky]

SO , when you think about it objectively,
its POSSIBLE that antisemitism is at the core of this thread.

Jew bashing or man bashing or maybe both might be at the core of this thread.

I am jewish.
i could claim that a real jew would have felt this undertone immediately
so maybe op doesnt know as much as she claims.
but i acknowledge
it could be someone unable to see the forest for the trees,
blinded by one righteous indignation
they overlook the potential consequences of their words and actions.

If bizarre posts on this board can help cause the NY times to run article,
certainly its POSSIBLE op's conclusion could incite an anti semite to violence.
malicious individuals dont exactly need much to attempt to justify harming the hated ethnicity of their choice.

according to previous posts / conclusions in this thread
if i see 70 yr old hasidic man touch a fit 20 something yr old nordic woman on the knee,
she could not possibly be jewish,
they could not possibly related,
she could not ne a fanmily freind,
it could not be a chance encounter,
it could not possibly be a landlord tenant thing,
despite the fact she made a choice to move to sit next to him
its NOT possible its anything other than "trafficking"
for some reason she couldnt possibly smack him upside the head with her suitcase and or simply run away
AND its useless to go to the police.

OH NO OH NO !!!
SOMEONE SHOULD DO SOMETHING TO HELP THIS NORDIC WOMAN ESCAPE THE FOREIGN LANGUAGE USING, RAZORPHONE CARRYING JEW !!
:evil: :evil: :evil: :evil:
starting to feel me yet ???

Garfunky wrote:
OH NO OH NO !!!
SOMEONE SHOULD DO SOMETHING TO HELP THIS NORDIC WOMAN ESCAPE THE FOREIGN LANGUAGE USING, RAZORPHONE CARRYING JEW !!
:evil: :evil: :evil: :evil:
starting to feel me yet ???

If you are correct about the OP's intentions (and I am guessing that you are not), then absolutely yes! As kindly as I can, can I point out that you may be as guilty as the OP about imagining intent where there may be none?

filmlover44 wrote: [quote=Garfunky]
OH NO OH NO !!!
SOMEONE SHOULD DO SOMETHING TO HELP THIS NORDIC WOMAN ESCAPE THE FOREIGN LANGUAGE USING, RAZORPHONE CARRYING JEW !!
:evil: :evil: :evil: :evil:
starting to feel me yet ???

If you are correct about the OP's intentions (and I am guessing that you are not), then absolutely yes! As kindly as I can, can I point out that you may be as guilty as the OP about imagining intent where there may be none?

yes, except im not speaking absolutes, have been trying to get this point across for several days without saying it, and decided at the least a small taste of reciprical treatment might open the eyes ....
(please see she might be blinded by righteous indignation and just not realize)

nor am i providing ops whereabouts ,description of her and her companion(s), time to find her , and insisting the police wont help.

a man who has not committed a crime is being labeled a trafficker in absolute terms based on one very brief "sighting",
during which he did NOTHING remotely illegal.

the anti-semitic angle only makes it worse. btw.

booklaw wrote:
I totally believe that the accusations above are just plain nuts!

GOOD !

because the only person who has made an absolute accusation is OP.

for reasons unknown to me , i inserted the "possibly".
op truly ends 1st post ends with
"i hope she wasnt being trafficked. no im not kidding"

and later admits it IS the only scenario she can think of.

redmenace wrote: [quote=Garfunky]for reasons unknown to me , i inserted the "possibly".
op truly ends 1st post ends with
"i hope she wasnt being trafficked. no im not kidding"

and later admits it IS the only scenario she can think of.

and now the post had disappeared

Here is the original post:

brooklynpotter
ceramme ceramma danna

Joined: 11 May 2006
Posts: 2020
Location: near the square that's a circle

Post Fri May 16, 08 11:23 am EST Reply with quote
around 11, was coming back from dinner. at some point during the trip two people came on together: an older (late 70s) unshaven orthodox man wearing a hat and carrying a rolly suitcase, and an early 20s blond girl, with a giant red rolly suitcase bound in shrink-wrap. girl looked very nordic, long hair up in a scrunchie, miniscule diamond earrings and nose ring, jeans, pink nylon carry-on looking bag.

at first they were in seat across from the other, so i couldn't tell that they were together. but when a seat opened up next to the man he motioned for her to come sit next to him. then, he kept leaning in to talk with her and it appeared he was explaining something. i could have just been reading into that. she didn't seem to have any emotion whatsoever

when the train went up the viaduct he used his razor phone twice, telling someone he was on his way but late, he might have said he was coming from san francisco. then the train went express and when i got off at 7th ave they stayed on the train.

i really regret not going up to her and pulling her aside and asking if she was okay, but i didn't. (why she wouldn't have been okay, for those who might not know: orthodox men aren't supposed to be talking to women who aren't relatives, esp. women in pants, or traveling with women in pants--she was clearly a foreigner. he shouldn't have been leaning in talking with her, totally inappropriate for him to be that close to her, etc. ) the whole thing was so out of the realm of normalcy. i really hope she wasn't being trafficked. no, i'm not kidding.
_________________
what would you tell me, if i could hear you speaking?---todd

Garfunky wrote: [quote=booklaw]
I totally believe that the accusations above are just plain nuts!

GOOD !

because the only person who has made an absolute accusation is OP.

I sent you a PM.

veets wrote: geez raw.. Now we are back to the beginning!!!!!
It has become a Raw/Garfunky (afew others thread).
Don't you think we could just drop it?

If not.. why???

because people are still defending op's "right"
to accuse someone of a crime
describe them and provide location.
while suggesting the police cannot stop him.
despite the fact that they havent done a FUCKING THING even remotely criminal.

the hasidic angle and the sex crime angle only make it that much worse.
and despite cries of op couldnt possibly be stereotyping or antisemitic,

the only "evidence" being offered is based on ethnicity and religion.
so what do YOU call that ??

and id still like to know what op or you thinks one should do if they see a hasidic man touch a nordic woman on the knee, this could not possibly be anything but trafficking , the police cant stop him and she cant possibly just get off the train. what do i do to aid this helpless woman who is so obviously the victim of a sex crime????

PLEASE , DO TELL

raw wrote: The fact that the original post keeps vanishing intrigues me. If you're going to post something and ask people to respond and don't like the replies that you get, it's cowardly to delete your original post. Keep it up and stand up for yourself or take back your words and thank people for sharing their thoughts. Don't blame a vanishing post of poltergeists. Especially after it attracted so many responses.

That actually looks like a board glitch to me. Note how the .sig line sucked up into the title, the lack of "edited...", etc.

FWIW.

WTGirl wrote: I am not thrilled with the lessons of all fundamentalists across the board: from wrapping women in burkas, to living in the desert marrying 12 year olds etc....they all share the same message.

Can.

Worms.

Opener.

You.

Alrighty then. Let me just say that I get your point, but wearing burkas is a far cry from marrying 12 year olds, in my eyes. Freedom includes the _freedom_ to wear burkas. I understand your point, mind you, but the flip side is that you can't walk in and so, "You shall wear a burka no more! You are free!" Many _want_ to wear the burka, and believe in it (and more.) I understand the viewpoint that _that_ is part of the problem, but I must give them their right to believe, worship, and dress how they choose.

Which doesn't extend to marrying twelve year olds.

Because it is complicated like that.

P.S. Which line is the best for touching Nordic women? Because I wants me some of that!

Garfunky wrote: thanks i appreciate the comments.

although i had thought you might have picked up on the intended irony.

mike myers also starred in "so i married an axe murderer"

Oh, I did. It was a dual purpose post.