CB10 postpones vote on avenue overhaul

The Brooklyn Paper
Share on TwitterTweet
Share on Facebook

Don’t miss our updates:

The Department of Transporta­tion’s controversial plan for Fourth Avenue has hit a speed bump.

Community Board 10 members opposed to the proposal blocked a vote on the redesign on June 17, postponing the neighborhood panel’s decision until October.

CB10’s action came just days after Community Board 6 resoundingly rejected the city’s plans for the avenue in Park Slope.

The Bay Ridge board voted overwhelmingly to delay the vote until the fall after an hour-and-a-half-long debate over the plans to raise a concrete island on the Verrazano-Narrows Bridge side of the 86th Street intersection and to put up a pedestrian fence stretching from the corner of Third Avenue halfway down toward 87th Street.

Longtime critics of the plan were behind the measure to delay, claiming the Department of Transportation hasn’t given the board enough time to analyze the new designs — despite the fact that the agency unveiled most of the proposal in March and has held several public hearings on the project.

“We have not been given adequate opportunity to really look at this plan and make a decision for the whole community,” said Rev. Khader El-Yateem, who made the motion to postpone — and who blasted the concrete island at a meeting last month.

But outraged supporters of the city’s traffic-slowing plan warned that failing to approve some reforms would lead to more collisions on the avenue — which a federal study ranked as the third most dangerous roadway in Brooklyn, and which has been the site of several horrific accidents in the past year.

“Fourth Avenue the way it is doesn’t work, and if we don’t vote to make some kind of change now, more people are going to get hit,” said Andrew Gounardes.

Even CB10 members who had remained largely neutral on the proposal expressed disappointment in the postponement — noting that the board’s Traffic and Transportation Committee had overwhelmingly supported parts of the plan that they never had the opportunity to discuss before the decision to adjourn.

Last week, the committee voted in favor of stripping away a lane between 95th and 101st streets on the Sunset Park-bound side to slow down drivers coming off the Belt Parkway. It also voted for relocating eight parking spots from Fourth Avenue between 65th and 66th streets to Shore Road Drive in order to form a new lane and reduce congestion.

They also backed shaving the thoroughfare down to a single lane in each direction for 13 blocks between Ovington Avenue and 86th Street, widening parking lanes, and creating a left turn bay at 75th Street. But the general board voted to set back a final decision before those issues even came up.

“It was a shame. I really wanted them to move ahead. The committee wanted them to move ahead,” said committee chairman Brian Kieran. “There were things in this proposal that I think people would have supported wholeheartedly, if they had gotten the chance to vote on them.”

But the plan’s detractors applauded the decision, arguing the board had dodged a speeding bullet.

“If we don’t stop DOT now, we’re really in trouble, because they are trying to destroy New York City,” said outspoken critic Allen Bortnick.

CB10 will meet at undecided dates in July, August, and September to discuss the proposal further before the October vote.

The Department of Transportation could theoretically steamroll over the board’s decision — or indecision — since the panel’s vote is strictly advisory. But the city has a history of respecting CB10’s recommendations.

Reach reporter Will Bredderman at or by calling (718) 260-4507. Follow him
Updated 10:12 pm, July 9, 2018
Today’s news:
Share on TwitterTweet
Share on Facebook

Don’t miss our updates:

Reasonable discourse

GTO from Dyker Heights says:
This whole design was meant to cause gridlock, which would then be used to argue for congestion pricing. Using innocent victims as props for your agenda was sick, and easily seen through. You car hating luddites are so pathetic with your passive aggressive attempts to make driving here miserable. Why not come out of the closet and argue for what you really want. Banning private ownership of automobiles. Because as we all know, then you would be soundly defeated in every election that you try to make that argument in.

