Carys no one is objecting to criminals being arrested. What we are objecting to is the illegal policing methods being used. Beating up vagrants is not ok. It is racist to target people because they are poor and black. It is racist to "move people along" because you don't like what they look like. Racist and wrong (and everyone of every race is capable of being bigoted). All we are asking is for the law to be applied. Equally. What is so threatening about that. As far as I know, policing in NY did not involve illegal forced removal
On Oct 20, 9:46 am, "Walsh, Carys" <[email protected]> wrote: > I just want to say that I object to this - it has nothing to do with race - I > don't care if the people roaming the streets are black, white, coloured, > chinese, whatever (and as my father is black as night it would be quite > difficult for me to be racist!) - what I do care about is the crime that > comes with vagrants. Robbery, holding guns to people's heads, attacking > people with guns or knives, breaking into people's houses in the middle of > the night with the intent to hurt - causing harm to people in order to get > money - that is what I have a problem with. And unfortunately, vagrants do > bring an element of crime - it is a fact. I think everyone needs to get over > the past and forget about race etc - rather look at the bigger picture, which > is that crime is a big problem in Observatory. And if people believe it is > wrong to arrest people, then maybe you need to take a look at the history of > New York and how it managed to get rid of crime - zero tolerance. Which I > believe is what Obs is trying to do. And as a single mother with 2 small > children - I am more than happy with - I have already had someone inside my > house at 1am with my children sleeping in their bedrooms. But as I understand > it from you, and maybe I am wrong, I shouldn't be upset about that - I should > have told the guy that it was ok, he can help himself to the small amount of > things I have - maybe stab or rape one of my children - because if I get > upset and want better protection in Obs, then I am actually taking away his > human rights. What about my human rights? What about my children's human > rights? Or because I work 12 hour days to make sure that my kids have a home, > does that mean that that we aren't entitled to anything because we already > have a house? > > > > > > > > -----Original Message----- > From: [email protected] [mailto:[email protected]] On Behalf Of H > Schultz > Sent: 20 October 2011 09:23 > To: The Observatory Neighbourhood watch > Subject: Re: FW: [obsnw] Re: Intriguing by line on the cover of Big Issue > > quick edit: abyss instead of abbess. Apologies > > On Oct 19, 4:16 pm, H Schultz <[email protected]> wrote: > > Hi Hannah Schultz (daughter of Mrs. Schultz) here > > My mother moved to Observatory in the 1980s because it was one of the > > few places in Cape Town in which inter-racial partnerships could be > > ok. You argue that Observatory has become better, but for us it has > > not. This is because it is difficult to live in a place that > > considers poor black people to be undesirable. > > > I do not know why my mother's aims are so baffling to you. What my > > mother wants is for the law to be applied equally. For Observatory to > > be open, for the policing of the suburb to be legal (yes Vita Schola > > arresting private citizens is illegal). She would like everyone of > > every race and class to be able to move freely on the streets of Obs. > > She spent her formative years fighting against forced removal; she > > does not want to witness it in the street outside. As a tax-payer she > > would like to hold the council accountable for the way in which her > > money is spent. As a ratepayer she would like to be able to sit in > > the parks. > > > You do not like her. Fair enough. People with conservative views have > > never liked her. And that has never stopped her before. You find her > > abrasive. Perhaps she is a little. Don't you think that it's excusable > > after 30 years of saying the same thing? Don't you think she has > > earned the right to be a little short to people who deny the humanity > > of others? > > > As you find her motivations strange, I find yours strange. How can you > > have so little compassion? How can you see people and be frightened of > > them simply because they are poor and black? If you have evidence that > > they have committed a crime, bring it to the police. But how can you > > believe that it's ok to target people because they look funny or > > because they are carrying poles? You would deny the destitute a > > sandwich and a place to sit and eat it. You see people with nothing > > and want to take that away. I do not understand how people who have > > so much can deny those with nothing so little. > > > And so it is clear that we will always have difficulty understanding > > each other. You do not want to take the leap into the human rights > > culture that we now enjoy. And none of us wish to travel into the dark > > abbess of paranoia that you inhabit. All she is asking is that the > > rule of law be respected in Observatory and that, as a tax-payer, she > > has a council that is accountable to her. It is her hard-earned right > > to do so and she will fight on. > > Sincerely > > Hannah Schultz > > -- > You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups > "The Observatory Neighbourhood watch" group. > To post to this group, send email to [email protected]. > To unsubscribe from this group, send email to > [email protected]. > For more options, visit this group > athttp://groups.google.com/group/obsnw?hl=en. > > The information in this e-mail is confidential and may be legally privileged. > It is intended solely for the addressee. Access to this e-mail by anyone else > is unauthorized. If you have received this communication in error, please > address with the subject heading "Received in error," send to the > sender, then delete the e-mail and destroy any copies of it. If you are not > the intended recipient, any disclosure, copying, distribution or any action > taken or omitted to be taken in reliance on it, is prohibited and may be > unlawful. Any opinions or advice contained in this e-mail are subject to the > terms and conditions expressed in the governing KPMG client engagement > letter. Opinions, conclusions and other information in this e-mail and any > attachments that do not relate to the official business of the firm are > neither > given nor endorsed by it. > > KPMG cannot guarantee that e-mail communications are secure or error-free, as > information could be intercepted, corrupted, amended, lost, destroyed, arrive > late or incomplete, or contain viruses. > > This email is being sent out by KPMG International Cooperative (“KPMG > International”) on behalf of the local KPMG member firm providing services to > you. > KPMG International Cooperative (“KPMG International”) is a > Swiss cooperative that serves as a coordinating entity for a network of > independent firms operating under the KPMG name. KPMG International > Cooperative (“KPMG International”) > provides no services to clients. > Each member firm of KPMG International Cooperative (“KPMG International”) is > a legally distinct and separate entity and each describes itself as such. > Information about the structure and jurisdiction of your local KPMG member > firm can be obtained from your KPMG representative. > > This footnote also confirms that this e-mail message has been swept by > AntiVirus software. -- You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "The Observatory Neighbourhood watch" group. To post to this group, send email to [email protected]. To unsubscribe from this group, send email to [email protected]. For more options, visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/obsnw?hl=en.
