photo by Boyd Loving
To the Village Council –
I was absolutely shocked at the end of last night’s meeting to witness such extraordinary uncivil and intimidating behavior regarding the taping of public meetings.
First of all, a resident was permitted to verbally attack another resident (who was not even present) and make wild hypothetical accusations about what might or might not be done with a videotape of the meeting. Both Susan and Michael attempted to stop this diatribe and defend Dana, and Matt Rogers quickly explained that taping is legal as long as the individual is not disruptive. Susan, Michael, and Matt all did the right thing, and quickly, and I appreciate their actions. Unfortunately, they were unable to stop the Bob, Albert, and Paul.
Certainly Dana had not been in the least bit disruptive, quietly standing at the side of the room. That Bob Fuhrman was allowed to go on and on about how we are all at risk of some sort of unspecified internet wickedness was completely wrong. Gwenn remained silent, instead of trying to stop this barrage of accusations; silent inaction speaks volumes. Compounding the mess, Paul and Albert then fueled the conversation, agreeing with Bob Fuhrman, contributing to his rant, and bringing up another meeting (of the HPC) at which Dana was legally taping the proceedings. Residents as well as elected officials should not be allowed to attack other residents, and should be stopped from doing so immediately. Unfortunately we have seen you allow as well as participate in this repeatedly, but last night really went over the top. Just a few weeks ago I was publicly accused by Albert and Gwenn of being a stalker, a bully, intimidating, and weird because I had my cell phone up while I sat quietly in my seat; again, my taping was completely legal and nondisruptive.
Whether it becomes a requirement that those who wish to tape a meeting must announce their intentions before doing so remains to be seen if Albert introduces his resolution. But at this time it is not required, so Dana’s actions at the HPC meeting you cited were neither illegal nor disruptive. (really, since when is sitting quietly in a chair considered to be disruptive?). And Dana’s actions last night were certainly not in any way disruptive. Remember, Matt Rogers clearly stated that it is legal to tape these meetings as long as the person is not disruptive.
Last night’s meeting ended on a horrible note thanks to the actions of Albert and Paul, and the inaction of Gwenn. It was actually horrifying to witness this scene, in which it was clear that you wished to intimidate and discredit one of our citizens. I am expecting that corrective action will be taken to rectify the damage you have done.
Anne Loving
That’s exactly your problem Mr. Halaby – you pray and listen to Albert and Paul like your god but don’t listen to others. Councilman Sedon who was a reporter until your gods caused him his job, also said in the same meeting that NJ state law allows one party consent for recording. May be you did not listen to him or may be you don’t understand the legal jargons.
No wonder you think that way Rurik Halaby being born in Israel. Don’t try to use the anti-Semitic card
Speech in Israel Is Not Free
There’s more to democracy than just holding regular elections
By Justin D. Martin
November 4, 2011
905 words
a
Share
on Twitter
b
Share
on Facebook
Email
this story
Both Israeli and US policymakers are fond of calling Israel and the United States likeminded democracies. “America has no better friend than Israel,” Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu said to applause from a joint session of Congress in a 2011 address. “We stand together to defend democracy.” Vice President Joe Biden has basically called Israel his second America. “No matter how long I’ve been away,” he crooned in Tel Aviv in 2010, “the instant I return, I feel like I’m at home…[T]he United States has no better friend in the community of nations than Israel.” Unfortunately for Israelis, their country has anti-free speech policies that do not represent modern democracy. Israel is more open than countries it borders, yes, but this isn’t a liberating revelation.
Multiple laws, policies, and court rulings in Israel violate nearly every freedom enumerated in the First Amendment of the US Constitution, including freedom of religion, freedom of speech, freedom of the press, and freedom of peaceable assembly. If Israeli politicians wish to brag that their nation resembles western democracies, they must defend the freedoms those countries hold dear. Israel does not.
Let’s start with religion. Ultra-orthodox Jews are eligible for welfare salaries from the Israeli government, which allow them to spend their days reading the Torah and praying, rather than earning a living. Catholic priests, Islamic scholars, Mormons, and atheists, however, do not get salaries for sitting around and pondering their beliefs. Israeli politicians, including the Prime Minister himself, routinely insist that Israel is a Jewish state, and that Palestinians must recognize that if they want to ever have a state of their own. No fully functioning democracy on earth has such an offensive religious policy, and the establishment of a national religion is something that goes against the very first democratic protection expressed in the American Bill of Rights.