Instead, all you Chairman Mao wannabes try to achieve your goals incrementally, so people are unaware of what's happening. That ain't flying around here anymore, the people that live, work and pay taxes here are fed up., and paying attention. Enjoy your bike lanes, because we are keeping our car lanes.
June 19, 2013, 1:35 am
Michael from Bay Ridge says:
I wonder what criteria are being used to analyze this plan. I admit, I am for slowing down fourth avenue. I only wonder how they intend to use this time and what standards will be applied to determine whether they implement or not...
June 19, 2013, 6:06 am
Mike from Williamsburg says:
It's not "car-hating Luddites" who are making driving in NYC miserable. It's your fellow motorists. They're the ones who make traffic. They're the ones who are traffic.

If you think we "car-hating Luddites" secretly want to ban private ownership of automobiles, you couldn't be more wrong. Perhaps ban the private storage in public space for free. Perhaps capture the negative externalities through pricing. If there's a theme that goes through our thinking, it's an ardent belief in the superiority of free markets to allocate scarce resources. I don't think Chairman Mao shared our enthusiasm for Adam Smith's invisible hand.
June 19, 2013, 6:07 am
Peter from Brooklyn Heights says:
Well said. The issues with cars today are perfect examples of two things, a) "the tragedy of the commons", and b) people think that when inside their cars, they are magical "I can do whatever the f*ck i want machines". Thus, the speeding, the honking, the aggressive driving.. the hundreds of deaths of New Yorkers every year.
June 19, 2013, 6:11 am
Scott from Park Slope says:
The speeds on Fourth Avenue must be brought down. The traffic must be calmed. The new school, PS 133, new residential towers springing up from Flatbush to Sunset Park, and ongoing gentrification of the Gowanus area mean many more families and children crossing the road. Delays now because something isn't perfect will cause tragedies later.

For all the people in Bay Ridge who use Fourth Avenue to skirt the traffic on the BQE, it's tough cookies. Take your highway speeds to the actual highway or ride the subway like everybody else.

We won't let our kids die because you're lazy.
June 19, 2013, 7:35 am
Brooklynite from Brooklyn says:
Allen Bortnick is clearly insane. Why is this man on a Community Board?
June 19, 2013, 8:41 am
John from Bay Ridge says:
CB 10 sickens me. And the fact that an imbecile like Bortnick is allowed to be a member of CB 10 says it all.
June 19, 2013, 8:46 am
Me from Here says:
"GTO from Dyker Heights" -
You have surprisingly good internet service considering you must be commenting on a computer tucked away in a bomb-proof bunker you've constructed to anxiously await the Left-wing zombie apocalypse, which you know will prove all your conspiracy theories true. When we're all herded off to concentration camps via CitiBikes in the name of Obamacare Death Panels, I know you will be the very first to say "I Told You So!"
June 19, 2013, 9:27 am
GTO from Dyker Heights says:
@Me: Haha, no bunker here, just enjoying life. No issue with citibikes or Obama, doesn't bother me in the slightest. Nice straw man though.

@Scott: So basically you want to punish everyone because of the destructive actions of a few. Not a very mature way of looking at things. Totally agree about cracking down on speeders. Get them off the road asap, perhaps the 40k members of the NYPD could be put to use to resolve that problem. I have no issue with speeding cameras either.

But that would not serve the purpose of traffic calming, which is to cause chaos and gridlock, that can be used to argue for congestion pricing. The ultimate goal is the Multiple Thefts Agency getting their hands on billions of dollars in toll money on the east river crossings that will then disappear into thin air.
June 19, 2013, 11:13 am
GTO from Dyker Heights says:
@Mike: It's not all my fellow motorists that make driving in NYC miserable, it's only the psychos that should not be allowed anywhere near a motorized vehicle. Getting most of them off the road would solve a lot of the problems discussed here.
June 19, 2013, 11:25 am
. from .. says:
"We won't let our kids die because you're lazy."

