Posts by Paul Martinez73

Ryan Vaughn7 said:And lately, you can't even scroll through news sites without being flooded by photos from Central Park, the Dolac Market, or random fish markets all over America. Why aren't the reporters covering that? It’s like they have total tunnel vision, much like those horses with the little musical instruments.

So basically, she just walked through Central Park, snapped a few shots, asked people why they were hanging out, and then popped into a Cathedral during mass with a camera?

That’s exactly what I was getting at 🤷

If she had just stood outside, filming and interviewing folks, nobody would have said a word. It wasn't about what she was doing, but rather how she went about it.

And the real issue is that some guy at the entrance smashed her phone, and now we see headlines like "Catholics are gathering for mass," "Catholics aren't following bans," and "Priest spreading coronavirus."

Man, one church, one priest, fifteen people at mass, and one guy smashing a phone—that's enough for them to drag the entire faith through the mud everywhere. She could have done a report on the mass while the ban was in place, but you know, there's a way to do things without being intrusive.

The biggest thing here is that the exact same people on this forum were demanding people come out of their holes and gather, and then suddenly they're offended by fifteen people meeting in a Church. Look, my stance is that people shouldn't be grouping up in the first place, and I'm sticking to that whether it's at a Church or anywhere else; I don't get these people, but whatever...

Just show a little consistency. That's why I posted this intentionally; I wanted to see how people would react, and honestly, the hypocrisy, insults, and labeling were pretty obvious.

Sunglasses on, but there isn't a single ray of sunshine in sight.
Drug

Elizabeth Mendoza said:If I were feeling particularly mean, I’d definitely point out how red Pop's nose looks.

As for why it's so red? Honestly, you can judge that for yourselves ☕. Between Christ's blood and all that, plus eating breakfast, lunch, dinner, and snacks, haha
.

Let's see who wants to throw the first stone if they didn't have a glass of wine before work today ☕
Or better yet, every single day before work ☕

darkseal9 said:Poblano on a mission, I see it immediately

🤣

And you can't touch me 🤣

Just so I can cover my own tracks ☕

Živana Živković—if we wanted to be truly malicious, we’d say she looks like some political operative from the Mirel Holly wing sent on a mission. She claims she just wants to spend Easter with her family, but for those of you accusing her, it sounds as fake as the accusations brought against Jesus. You haters!

But hey, it is Easter, so let's all forgive each other today... even the provocateurs.
I actually unignored restlesssurfer97 today, though I haven't unignored wiredrider9 yet... maybe by Christmas.

restlesssurfer97 said:

Pop style 🙏

This is totally giving me those vibes of Cholov's warriors charging in with knives between their teeth toward some terrified Stakor guys from Barcelona...

Živana Živković:

"Journalism isn't appreciated, but believe me, if we weren't bringing you all this information, the number of sick and dead would be much higher."

🙏 🙏

So our wonderful journalists are just overflowing with useful intel, single-handedly preventing the death toll from skyrocketing... what a hero. 🙏

Give her an award for everythingggg, I've totally changed my mind. It's the Pop's fault!

darkseal9 said:Let me be clear right off the bat—I haven't actually seen the footage of what happened in the church myself.

But seriously, can someone please explain the logic here? How on earth are those 15 or 30 believers supposedly doing more damage to public health than 100 people packed into a shopping mall? I’m genuinely asking!

It looks like Anthony Jackson2 and the rest of them ended up on life support. ☕

bluebison47 said:They aren't enforcing the Law, but they certainly have the right—and maybe even the obligation—to point out when it's being broken, whether that happens in the middle of Times Square or in the privacy of some weekend cabin up in the Appalachian Mountains.

Unless, of course, you’re acting with good intentions, then I guess you can wander into a church or onto private property however you please 🙏 🙏 But if we’re doing something that isn't allowed, well, then they aren't going to just let us get away with it. 🙏

So, according to you, investigative journalism means storming into the middle of a service at a Cathedral with a camera rolling?
Instead of, say, filming before or after, calling the police, and presenting that as evidence. You know, like a normal, rational person would.

I guess it would also be "investigative journalism" if a reporter broke into a house full of criminals and took a bullet for trespassing. Or maybe if they just handed their findings over to the court and the police and reported on how they handled it?

