🚀 go-pugleaf

 
 Article 36635 (36 more) in misc.headlines:
 Organization: University of Illinois at Chicago
 
 In article <BxIExK.Aqn@ddsw1.mcs.com>, arf@ddsw1.mcs.com 
 (Jack Schmidling) says:
 >If there is any validity to the notion that a mixed jury provides justice,
 >we must define the word mixed.  It assumes that people have prejucides
 >and biases and by attempting to balance them, justice will prevail.
 
 <Once again, your wealth of ignorance astounds me Steempy.  
 We are dealing with the jury of a murder case, not the 
 witnesses for or against some new welfare law being heard 
 before Congress.
 
 Your personal attack neatly avoids any objective comment on 
 my remarks.
 
 
 >It is a sicko idea and another good example of what is wrong with the
 >cultural diversity that liberals are stuffing down our throats.  However,
 
 <Only you can come up with the idea that cultural diversity 
 is something sick.
 
 Only you seem to be unable to comprehend simple English 
 sentances.  The idea above referred to is sicko not cultural 
 diversity.  Cultural diversity as practiced in this country 
 is flawed and can not work as dreamed by the dreamers.
 
 <The goal of jury selection is to get a group which consists 
 of people who are not of the "kill the nigger"....
 
 Pray tell, how does this differ from what I said?
 
 > But then, such subtle points of jurisdictional
 information are far and beyond the call of Mr. Schmidling's 
 clues as to what is or what isn't reality.
 
 More objective arguments.
 
 >What the hell do Hispanics have to do with this anyway?  Why are they on the
 >jury? My understanding is that the accuse is a Negro and the victim a Jew.
 >What it the point in mixing Hispanics in the jury?
 
 >The point of "mixing" Hispanics into the jury is for the 
 hell of it.  They were people not involved in the case, who 
 couldn't give a rat's ass in Brooklyn either way, and not 
 because of anything else. 
 
 Why not some nice white boys from the burbs?
 
 < In your twisted, racist mind Jack, if there is a dispute 
 between people of two races, the should be the only ones to 
 judge. 
 
 Sounds like you need to do a little untwisting.
 
 > The trouble is, EVERYONE HAS TO LIVE
 IN THE SAME SOCIETY AS THE DISPUTING PARTIES (caps made to 
 drive home point
 to man with point on head).
 
 The only point made seems to relate to your maturity and 
 total lack of objectivity.
 
 > RACE HAS ABSOLUTELY NOTHING TO DO WITH JURY 
 SELECTION.....
 
 I believe I juggested a Chassidic Jew.  Since when are 
 Chassidic Jews a race?
 
 >Honestly, Mr. Jack Schmidling, if you have read this 
 far....
 
 I always read to the end of the first response from most 
 individuals.  However, it is now clear that you are simply a 
 teeny bopper trying to take on a mature adult and are just 
 flailing like a brat.
 
 If you expect me to read or respond to your next round, you 
 had better try a little harder.
 
 <Just where did you get your education?  Inside a 
 cracker-jack box?
 
 I think the important point is that you are still obtaining 
 yours and it is clearly a long way off.
 
 js