But we will because they are stupid!
June 19, 2013, 1:17 pm
ty from pps says:
If you can get the NYPD to (a) actually enforce these things and (b) not lobby against things like red light and speeding cameras, more power to ya. In the meantime, the DOT will have to impose engineering solutions. But when there are headlines like, "88% of Brooklyn Drivers Are Speeding, And Almost None Get Tickets," we're not talking about a couple of bad apples here.
June 19, 2013, 1:18 pm
Tal Barzilai from Pleasantville, NY says:
Some need to look for the causes of postponing the vote on 4th Avenue rather than the effects. This was because they feel that it was rushed on them, and Bloomberg just wants to get it done before he leaves. I am glad that there are those who see through Bloomberg and put him in his place. GTO does make a good point, because I feel that in the long run, this will cause more congestion. As for the speeders, nobody is justifying them, because I to want them to follow the rules, but to blame all for a few is a major hit below the belt. It's not like I blame all cyclists or pedestrians just for a few, so knock it off with that. Anyone who is talking about removing the members for opposing should think of how Markowitz was viewed for in wanting to remove members for opposing the Atlantic Yards complex.
June 19, 2013, 4:01 pm
ty from pps says:
"This was because they feel that it was rushed on them, and Bloomberg just wants to get it done before he leaves. I am glad that there are those who see through Bloomberg and put him in his place." That's just a stupid statement. Do you honestly think the Mayor of New York City -- any mayor -- is deeply involved in traffic issues like 4th Avenue in Brooklyn?! Seriously? You think the Mayor of New York City see this proposal as some sort of legacy issue?!

Multiple public hearings and, I'm sure, other direct communication with the Community Board is certainly "rushed." Lord give me strength!

Umm... Tal... have I mentioned to you that you are an ignorant dummy? God you're stupid.
June 19, 2013, 6:09 pm
Tal Barzilai from Pleasantville, NY says:
Ty, have you been living under a rock for all of those years, or are you only capable of seeing things that only Bloomberg and his cronies can see? Keep in mind who appoints the head of the DOT, and that is the mayor. The head of the DOT has always been known to do the bidding of the mayor that appointed them, so this isn't something new. Wasn't it Bloomberg who said he wanted bike lanes and smaller roads just about everywhere? That was true the last time I heard him on that. Surprisingly, he has the money for all of this traffic calming but not enough to help the city where it's really needed, which why Quinn shouldn't be elected, who is known for being his right hand. Overall, if there is an ignorant dummy here, it's you ty, not me especially when you keep on looking into mirror and read only the reflection in it.
June 19, 2013, 6:32 pm
ty from pps says:
Tal -- I know you're stupid, so it's not surprising your don't understand the difference between setting an agenda (Mayor and Commissioner level) and individual acts and implementation details....

So, do you think Mayor Bloomberg was pacing in his office just desperately waiting for the CB10 decision?

Since you think "fixing the timing of the lights" is the ultimate solution for all of the city's traffic problems, do you think the mayor should be involved with reviewing and approval all of these adjustments?

You couldn't even wrap your dumb head around the complexities of managing your own home (thus living with your mommy), so I understand why you might think the head of a multi-trillion dollar government organization would be personally involved with every decision.
June 19, 2013, 6:43 pm
ty from pps says:
(billion, not trillion... but do you know the difference?)
June 19, 2013, 6:47 pm
bkdude says:
tal & ty. how cute!
June 19, 2013, 7:17 pm
Thomas Lawrence from Brooklyn Heights says:
Light rail would make-work and solve many traffic problems. But the rubber-tire crowd has the biggest lobby.
June 19, 2013, 9:02 pm
GTO from Dyker Heights says:
@ty: If 88% of Brooklyn drivers are speeding, that says a lot more about the NYPD than anything else. Get them off their asses and make them do their jobs.

You have said many times that solutions that work in other cities can work here. Having drivers obey laws like they do in many other places is the perfect example of that.

Choking off major roadways so a bunch of criminals can steal more money from the taxpayers is not the best way to achieve those goals.
June 20, 2013, 1:17 am
ty from pps says:
GTO -- The NYPD doesn't even get their "traffic agents" to obey basic traffic laws or prioritize safety over quotas (yeah, I know, no quotas...).