Anthony Jackson2 said:The whole private property argument when it comes to filming in a Cathedral is old news—it's been done before. 🙏

Even if that logic holds up, is there actually a law that gives you the right to physically assault someone just because they're filming you? Or is that handled differently by the legal system?

Let's not play dumb here—they attacked her because she caught them breaking the rules. It’s just the standard reaction from any Criminal caught red-handed. 🤷

And was he arrested because he took matters into his own hands?
She showed up looking for a fight, got one, handed out some herself, and now he’ll have to answer for those hits.

bluebison47 said:Private parties and parks aren't closed off or forbidden, provided it's within the immediate family circle.

It's just like how the church isn't closed to family events: baptisms and weddings aren't banned, assuming someone wants a wedding with just a few guests.

That’s not what I’m talking about, and you know it perfectly well.

I'm talking about BBQs with friends, hanging out with family, or having people over at the house with the crew. Don't twist my words; I can pull up a few police reports for you. No reporters ever showed up to those.

bluebison47 said:What actually matters more here? What's the real priority? Is it protecting privacy on someone's private property, or is it following the Law—you know, the kind that's directly tied to protecting public health? I mean, I guess it's a tough one... maybe. It feels like we're constantly torn between the two.

That’s... I mean, that's like saying we shouldn't care if there's white powder being moved around or violence happening in some nursing home, right? Because, well, have I ever heard of private property? I guess... maybe? It's just... it's a bit much, isn't it?🕺

It's like you're saying we shouldn't care that everyone is dealing drugs in their houses and dealers are walking the streets selling weight, let's just head to Church because a joint once caught fire in there.

bluebison47 said:How can you even be sure she wasn't at a Backyard BBQ or somewhere in Golden Gate Park? 🤷 Besides, parks and private parties aren't off-limits or locked down, unlike churches and other secular institutions.

Even if she wasn't, maybe that just wasn't her assignment. It’s not like she went into this specific church to launch a personal crusade against the cross; she was likely just following orders.

The funniest part of all this is watching people practically advocate for stripping away freedom of speech and reporting rights, yet they’re the first ones to start shouting about "that old regime"—which, heaven help us, actually championed and enforced those very same ideas. 😍

Private parties are strictly banned, and you can't even hang out in parks unless you're with your family. There are plenty of police reports on the subject... ☕
It was that one woman I personally linked—the one who was lecturing people in the park about why they weren't keeping their distance from CNN... funny how the exact same crowd attacking those people gathered together now were the ones mocking them back then and pushing the idea that everyone should just hang out and get together...
🤷

Freedom of speech? Reporting? Please, give me a break. If you actually bother to read all our posts explaining this, you'll see we all agree she broke the rules, which is exactly why some guy snatched the phone right out of her hand... It wasn't about Pop or Jesus or three million believers, just one guy who decided to take justice into his own hands and ended up getting detained for it.

bluebison47 said:So, there was no story happening in a place where self-isolation rules were being blatantly and openly ignored? I mean, if it's not making fools of us—the ones actually following the rules by staying away from bars, cultural hubs, or sports venues—then maybe it's just making a fool out of my grandmother. She’d probably be heading to Easter Mass right now if she could, but, well, life happens, I guess.

Why are believers getting so worked up if they aren't even doing anything wrong or prohibited? We didn't see scenes like this last Easter, for instance, when they'd film hundreds of people outside the Cathedral and other churches all over the country.

If I wanted to be particularly nasty and stir the pot even more, I could compare this to those times when Masses are held specifically for ultra-nationalist thugs, and then, once the media reports on it, everyone suddenly plays the "anti-fascist" card and acts outraged to hide what they actually did. 🙏

Yeah, it's blown up into a much bigger scandal than it really is, but honestly, that journalist still holds the moral high ground in this whole mess.

So why don't they crash private parties or backyard BBQs? Or end up in public parks?
Because then there wouldn't be much of a story; she could have just called the cops, waited for them to show up, and that's that. 🤷

She wanted a reaction, and honestly, she got one. If she had stayed outside, filmed everything, and called the police, that would have been something else.
That would have actually been journalism, but this is just pure provocation—chasing clicks and manufacturing drama where none exists.

brightpilot6 said:It isn’t exactly the priest who spends the entire ceremony filming baptisms on his phone. It’s just a crowd of people holding up their devices, capturing everything through a screen. And honestly, I can’t recall ever hearing a single word from the clergy about it—not once.

