OK, I wrote this all once and cleared it out accidentally.
I hope I got it all down properly the second time.
Here read the whole thing on TMZ (
http://www.tmz.com/2006/07/28/gibson...ged-cover-up/).
You have to see some of the stuff he said about Jews and women.
Quote:
|
Originally Posted by raeanna74
As for the cover up? I doubt the police are concerned with his opinions as racist or contraversial as they may be. They're concerned with the laws he broke and enforcing those laws. Doesn't matter to me if it's covered up or not.
|
I think that if the Police were really interested in enforcing those laws they would not have forced teh officer to sit back down and write a new ("sanitized") report after writing the origianl detail 8 page report. He could have been back on the streets enforcing those laws and keeping the peace.
let's assume that they were not trying to protect a celebrity and they were doing what they said as TMZ reported that...
Quote:
|
Mee was told Gibson's comments would incite a lot of "Jewish hatred," that the situation in Israel was "way too inflammatory."
|
What is the Police's job? What is better hiding what happend to hopefully limit any bad reaction to the situation or to tell the whole truth?
I think it is really bad the the Police, in this case, lied (held back the whole story). If we can't count on the Police to be truthful and straightforward, then who can we count on.
This probably happend more than we would like to believe. I think that this is another case (good intentioned maybe) of shorsighted decisions that kill the credibility of the authorities. I am sure that the L.A. police do not need any more of these types of situations.
Quote:
|
Originally Posted by Gilda
See, the weird thing here is that it's being characterized as apologizing for the anti-Semitic remarks, but if you read the actual statment, it's a very generic apology to the deputies for "despicable behavior" and words. I'm not sure if he has apologized for the anti-semitism. It's certainly possible that hea meant it in that way, but the words there are awfully ambiguous.
|
Quote:
|
Originally Posted by Gilda
I thought it was fairly common, especially for those with a "nice guy" image to protect.
|
I think that this is just the standard generic appology that a celebrity makes when they get into trouble. He must appologize, right? He is a good guy, right? Now the general population can say, "oh, he really did not mean what he said. He was drunk. You know he is an alcoholic. And he appologized, so everything is OK."
This is not the first time that Gibson has been accused of being an anti-semite and unfortunately it won't be the last.
First it was, "His father is an anti-semite, he is not". Then it was, "no, he is just re-telling the story". And now it is "he just drank a bit too much, besides, he appologized".
Quote:
|
Originally Posted by ngdawg
Alcohol does two things: It enhances the asshole effect and it allows the truth to come up. That's all I'm sayin....
|
I don't think that is exactly right. I believe that when someone drinks you see the tru person come out. If someone is a reallg good person then when they drink you will see it. If someone is bad, however, then watch out for when they drink.
There is a famous quote from the
Talmud that somebody once explained to me:
(please excuse me if I don't get the translation and interpretation
exactly correct)
This is translated as - by one's pocket, by one's cup, by one's anger.
The interpretation is that there are three ways to tell the true nature of a man (person).
- by one's pocket - by how a person deals with money matters
- by one's cup - by how a person handles himself with alcohol
- by one's anger - by how a person handles his anger