Though, I'm not sure who the "criminals" are in your comment -- the DOT workers painting lines on the street?
June 20, 2013, 7:43 am
james from bay ridge says:
I love how the DOT had several meetings, presented traffic data and plans, and every one already complains about the speeds on 4th ave, and....we get postponement. The author rightly points out that there has already been several meetings and we all are aware of the problem. The CB is not fulfilling its requirement and the DOT should just go ahead already without their endorsement. If we want to make safe and efficient streets, you make changes that prioritize pedestrians and public transit--not waver back and forth, and sit on your hands while the problem persists. These are very basic, small changes and its going to take till next year? What a joke.
June 20, 2013, 9:40 am
Tal Barzilai from Pleasantville, NY says:
Seeing that claim from Transportation Alternatives does make me feel suspicious on that. Knowing that they are anti-car fanatics, they are probably fudged only to make it that high. At the same time, I can say the same thing about cyclists flouting the laws at a high number, and the bike zealots here will be crying foul on that, plus they will claim there was an anti-bicycle bias, which shows how much they can dish criticism, but just can't take it. As for Streetsblog, I see it as the American version of the Electronic Intifada where so many fanatics post there and even make personal attacks on any group or individual who doesn't see through their eyes only. Overall, the community board didn't get manipulated by Bloomberg and JSK, and I am glad that they saw through their plan.
June 20, 2013, 2:52 pm
ty from pps says:
I think it's safe to say, Tal, that we are all happy you're glad. I mean, it would be a shame if a man living in his mom's basement in Pleasantville was upset by the change in the configuration of 4th Avenue in Brooklyn. I mean, there's a small chance you might even have to drive on the road in a year or two. Can you imagine?
June 20, 2013, 4:45 pm
Tal Barzilai from Pleasantville, NY says:
Ty, nobody who opposed the DOT's plan was against safety, they were against the idea of the configuration. Many of them felt that that not allowing for left turns at certain points will force motorists to make almost circle routes when they used to just have a straight path there. Also, reducing travel lanes will actually back traffic, and since 4th Avenue is a major thoroughfare, commercial vehicles are using it as well. Overall, nobody is trying to be against safety, they just want something that doesn't create an inconvenience to the already existing traffic. BTW, I am against reckless drivers, but we shouldn't punish the entire group or motorists just because of a few. I am sure you wouldn't like if someone said that all cyclists should be punished because of a few that tend to flout the laws or even pedestrians just because of a few. Laws are for everyone to follow, not just a select group, so this isn't George Orwell's Animal Farm, this is real life.
June 20, 2013, 5:41 pm
ty from pps says:
Tal -- You do know that I drive in Brooklyn a lot.... A lot more than you.

The first half of your comment is total B.S. You are making it up. How do you know *why* they voted? There have been a couple vague public statements. These CB decisions are not based on rational decision-making. If they were, they'd be doing a lot more for their communities -- IN GENERAL, not just for things like this.

Like I said, I'm so glad a guy in Pleasantville (who has personal and private information about the CB10 decision) is pleased with the decision. Now go help you mom get ready for her bath.
June 20, 2013, 6:09 pm
Tal Barzilai from Pleasantville, NY says:
Ty, I know that if they agreed with you, then you would be saying the exact opposite of what you just said. You are just a sore loser and don't know how to take a loss like that. For the record, I have driven in Brooklyn for the last couple of years, and I know what it's like there first hand as well. Honestly, I feel that getting rid of the left turn bays is a bad idea and will force circle routes while commercial vehicles will have a harder time, because there are a number of roads that they can't go on unless it happens to be a major thoroughfare. On a side note, I never did condone what the repeat DWI driver did down in the East Village, and I couldn't even believe what he knocked over or crashed into, which got that area into a lock down because of that, which shows that I do call out such motorists, while your kind hardly calls out cyclists that act as such.
June 22, 2013, 5:23 pm
ty from pps says:
Tal -- You don't get it do you?