If someone decides to start filming you without any prior warning, don't you think you're well within your rights to call the police or even pursue legal action?

Why exactly didn't those defenders step up and make that play today? Do they somehow operate under a different set of rules than everyone else on the field?

Actually, I did see it—the priest mentioned there were baptisms happening today and noted that the TV crew was there and that the mass was being recorded. Neither the Mayor of New York City, who owns the stadium, nor the club president are out there filming. You get permission to film either verbally or in writing if you need to.

Did I ever actually say it was okay for someone to snatch her phone?

All I said is that we shouldn't act surprised. If you walk in there specifically looking to provoke people, you can't complain when someone grabs your phone right out of your hand...

People are making this huge deal out of one guy grabbing a phone, acting like those twenty old guys from the Church beat her to death inside the Cathedral.

It's like if you showed up in the stands surrounded by Hooligans to film; you wouldn't be shocked if someone threw a drink at you and your phone ended up flying onto the field. You're choosing to provoke them.

Like Susan Kim2 said, she reacted the way she did, and that guy reacted the way he did. Now everyone is attacking the entire Church and every single person who was inside, when really, this whole conflict was just between three specific individuals...🤷

And you're twisting it by asking if different rules apply to them? No, it's clearly stated that both of them were taken in. 🤷

Elizabeth Mendoza said:That was a pretty weak response, just like your buddy Bijeliprah over there.🕺

How does anyone actually claim to own a piece of land? Doesn't it all belong to the Motherland?

Go ahead, buddy, go tell those fairy tales about the White House and maybe you can afford to build yourself a shack.

That's the vibe. Now leave me alone...☕

brightpilot6 said:Well, given that particular value system, I can't say I'm surprised this gets the green light.

The next time someone tries to snap my picture with a phone or camera during a baptism at church without asking first, I might just have to throw a punch and cite your logic as my defense.

Exactly!

If the priest tells you at the start of Mass that there's a baptism today and it's being recorded, you have every right to just walk out. If someone starts filming you without prior notice, you have the right to call the police and sue.

It's the same when you go to the Stadium; if they say the stands are being filmed, you can either accept that certain people have permission from the venue to record or just stay home. If you start filming people at the Stadium or recording the game yourself, you might end up getting sued, kicked out, and banned from the Stadium entirely. Someone might also try to get physical with you, but they'll be held accountable for that too.

Elizabeth Mendoza said:Doesn't the church and God belong to the people? How on earth can a church own things privately?

Please, don't embarrass yourself like this. Do you actually realize what you're typing? 🤦

But then again, it's hardly surprising since you have zero actual arguments, just insults and attacks, and now you're trying to play the intellectual with these ridiculous tropes... it's honestly pathetic.

This is my last word to you, so feel free to find someone else to bother.

Elizabeth Mendoza said:Is a church a private corporation now? Does it own its own private plot of land?🕺

Who am I even arguing with here... 🤦

brightpilot6 said:You claimed she was looking for a "fight," and that she got exactly what she wanted. That's a bold take, unless you happen to know her personally.

I wonder if you would be typing the exact same thing if, say, the police had opened fire on her while she was filming them? That would certainly make for a more compelling headline, wouldn't it?

urbanhawk17 said:Whether you expected it or not, they don't have any say in what happens to her.

It seems like nobody here has quite grasped the concepts of private property and filming permits yet.
If the cops gunned you down after you broke into a precinct to film them, you'd probably be telling everyone you got exactly what you deserved
🤷

nimblemarlin9 said:I mean, what's there to argue if you just don't get that being filmed in public is totally legal 🤣

If you reacted the way you said you would, you'd just end up being exactly what I called you—a total insecure aggressor... ☕

Go ahead, explain to me how a church counts as a public space, or how your private car is somehow public property. I already linked the article explaining that if you film a car accident from inside your own vehicle, someone can still sue you.

Waiting to see this mental gymnastics routine unfold... ☕

I mean, just admit you're wrong. Elizabeth Mendoza couldn't handle it, she didn't have the strength left. And even the Socialist Party failed to defend the Church as a public space rather than their own private playground.