Does Israel have a free press? Israeli news media must routinely submit their work to military censors for approval prior to publication. Imagine if journalists in the United States were forced to hand over their work to the Marines for their blessing, and then ask yourself if the American press, bound by such shackles, could be considered free. An Israeli journalist reported in an op-ed in the International Herald Tribune this month that another Israeli journalist and ex-soldier had been sentenced to four and a half years in jail for blowing the whistle on potential Israeli war crimes. This was after the whistleblower was confined to house arrest for two years. Another reporter for Haaretz, who received the leaked documents from the ex-soldier, may face criminal charges, despite having received approval from his military censor to publish a related report.
As for freedom of speech, a shocking policy passed by Israeli officials outlaws a core element of that right. One of the ways that citizens in a democracy can most powerfully effect change is by speaking through their financial decisions. Israeli lawmakers astonishingly passed a bill this year that makes it illegal to call for boycotts of Israeli goods, services, and even universities or cultural organizations. One renowned Israeli legal scholar quoted in The Guardian called the bill’s passage the “blackest day in Knesset history.”
Lastly, freedom of peaceable assembly is something the Israeli government openly dismisses. While thousands of Israelis have been recently demonstrating in Tel Aviv and elsewhere for economic change, not everyone in Israeli territory can do the same. Implicit in the right to peaceably assemble are the freedoms of association and of human movement. There are over 500 military checkpoints, closures, and military barricades in the Israeli-occupied West Bank, which is slightly larger than Delaware. During my travels to Israel and the West Bank I met a Palestinian man who missed the birth of his son because Israeli soldiers refused to let him through a checkpoint. I once told this man I grew up in Florida and that my wife is from Seattle, and also explained the thousands of miles between those two cities. “How many hundreds of military checkpoints are between those places?” he asked. He was flabbergasted and then saddened when I told him there were none.
Palestinians rights to assemble, to visit family and friends, and to access institutions are crippled by an Israeli police presence that would’ve made Mao giddy and George Orwell vomit. This is in addition to a twenty-five-foot-high wall that is over 400 miles long, equipped with electrical fencing, sniper towers, and razor wire that keeps Palestinians where the Israeli military wants them. Israel does have legitimate security threats from extremist groups, but Israel is also the only regional power with nuclear bombs, and its carpet bombing in recent years of Lebanon and Gaza and the mass civilian casualties it inflicted indicate the country doesn’t need a wall to defend itself.
Israel’s apologists sometimes counter that speech in Israel is freer than in any other country in the Middle East, and this is true. But again, Israelis aren’t satisfied, rightly, with being labeled more open than Algeria or Saudi Arabia. They want more. A democracy is more than a country that just holds scheduled, meaningful elections. Even Mubarak’s Egypt had elected politicians serving in parliament that the regime didn’t like, but Egypt was not a working democracy. Israeli policymakers may claim their country is a modern democratic state, but there are simply too many indicators revealing that it is not.
Rurik, your ignorance is showing once again. The whole point of the posting was not whether people should have to announce that they are taping (even though, LEGALLY, they do not have to). The point of the article is that Albert and Paul, who you seem to think are saints, viciously attacked a resident who behaved legally, he was not even there to defend himself. and they used language describing him that was at least defamatory and slanderous, and in the opinion of many was threatening. This is no way for elected officials to behave, and it is certainly not the first time they have done this. Of course you would support this behavior, because that is the way you talk when you come to meetings instead of sitting home, you use foul language, you tell other residents to shut up, you are a disgrace. Just like Paul and Albert.
Other than by possible anonymous postings, we have not heard a word from Paul, Albert or Gwenn. Sadly, this is not surprising. Paul and Albert lost their tempers and spewed innumerable nasty adjectives to discredit a resident who was acting completely in accordance with the law, and Gwenn sat quietly and allowed this verbal onslaught to carry on. This is one of many, way too many, such meetings at which Paul, Albert, and Gwenn have allowed and enabled the public crucifixion of an elected official, an appointed official, or a member of the general public.
Whether a resolution is inserted into the code at a future time to require that all recording by private citizens must be announced, the fact is that at this time such an announcement is not required. Thus, their nasty characterizations were way, way out of line. It is entirely possible that they went over the line into libel and slander. Lawyers can decide about that. Well, lawyers other than the one who calls himself Deputy Dawg.
We, the people, have all the dates and transcripts of their vicious outbursts dating back 4 years, and in Paul’s case 8 years. For Albert and Gwenn, who are running for reelection, we will be happy to replay these over and over and over for the voting public to be reminded of your true colors. We do not need to say anything; your own words will say it all.
To use one of Albert’s favorite catch words – GOTCHA!
Any public body that does not want to be videotaped in their public duties has something to hide. It should be required that all public bodies videotape and broadcast their meetings so that people who are not able to attend can see how their tax dollars are spent. You have senior citizens, handicapped persons, parents with children who are not able to attend for one reason or another. Public officials should be proud of their actions and should want to let the public know everything they do.
Wayne Tarus is right