When the DOT (experts) present a plan, supported by modeling and data -- I know, it's all lies, I know -- and then the transportation subcommittee of the Community Board approve the plan... a "yes" vote doesn't need to be justified.

What needs to be justified is a "no" vote that goes against the experts and the subcommittee of the group that charged this very subcommittee to vet things like this.

If three doctors (experts) tell you that a knee replacement surgery will rid you of the pain in your leg, a "yes" doesn't need to be justified. Everyone agrees with the expert assessment. However, if you say, "no, I don't want the surgery," this has to be justified (not the doctors in this case, they'll just move on to the next patient). You have to justify this to yourself -- why did you say no? You're 92 years old and it doesn't make sense to bother. You can't afford it. You have a religious reason. You don't like cats. Whatever. Unless you're a crazy person, you need a justification to go against the expert recommendation.

In this case, what was this justification? NONE was given. Some vague hints from one member of the board, but no actual reason for their vote.

And will you shut up with the "your kind" talk. Do you want me to talk about "your kind" -- which group would you like to be part of, hmmm? By the way, when was the last time you saw a cyclist critically injure 3 people, knock down a street light, demolish a store front and crush a dozen bicycles all at once? Hmmm?
June 22, 2013, 8:22 pm
Tal Barzilai from Pleasantville, NY says:
Ty, there are things that you just don't get. The community boards felt that the stats from the DOT were flawed. Also, JSK is known for being anti-car, so a bias is being expected on her plans for 4th Avenue. Perhaps there was something that they saw that neither you or JSK didn't see in this plan. However, if you want a real answer, ask those members directly, because I don't represent them in any way or form. As for that DWI drive that crashed in the East Village, I never did say I condoned his action, but you probably assumed that I did despite what I said, plus I never hear you calling out cyclists and pedestrians that have been known to break the laws. Seriously, traffic calming punishes regular, law-abiding motorists more than it does on those who flout them, but you are too anti-car to notice that.
June 23, 2013, 7:05 pm
ty from pps says:

You don't have these facts. You are saying things like they are facts, but they are not facts. They are ASSUMPTIONS you are making!

"JSK is known for being anti-car" -- THAT IS A STUPID COMMENT! No, you *think* she is anti-car because you're a ignorant dumba$$. JSK has increased efforts in the Manhattan core and all over the city to keep traffic moving and decrease congestion. There is an enormous NASA-style command center that JSK has consistently increased funding to... increased traffic monitoring cameras, increased censors, etc. etc. that all feed into this massive system. Traffic lights can be adjusted, problems can be identified almost instantly, etc. etc. ALL for the benefit of CARS and TRUCKS! Bicycles and pedestrians don't need complex anti-gridlock systems... they don't get stuck in traffic.


Did you even READ my last comment? "Perhaps there was something that they saw that neither you or JSK didn't see in this plan." THAT IS FINE! Thus, the need for JUSTIFICATION! Explicit (that means saying it out loud) justification of why the Community Board disagrees with the recommendation. Agreement doesn't need to be justified.

Tal, you do know the DOT is part of the same government as the Community Boards, right? The DOT is not a lobbyist or a vendor bidding on a contract. The DOT *is* the city.


Now, SHUT UP. And keep your ignorance and guesses (that you present as facts) to yourself.
June 23, 2013, 8:42 pm
ty from pps says:
"Seriously, traffic calming punishes regular, law-abiding motorists more than it does on those who flout them, but you are too anti-car to notice that."

Seriously, you're stupid.
June 23, 2013, 8:44 pm
Tal Barzilai from Pleasantville, NY says:
Ty, how do you know that the data given by JSK isn't flawed? Did she personally show the plans for 4th Avenue at a secret meeting? More importantly, what is with the hostility coming out from you? Do you have close connections with the DOT or do you work for them? Maybe that can help understand why you are so defensive on this. What really annoys me here are those like you feeling that when things don't go your way, it has to be done by forces unknown, not to mention calling for those that disagreed to be burned to the stake just for taking that choice. You do really need to take a chill pill sometimes, because you need them. Perhaps, you should just stop looking at your Robert Mugabe poster and wishing you could be like him and just get rid of all those that oppose you. Overall, the community saw the plan, voted on it, and your group just lost. Seriously, you need to learn how to keep your ego to yourself especially when you already go to have your say on this, so let others have theirs'.
June 24, 2013, 2:13 pm
ty from pps says:
Tal --

WILL YOU PAY ATTENTION and stop with you usual crap.

"how do you know that the data given by JSK isn't flawed?" I don't. Maybe it is. Is *that* the justification for the Community Board's decision? If so, they should say that.

I'm being defensive? Seriously? Tal, sweety, whenever the DOT is mentioned you do everything say why they are horrible, wrong and "punishing" everyone.

"and your group just lost" -- NO TAL. If you are paying f*cking attention, this isn't the point. This isn't Us vs. Them. The DOT is the government. The Community Board is the government. They BOTH are serving the people of the city (or are supposed to be). All of the people.

Please re-read my June 22, 9:22 pm comment. It's VERY clear you didn't read it. Or you read it, but had no intention of letting this change your opinion in any way. No, all opinions held by Tal Barzilai are permanent. They are based on ignorance, assumptions and not paying attention... but nothing will change them.
June 24, 2013, 4:19 pm
ty from pps says:
I'm going to say this again, too, because you seem to not have a clue about how the world works.

The DOT is not a lobbyist or a vendor bidding on a contract. The DOT *is* the city.
June 24, 2013, 4:21 pm
Tal Barzilai from Pleasantville, NY says:
Ty, why is it that you can't comment with presenting such hostilities? Perhaps, it's about time you start taking your medication again, because you probably need it. Why is that you can't talk without making personal attacks? Bottom line, you had your say on this while those on the community board had theirs'. BTW, not everyone who opposes traffic calming is against safe streets, so I am tired of the black and white stereotypes. No wonder why places such as Streetsblog and Transportation Alternatives are being viewed as chief enablers for the anti-car fanatics, and some of what they say over there reminds me of the Electronic Intifada when talking about how much they wish Israel never existed as a nation. Then again, explaining you the reason why there is opposition to traffic calming is sort of like trying to get the Muslim Brotherhood to accept Israel as a Jewish state.
June 24, 2013, 5:11 pm
ty from pps says:
Tal - Why is it that you can't comment without be a total nutjob?

Tal, you think bigger/wider roads improves traffic flow. The bigger, the more traffic can move. This is just ONE example of your ignorance that you refuse to change. Soooooooo many people have tried to explain even the most basic traffic engineering concepts to you, but you reply with ignorance and a refusal to learn something new.

You just stay in Pleasantville and we're all a little safer down here.
June 24, 2013, 6:12 pm
ty from pps says:
P.S. I hate you.
June 24, 2013, 6:13 pm
Tal Barzilai from Pleasantville, NY says:
Ty, nobody is calling to make 4th Avenue let alone any other roads wider, that's just something in your twisted little brain of yours. Reducing the road in the long run will actually cause more traffic than it was prevent. The fact that it's a major thoroughfare, reducing the lanes will make it very difficult for commercial vehicles, which is why the community boards voted it down. There are ways to make it safer without causing an inconvenience on others. However, others besides motorists have to play their part to such as stopping with the jaywalking, but you will all cry foul to that when at the same time want others to follow the rules when you don't.
June 24, 2013, 6:50 pm
ty from pps says:
Tal, that fact that you don't comprehend what I just said is proof enough that you are stupid. It must be tough going around life being as dim as you, but everyone has their cross to bear.

And to be clear -- yes, that is a personal attack. You don't have to say, "and stop with the personal attacks and blah blah blah" and "your kind always says blah blah blah." I've heard it all. You are stupid. We all know this clearly. You will always live with your mom. And hopefully she will take your computer away for being naughty. But in the meantime, just know that you are stupid and I hate you... you personally. You. Not what you "represent" (you don't represent anyone -- other than yourself, a sad pathetic ignorant man in his mom's basement who is obsesses with a city 50 miles from his house) You are an individual who I pity and I hate.
June 24, 2013, 7:12 pm
Tal Barzilai from Pleasantville, NY says:
Ty, you actually described yourself more than you did me. You know absolutely nothing about me, so quit pretending to be a know it all when you are not one. If you don't like what I am saying, then just simply don't reply to it like a mature adult, which is something that you are not as well. I feel the reason that you resort to such an attitude is because you are probably more afraid of others than anyone is afraid of you, which is why you say this behind your computer screen. In reality, there are no right or wrong answers, just the way we view things, which is why I feel that the DOT is flawed especially on getting rid of the left turn bays on 4th Avenue.
June 24, 2013, 7:35 pm
ty from pps says:
You really accept a crystal clear message, can you? Seriously dim.
June 24, 2013, 7:52 pm
ty from pps says:
You really *can't accept a crystal clear message, can you? Seriously dim.

(You know what dim means right? Like a dim light bulb?)
June 24, 2013, 7:53 pm
Tal Barzilai from Pleasantville, NY says:
Ty, just cut out the personal attacks as they are a hit way below the belt, even for you. Stop being an Internet schoolyard bulley behind your computer screen and talk about the issues like an adult. Back to the topic. It seems when there is a split decision, this means that the other side's arguments are meritorious, despite what the streetsblogger crowd thinks. The anticar mentality that you epouse is very tiresome and completely debunkable, given the average tax bill of the motorist vs the renaissance-man biker. If you were looking for a message board where everyone was going to just agree with you to be "nice", well, then you've come to the wrong place. If you came for an honest dialogue of different views, then hang around. Maybe you'll learn a few things. I know I sure have. MOst of all the pettyness of streetsblogger zealouts like Ty and Other Michael. I did remember hearing some of the protesters in some of the Mid East countries backing off on women's rights. How is it true democracy by being sexist? Also, hearing that the Muslim Brotherhood is being involved doesn't seem to make me feel supportive when I already know where they stand on some issues. Originally, they were on the fence of the protests in Egypt before actually being involved. I'll NEVER forget the time that I started threads there about Boston's Big Dig project, the airlines charging for other stuff and so forth! and they just hacked those up like a chain saw!! That sort of reminds me of Napoleon Bonaparte when he was originally neutral in the French Revolution, but then stepped in later after several failures to become the dictator of France and stopped democracy despite being benevolent to the people. Just because there are people against the government that is there now, doesn't always mean that they are for democracy, and the example of the Iranian Revolution is one of them where the shah was overthrown for the ayatollah. Yeah, I did that to a cooking forum earlier in the summer where an admin banned me because I stood up to her, mainly because she just kept on accusing me of posting stuff that supposedly wasn't true when I know that it was. I told them exactly what they can do with that forum as well. They also don't like to be told when they're wrong. Hezbollah used democracy just to rise to power in Lebanon and then abolished it the moment they stepped in, and the same thing happened with Hamas in the Gaza Strip, and this what some fear about the Muslim Brotherhood in Egypt. I am sure they really are for democracy Sharia Law, and may be no different than who was there. Honestly, it's easy to overthrow a government that one despises, but to make a stable government that will use democracy is not always easy for some. This has been the case in the past as well. Although Simon Bolivar was able to help free much of South America from Spanish rule in the 1820's, he was unable to make them democracies as he promised. Sun Yat Sen tried to make China a democracy in 1912, but that failed and it alienated a lot of the people there since they were not much educated about it either, which lead to Communist Revolution, in 1949 lead by Mao Zedong. Vladmir Illych Lenin at first believed in the people durring the Russian Revolution by stating peace, land, and bread, to them, but then became obessesed with power and made it communist instead. It's unfortunate that some places try for democracy and then fail because of their history of being used to authoritarian regimes. The reason why there will be no riots to overthrow the Israeli government is mainly because they are one of the few actual democracies in the region, and everyone is represented, plus protesters to the Knesset are not arrested just for their criticism, so this is a big difference here compared to much of the rest. One thing never to forget is that elections in general do not always define democracy especially when dictators and other extremist and terrorist groups have a history of alawys getting elected. If they truly want democracy, they should show that they really want, and not just use it to get rid of someone they don't want just to have that same power themselves. The board here is set up in such a way so that the constant & stubborn Internet Schoolyard Bullys can't just come waltzing back in here whenever he wishes, pleases or chooses to, under his own power without the help of an admin to let him back in. I'm not at all here to fight with you or anyone else, but it is what it is, but if you want to keep on disagreeing with me, well, that's your choice.
June 26, 2013, 8:04 am
ty from pps says:
Wow, that was a whole lot of unorganized "thoughts" there, Tal. Like I said, you are stupid and ignorant and don't even *try* to change that.

When you actually get something right, it's like the way a broken clock is still right twice per day.

Now, go be a loony by yourself. The rest of us are tired of you. Until then... no, I won't stop the personal attacks. In fact, that is ALL you will get from me. You are stupid and vile (טיפש ונִתעָב).
June 26, 2013, 10:44 am
ty from pps says:
Just a fun review of Tal’s stupid 750 word vomit.
* debunkable (not a word)
* tax bill of the motorist vs the renaissance-man biker (He still doesn’t know the difference between taxes and personal expenses)
* Maybe you'll learn a few things. I know I sure have. (When was this? No evidence to show you’ve learned anything.)
* protesters in some of the Mid East countries backing off on women's rights. (Random topic #1)
* Muslim Brotherhood and Egyptian protests (#2)
* Boston's Big Dig project (#3)
* airlines charging for other stuff and so forth! (#4)
* Napoleon Bonaparte when he was originally neutral in the French Revolution (#5)
* Iranian Revolution and the ayatollah (#6)
* cooking forum earlier in the summer where an admin banned me because I stood up to her, mainly because she just kept on accusing me of posting stuff that * supposedly wasn't true when I know that it was. (#7 and HAHAHAHAAHAHAHHAHAHAHA)
* Hezbollah used democracy just to rise to power in Lebanon (#8)
* Hamas in the Gaza Strip (#9)
* Muslim Brotherhood in Egypt and Sharia Law (#2b)
* Simon Bolivar (#10)
* Sun Yat Sen tried to make China a democracy (#11)
* Communist Revolution and Mao Zedong (#12)
* Vladmir Illych Lenin (#13)
* The reason why there will be no riots to overthrow the Israeli government is mainly because they are one of the few actual democracies in the region (#14 and stupid)
* This is a big difference here compared to much of the rest (Wait… “here”? So you live in Israel, not Pleasantville?)
* Elections and democracy (#15)
* I'm not at all here to fight with you or anyone else (No, just to be a crazy person and share you stupid thoughts with the world?)
So, what we have is AT LEAST fifteen crazy random thoughts spewed in a block of text, in response to an article about a fairly minor ROADWAY RE-DESIGN proposal in Brooklyn.
June 27, 2013, 8:33 am
ty from pps says:
(Sorry, I should be clear... "debunkable" is a word, but it's one that only used by nutjob conspiracy theorists and other ignorant people -- but Tal also has a tendency to not even use this stupid word correctly.)
June 27, 2013, 8:35 am

Comments closed.

First name
Last name
Your neighborhood
Email address
Daytime phone

Your letter must be signed and include all of the information requested above. (Only your name and neighborhood are published with the letter.) Letters should be as brief as possible; while they may discuss any topic of interest to our readers, priority will be given to letters that relate to stories covered by The Brooklyn Paper.

Letters will be edited at the sole discretion of the editor, may be published in whole or part in any media, and upon publication become the property of The Brooklyn Paper. The earlier in the week you send your letter, the better.

Keep it local!

Stay in touch with your community. Subscribe to our free newsletter: