The apparent legality of harassment

User avatar
spot
Posts: 40346
Joined: Tue Apr 19, 2005 5:19 pm
Location: Brigstowe

The apparent legality of harassment

Post by spot »

The thread is prompted by a tweet:Ivanka and Jared at JFK T5, flying commercial. My husband chasing them down to harass them. #banalityofevil

The story can be found at JetBlue Ejects Passengers After Encounter with Ivanka Trump : snopes.com

The men involved are Matthew Lasner and Dan Goldstein and what completely baffles me is that no charges have been brought against either of them. Their target was traveling on a scheduled flight with three children. What happened has nothing to do with an expression of free speech, it was a pre-planned violent verbal assault.
Nullius in verba|||||||||||
To Fate I sue, of other means bereft, the only refuge for the wretched left.

Who has a spare two minutes to play in this month's FG Trivia game!
My other operating system is Slackware
User avatar
tude dog
Posts: 5121
Joined: Mon Oct 15, 2007 11:48 am

The apparent legality of harassment

Post by tude dog »

spot;1504595 wrote: The thread is prompted by a tweet:Ivanka and Jared at JFK T5, flying commercial. My husband chasing them down to harass them. #banalityofevil

The story can be found at JetBlue Ejects Passengers After Encounter with Ivanka Trump : snopes.com

The men involved are Matthew Lasner and Dan Goldstein and what completely baffles me is that no charges have been brought against either of them. Their target was traveling on a scheduled flight with three children. What happened has nothing to do with an expression of free speech, it was a pre-planned violent verbal assault.


Nobody gives a chit about violent verbal assault,whatever that is.

It was shameful and the f'ers who did that by now seem to realize it backfired at whatever they hoped to accomplish.
What happened to Kamala Harris' campaign?
She had the black vote all locked up.
User avatar
spot
Posts: 40346
Joined: Tue Apr 19, 2005 5:19 pm
Location: Brigstowe

The apparent legality of harassment

Post by spot »

tude dog;1504600 wrote: Nobody gives a chit about violent verbal assault,whatever that is.Intimidation by aggressive shouting. It's not a thing civilized people do.
Nullius in verba|||||||||||
To Fate I sue, of other means bereft, the only refuge for the wretched left.

Who has a spare two minutes to play in this month's FG Trivia game!
My other operating system is Slackware
User avatar
tude dog
Posts: 5121
Joined: Mon Oct 15, 2007 11:48 am

The apparent legality of harassment

Post by tude dog »

spot;1504602 wrote: Intimidation by aggressive shouting. It's not a thing civilized people do.


Yup, uncivilized people can be a pain.
What happened to Kamala Harris' campaign?
She had the black vote all locked up.
User avatar
magentaflame
Posts: 2990
Joined: Fri Jun 17, 2016 4:11 pm
Location: Victoria, Australia

The apparent legality of harassment

Post by magentaflame »

Man says "my husband"....... first time ive seen that phrase used.

And the expression "deplane"..... wtf?

Wouldnt worry though Spot. If its punishment you want, once Trump is actually president those two will never work again. (Watch this space)
The 'radical' left just wants everyone to have food, shelter, healthcare, education and a living wage. Man that's radical!....ooooohhhh Scary!
User avatar
LarsMac
Posts: 13205
Joined: Fri Nov 27, 2009 9:11 pm
Location: Far Out, Man

The apparent legality of harassment

Post by LarsMac »

When that happened, those people thought they were cool or something, and posted their "attack" on Facebook.

I don't care what people think of Mr Trump and his election to the office, but being rude to his family is uncalled for. Those people are idiots.
Control is an illusion. The Chaos is all part of the fun.
-Susan Hattie Steinsapir
User avatar
spot
Posts: 40346
Joined: Tue Apr 19, 2005 5:19 pm
Location: Brigstowe

The apparent legality of harassment

Post by spot »

To quote Wikipedia regarding Scottish law as an example,The Scottish law definition of a breach of the peace is "conduct severe enough to cause alarm to ordinary people and threaten serious disturbance to the community."

[...] To prove a Breach of the Peace the most important thing to prove is that someone was Alarmed, Annoyed or Disturbed by the incident [...] The maximum punishment if a case is remitted to the High Court remains imprisonment for life although such severe punishment is now rarely applied.

Nullius in verba|||||||||||
To Fate I sue, of other means bereft, the only refuge for the wretched left.

Who has a spare two minutes to play in this month's FG Trivia game!
My other operating system is Slackware
User avatar
tabby
Posts: 2511
Joined: Fri Oct 29, 2010 3:41 pm
Location: Virginia

The apparent legality of harassment

Post by tabby »

The definition of a "hate crime" here is “a criminal offense against a person or property motivated in whole or in part by an offender's bias against a race, religion, disability, sexual orientation, ethnicity, gender, or gender identity.”

No mention of political affiliation so it may not match the criteria for it to quite literally become a Federal case. The onus may be on Ivanka to press charges if she so desires but I suspect she's already put it behind her.
User avatar
spot
Posts: 40346
Joined: Tue Apr 19, 2005 5:19 pm
Location: Brigstowe

The apparent legality of harassment

Post by spot »

If it doesn't qualify as an assault in America then American law is defective.

Besides, I'd have thought being related to the current President-elect qualifies as a disability any day of the week.

Perhaps Hunter College has a contractual clause about bringing the institution into disrepute.
Nullius in verba|||||||||||
To Fate I sue, of other means bereft, the only refuge for the wretched left.

Who has a spare two minutes to play in this month's FG Trivia game!
My other operating system is Slackware
User avatar
magentaflame
Posts: 2990
Joined: Fri Jun 17, 2016 4:11 pm
Location: Victoria, Australia

The apparent legality of harassment

Post by magentaflame »

spot;1504611 wrote: If it doesn't qualify as an assault in America then American law is defective.

Besides, I'd have thought being related to the current President-elect qualifies as a disability any day of the week.

Perhaps Hunter College has a contractual clause about bringing the institution into disrepute.


Hence why i said he'd never work again.

Although i agree its uncivilised Ivanka isnt just an innocent daughter. She was part of his election team and he's trying to make her part of his government. So........
The 'radical' left just wants everyone to have food, shelter, healthcare, education and a living wage. Man that's radical!....ooooohhhh Scary!
User avatar
spot
Posts: 40346
Joined: Tue Apr 19, 2005 5:19 pm
Location: Brigstowe

The apparent legality of harassment

Post by spot »

So that's no excuse to harass her on a commercial flight with her family?
Nullius in verba|||||||||||
To Fate I sue, of other means bereft, the only refuge for the wretched left.

Who has a spare two minutes to play in this month's FG Trivia game!
My other operating system is Slackware
User avatar
magentaflame
Posts: 2990
Joined: Fri Jun 17, 2016 4:11 pm
Location: Victoria, Australia

The apparent legality of harassment

Post by magentaflame »

Just putting foward, that there will be repercussions. Its america. And they picked on a rich person. He'll lose his job, home, family.....etc after theyve done suing the pants off him. And the shirt off his back.
The 'radical' left just wants everyone to have food, shelter, healthcare, education and a living wage. Man that's radical!....ooooohhhh Scary!
User avatar
magentaflame
Posts: 2990
Joined: Fri Jun 17, 2016 4:11 pm
Location: Victoria, Australia

The apparent legality of harassment

Post by magentaflame »

Then youll be here complaining about the injustice of that
The 'radical' left just wants everyone to have food, shelter, healthcare, education and a living wage. Man that's radical!....ooooohhhh Scary!
Clodhopper
Posts: 5115
Joined: Mon Feb 25, 2008 5:11 pm

The apparent legality of harassment

Post by Clodhopper »

After Trump's campaign I'm happy for any member of his team to be targeted, and his family are part of his team, will be running his businesses and formulating policy. Clinton may have been a bit nasty, but compared to Trump she's an angel. The USA is going to be raped for his benefit, and that of his Russian backers.

The UK on the other hand is going to become a low tax low service economy and the NHS will be a shell. Retail and manufacturing will decline steadily so the middle classes as well as the traditional working classes will experience mass unemployment and poverty since there will be many fewer managerial jobs. We are in a dreadful negotiating position for new deals because we MUST get deals and no-one we negotiate with is that desperate so they can delay delay delay without taking harm, until we sign up to their terms. The US trade negotiator, appointed by Trump, has already called it a God given opportunity to steal business from the UK and is advising his clients accordingly. Brexiters have put us right in the ****.

Brexiters have completely smashed the country and are too stupid to realise it - except for the far right nasties who want to smash the economy so they can get power in the chaos and desperation, and the racists who brexit voters have empowered, the small minded xenophobes who hate any foreigner (and foreign starts outside their village) and the very rich/right wing of the tory party who want a low tax environment and can afford private health insurance and have their company pension and don't care that the poor starve.

Ands the poor WILL starve. There are already signs of it in the North of England and brexit will only make it worse - inflation is back and there's no money for increased benefits or services. There's only so long we can keep borrowing money before the IMF gets stroppy and brexit has already led to our credit rating being downgraded.

It is hard to adequately express my loathing and contempt for the people who have done this.
The crowd: "Yes! We are all individuals!"

Lone voice: "I'm not."
Ahso!
Posts: 10215
Joined: Wed Nov 11, 2009 1:38 pm

The apparent legality of harassment

Post by Ahso! »

Don't hold back, Clod. It's nice to see you posting!

I try to give due consideration to what's been happening politically in the US, UK and indeed worldwide. All I can come up with is that when viewed as an organism, it would appear to be mutating. These changes we're witnessing are pretty significant and frightening on the face.

To keep this short enough, the final question is whether or not the organism's changes are selective, and if not then it will need to mutate further or go it's way to irrelevance and finally extinction. How long the dying phase is is anyone's guess. Perhaps we're already in that phase, in fact.

I'm curious to see how a Trump administration plays out, whatever the end result is.

If Trump is doing what I suspect he's doing with his choices then this could be a game-changing period in the US for the better, and we all know that that is what has to happen one way or another.
“Those who can make you believe absurdities can make you commit atrocities,”

Voltaire



I have only one thing to do and that's

Be the wave that I am and then

Sink back into the ocean

Fiona Apple
Clodhopper
Posts: 5115
Joined: Mon Feb 25, 2008 5:11 pm

The apparent legality of harassment

Post by Clodhopper »

I just don't think a misogynistic thin skinned childish sod with a very high opinion of himself and no morals is likely to make a good President. But what do I know? What do you think he is doing with his choices that will make the USA so much better? I think his only concern as President is to get as rich as possible. Maybe I'm so revolted by the way he comes across that I'm missing his good points. What are they? What do you think his plan is?

edit: Oh and hi there :) Good to see you again
The crowd: "Yes! We are all individuals!"

Lone voice: "I'm not."
Ahso!
Posts: 10215
Joined: Wed Nov 11, 2009 1:38 pm

The apparent legality of harassment

Post by Ahso! »

Trump's picks appear to me to be typical of a business person, which is what he sold himself as to his supporters.

Politicians usually appoint wonks to a job in order to crank it properly and keep it running smoothly. They usually only tweak the thing around the perimeter and never want to mess with the inner workings for several reasons that I'll avoid getting into in order to keep this short enough. They turn out to pretty much be gate-keepers, which is what becomes frustrating for the average person in the real world dealing with the consequences of the machinery. Behind the scenes, these appointees are lapping up to the powers that be for the future when their political careers come to an end, believing that it's all really on auto run anyway as long as they just sort of watch the gauges.

Back in 1976 Jimmy Carter tried to usurp this political system and I think was surprised and unprepared for the consequences of being a true outsider. Carter paid heavily for his political naivety and got rode out of town in short order to make room for the conventional Reagan who was easily manipulated by everyone really.

Donald Trump took all this in and realized that if Washington is ever going to be changed the change agent had to be tougher than Carter (a bully) who wasn't going to take crap from anyone. He/she would need to choose the most dedicated base to be relied on and play from there. Trump knew what to say, how to say it and when to say it.

Don't forget that through the years Trump was making a name for himself and establishing important relationships. I won't go as far as to say that Trump planned all this way back, but there definitely came a point when he realized that everything was as right as it was going to get for him to make his move. He felt the waters in 2012 and began his play.

Business people are taught to take a failed opportunity or broken mechanism and either turn it around to make it work or allow it to die, indeed assist in the dying process to remove the thing from view. It's a do or die mentality. What they tend to do is put their best people in the process to maneuver around and work at it. If the people chosen, who are all outside convention, can be convinced of whatever the facts are after being exposed to them as Trump's appointees will be, then he'll adapt, but what Trump is showing above all else is that he's not afraid of consequences either way. He'll man-up and tell what's been found.

There is some faith involved in all this. First, Trump has faith that his appointees will be loyal to him. Secondly, he has to have faith that once he comes face to face with all the facts, his supporters will stick with him regardless of the outcome. That's a lot of faith.

The other thing to be aware of is that business people create facades quite intentionally, and Trumps picks are obviously people who have gotten everyone's attention. That's no mistake! He's creating discomfort for both the right and the left. Both want him gone.

eta: I didn't vote for Donald Trump or Hillary Clinton, but he is president now, so we might as well give the guy a chance.
“Those who can make you believe absurdities can make you commit atrocities,”

Voltaire



I have only one thing to do and that's

Be the wave that I am and then

Sink back into the ocean

Fiona Apple
Clodhopper
Posts: 5115
Joined: Mon Feb 25, 2008 5:11 pm

The apparent legality of harassment

Post by Clodhopper »

Well, I hope for the sake of the USA that you are right. I don't see any sort of plan other than self aggrandisement. He has already shown that nepotism is fine with him, along with being above the law and using the fact he will be President to further his business interests - I believe he's already put pressure on Venezuela (I think) to stop opposing one of his hotels and they caved immediately.

I have not, ever, seen any sign that Trump is interested in anything other than himself. You don't have a choice any more about giving him a chance. He will be in charge and I don't think even a Watergate would stop him because most of his supporters won't believe anything bad about him at all. If women voted for him after his attitude became apparent in deeds not words he can get away with anything, and will.
The crowd: "Yes! We are all individuals!"

Lone voice: "I'm not."
Ahso!
Posts: 10215
Joined: Wed Nov 11, 2009 1:38 pm

The apparent legality of harassment

Post by Ahso! »

A case in point is Christie Todd Whitman who was appointed by Dubya to head the EPA. Whitman had been known as a climate denier when she was appointed. I recently read a piece on her from The BBC where she explains that after being exposed to all the information and scientific facts of climate change her mind was changed. The article points out that she hopes Trump's pick will be open to all the facts, and if he is he'll advise Trump accordingly.

Christine Todd Whitman, head of the US Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) under George W Bush, accused Mr Trump of ignoring compelling science.

And she warned that his threat to scrap climate protection policies puts the world's future at risk.

Trump supporters say rules on climate and energy are stifling business.

But Ms Todd Whitman says the US must find ways of promoting business without unduly harming the planet.

...

But Ms Todd Whitman said she hoped the new administration did not prove to be as extreme as it appeared at first sight.

"Once he's in office, Pruitt will find it's a lot more complicated than they thought," she said. "Hopefully they'll be able to listen - and then start to moderate.

"Regulation can go too far and there probably are regulations that have outlived their usefulness and need to be cut back to a degree… but to throw it all out…"

http://www.bbc.com/news/science-environment-38484730

I think in Trump's mind, if the hardliner he's appointed can be convinced then there's got to be a reality to it. What his argument will be to his supporters will be one of - look, you saw who I put in there. I assure you, it's real.

I think the same goes for his pick on Israel. While it's no secret that the Trump family is a family of Jewish wannabes (which is actually common within the NY world of affluence), I think he'll assess the situation after giving net-in-yahoo a guy he wants. If after all that a two state solution is still not achievable, Trump will know it's all a charade, and will then act accordingly. Hopefully there will still be a few Palestinians left by then.

I realize much of this is optimism on my part. But hey, the situation is what it is. At least I'm looking for some light here.
“Those who can make you believe absurdities can make you commit atrocities,”

Voltaire



I have only one thing to do and that's

Be the wave that I am and then

Sink back into the ocean

Fiona Apple
User avatar
AnneBoleyn
Posts: 6632
Joined: Sun Dec 11, 2011 3:17 pm

The apparent legality of harassment

Post by AnneBoleyn »

spot;1504611 wrote: If it doesn't qualify as an assault in America then American law is defective.

Besides, I'd have thought being related to the current President-elect qualifies as a disability any day of the week.

Perhaps Hunter College has a contractual clause about bringing the institution into disrepute.


If he has tenure, he is safe.
User avatar
AnneBoleyn
Posts: 6632
Joined: Sun Dec 11, 2011 3:17 pm

The apparent legality of harassment

Post by AnneBoleyn »

magentaflame;1504615 wrote: Just putting foward, that there will be repercussions. Its america. And they picked on a rich person. He'll lose his job, home, family.....etc after theyve done suing the pants off him. And the shirt off his back.


Totally WRONG. Nothing will happen; too many people feel the way he did but won't express it like that. I wouldn't.

eta---and with her young children there? That guy is an obnoxious boor.
User avatar
AnneBoleyn
Posts: 6632
Joined: Sun Dec 11, 2011 3:17 pm

The apparent legality of harassment

Post by AnneBoleyn »

It is unusual that there were no arrests. People on airplanes have been arrested for far less.
User avatar
spot
Posts: 40346
Joined: Tue Apr 19, 2005 5:19 pm
Location: Brigstowe

The apparent legality of harassment

Post by spot »

AnneBoleyn;1504934 wrote: If he has tenure, he is safe.


I didn't think it still existed.
Nullius in verba|||||||||||
To Fate I sue, of other means bereft, the only refuge for the wretched left.

Who has a spare two minutes to play in this month's FG Trivia game!
My other operating system is Slackware
User avatar
AnneBoleyn
Posts: 6632
Joined: Sun Dec 11, 2011 3:17 pm

The apparent legality of harassment

Post by AnneBoleyn »

spot;1504937 wrote: I didn't think it still existed.


Your mistake, it seems.
User avatar
spot
Posts: 40346
Joined: Tue Apr 19, 2005 5:19 pm
Location: Brigstowe

The apparent legality of harassment

Post by spot »

AnneBoleyn;1504939 wrote: Your mistake, it seems.


Perhaps the US system differs from that in England.

As for contractual clauses, even the US system retained an exception for dismissal with just cause.
Nullius in verba|||||||||||
To Fate I sue, of other means bereft, the only refuge for the wretched left.

Who has a spare two minutes to play in this month's FG Trivia game!
My other operating system is Slackware
User avatar
AnneBoleyn
Posts: 6632
Joined: Sun Dec 11, 2011 3:17 pm

The apparent legality of harassment

Post by AnneBoleyn »

spot;1504940 wrote: Perhaps the US system differs from that in England.

As for contractual clauses, even the US system retained an exception for dismissal with just cause.


This isn't a big enough deal. You are nit picking.
User avatar
spot
Posts: 40346
Joined: Tue Apr 19, 2005 5:19 pm
Location: Brigstowe

The apparent legality of harassment

Post by spot »

AnneBoleyn;1504941 wrote: This isn't a big enough deal. You are nit picking.


On the contrary, it's exactly what bringing the university into disrepute refers to.
Nullius in verba|||||||||||
To Fate I sue, of other means bereft, the only refuge for the wretched left.

Who has a spare two minutes to play in this month's FG Trivia game!
My other operating system is Slackware
User avatar
AnneBoleyn
Posts: 6632
Joined: Sun Dec 11, 2011 3:17 pm

The apparent legality of harassment

Post by AnneBoleyn »

spot;1504942 wrote: On the contrary, it's exactly what bringing the university into disrepute refers to.


Hunter College, where my son taught physics, is part of the larger CUNY (City University of New York), which has several branches in each borough of the city (there are 5 boroughs: Brooklyn (Kings); Manhattan (New York County); Staten Island (Richmond); Queens & The Bronx. It's huge, it's mammouth & they all hate DT (Delirium Tremens, or Don't Trust).

Tenured professors do way worse than this. Tenure is tenure; it's very hard to get & very hard to lose once gotten. My son taught physics & astronomy at many branches throughout the University; I went to several of it's colleges before I graduated from the Private--NYU (New York University).

This man's actions have done nothing, nada, to Hunter's reputation. We've already forgotten about it, even if you haven't. I'm sure Lady Ivanka has forgotten it too.
User avatar
spot
Posts: 40346
Joined: Tue Apr 19, 2005 5:19 pm
Location: Brigstowe

The apparent legality of harassment

Post by spot »

AnneBoleyn;1504946 wrote: This man's actions have done nothing, nada, to Hunter's reputation. We've already forgotten about it, even if you haven't. I'm sure Lady Ivanka has forgotten it too.I see your words but I suspect you've blinded yourself to reality. Of course it has damaged the university's reputation, and that damage will remain for decades unless they take some form of action even if it's only an expression of disavowal. The reports showing up on Google will make certain that the indicent can't be forgotten, the world is no longer dependent on the fickle recall of The United States of Amnesia which you appear to be celebrating.



What I find surprising is that the values of the Enlightenment seem this year to have disintegrated among those people I would previously have expected to remain courteous. Your Hunterian professor is among them. To deliberately set out to harass anyone on the grounds that she's a politician's child is despicable behavior. You know it, I know it, everyone knows it. It's not what we do. It's no different to tarring and feathering, or burning out a witch from her cottage. It's backward, it has blurred the boundary between the good guys and the bad guys it's indistinguishable from alt-right scummery.

You've worn selectively prejudiced blinkers since you arrived here, it clouds your capacity to actually think and be honest every time you let them get in the way.
Nullius in verba|||||||||||
To Fate I sue, of other means bereft, the only refuge for the wretched left.

Who has a spare two minutes to play in this month's FG Trivia game!
My other operating system is Slackware
User avatar
AnneBoleyn
Posts: 6632
Joined: Sun Dec 11, 2011 3:17 pm

The apparent legality of harassment

Post by AnneBoleyn »

spot: "You've worn selectively prejudiced blinkers since you arrived here, it clouds your capacity to actually think and be honest every time you let them get in the way."

Ad hominem.
Clodhopper
Posts: 5115
Joined: Mon Feb 25, 2008 5:11 pm

The apparent legality of harassment

Post by Clodhopper »

My understanding is that the Trump family, including Ivanka, are part of his government team, running his businesses AND involved in policy formulation and execution. If that is true then Ivanka is a fair target especially since I regard the situation I described as being nepotistic and financially corrupt. She should realise it and if she doesn't want her children exposed to it should use private flights which she has the money to afford.
The crowd: "Yes! We are all individuals!"

Lone voice: "I'm not."
User avatar
spot
Posts: 40346
Joined: Tue Apr 19, 2005 5:19 pm
Location: Brigstowe

The apparent legality of harassment

Post by spot »

I'd rather we were polite. Right now, Ivanka has been given good cause to dislike her social inferiors.
Nullius in verba|||||||||||
To Fate I sue, of other means bereft, the only refuge for the wretched left.

Who has a spare two minutes to play in this month's FG Trivia game!
My other operating system is Slackware
User avatar
spot
Posts: 40346
Joined: Tue Apr 19, 2005 5:19 pm
Location: Brigstowe

The apparent legality of harassment

Post by spot »

AnneBoleyn;1504955 wrote: spot: "You've worn selectively prejudiced blinkers since you arrived here, it clouds your capacity to actually think and be honest every time you let them get in the way."

Ad hominem.


On the contrary.

Let me explain how to tell.

What you do is you set it as a blind trial in your head - you have to do a bit of pretending to get this right.

One group you're discussing is "my group, the in group, the pack I run with, the ones I support". The other group is "Them".

Then you describe to yourself the behavior you're about to critique.

If you get the good and bad reversed by applying the test to Us doing it followed by Them doing it, then you're wearing selectively prejudiced blinkers.
Nullius in verba|||||||||||
To Fate I sue, of other means bereft, the only refuge for the wretched left.

Who has a spare two minutes to play in this month's FG Trivia game!
My other operating system is Slackware
User avatar
AnneBoleyn
Posts: 6632
Joined: Sun Dec 11, 2011 3:17 pm

The apparent legality of harassment

Post by AnneBoleyn »

I thought you'd rather be polite. Obviously not. I won't be playing with you for quite a while spot. You have presumptive arrogance, and I won't go down the path of trading insults with you. I am, however, disappointed by your seeming disdain of me. I come here for fun, for feeling good, for trading ideas without rancor, so I shall say to you, spot, 'goodbye for now.'
User avatar
tabby
Posts: 2511
Joined: Fri Oct 29, 2010 3:41 pm
Location: Virginia

The apparent legality of harassment

Post by tabby »

I haven't seen any further developments on this in the mainstream media so I did some checking online and found a petition appealing to Hunter College to have Matt Lasner removed from Hunter College Administration ~~~~~> https://www.change.org/p/hunter-college ... nistration

That seems to be an ongoing campaign.

As a side note and completely off topic, Matt Lasner is such a dead ringer for Jared Fogle, the infamous Subway Guy! I hadn't noticed that until I pulled up the petition page and saw that particular photo.
User avatar
AnneBoleyn
Posts: 6632
Joined: Sun Dec 11, 2011 3:17 pm

The apparent legality of harassment

Post by AnneBoleyn »

Right Wing Millennials started this petition, and it is not local to New York City. It is meaningless, Tabby. They could get a million RIGHT WING signers, most not from New York City & it would still be meaningless. Did you find out if he has tenure? It probably wouldn't matter in this case anyway. You are right, he looks like Jared Fogle (shudder).

You don't understand NYC CUNY bureaucracy. I do. I've gone to CUNY schools, so has my son, & he was a professor at several of the colleges. Even if the RIGHT WING signers were from New York City, most would not have standing, legally, to be heard by Hunter CUNY.

Personally, I think he should have been arrested at the time. Planes are a bad place to start a scene of any kind. Travelers have been arrested for much less. Besides, the victim of the harassment is not asking that anything be done, & she herself is not pursuing it. She's got other stuff on her plate.

People usually don't lose their jobs for unbecoming, boorish behavior committed while on vacation, unless there is a morals clause of some kind, & I'm pretty sure CUNY doesn't have one.

I'm a native New Yorker, & I know how this town operates.
User avatar
tabby
Posts: 2511
Joined: Fri Oct 29, 2010 3:41 pm
Location: Virginia

The apparent legality of harassment

Post by tabby »

I don't doubt for a minute that you have a good feel for the general ethos of NYC and my post wasn't intended as a challenge. The petition was really the only thing of note that I was able to find to bring the topic up to date. I knew it for what it was when I read the Facebook name "RightWingMillennials" . They were upfront about it ~~~ kinda hard to miss! I didn't mean to imply any success in their endeavor, only that it was out there.

Your comments about CUNY have brought some thoughts to my mind and I'd like to get back to this and ask you some questions but I'm about to fall asleep right now so in the next day or two, I'll come back to it.
User avatar
AnneBoleyn
Posts: 6632
Joined: Sun Dec 11, 2011 3:17 pm

The apparent legality of harassment

Post by AnneBoleyn »

((Tabby)). Oh no, I didn't think you were challenging me or are a dues paying member of Right Wing Millennials! Their very name set me off!

Feel free to ask away on anything, if I don't know, I'll tell you so.

Great to have you back. Missed you.
User avatar
tabby
Posts: 2511
Joined: Fri Oct 29, 2010 3:41 pm
Location: Virginia

The apparent legality of harassment

Post by tabby »

Anne, I'm curious about your comments concerning NYC and CUNY. I guess I never realized what a Democratic stronghold it is up there. If as you say, the establishment of CUNY is clearly left wing, then Matt Lasner probably affected more courage than he otherwise might have if in a different environment. I'm not saying Hunter openly encouraged him but because of the atmosphere he probably felt an inflated and disproportionate sense of outrage when he came across Ivanka on the plane. He was correct also in his knowledge that it was an okay thing to do ... after all, the college has clearly closed ranks behind him. He's had his 15 minutes of fame and we'll probably never hear any more from him. We live in hope.

I hope not all college & university campuses are as politically single minded as it appears to be there. Shouldn't students be taught how to think for themselves instead of being surrounded by so much dogma? Left wing or right wing, how can they do that when they're saturated with extremist political views? I would have found it suffocating. I hate being pressured to think a certain way and I couldn't be the only one. Part of my problem is that I'm never fully comfortable with extremes on either side and I tend to look for moderation to level things out. Wish me luck with that!!

Your comments yesterday made me start thinking about it all and that's not a bad thing.

Should public tax dollars be funding political extremism in education?
User avatar
AnneBoleyn
Posts: 6632
Joined: Sun Dec 11, 2011 3:17 pm

The apparent legality of harassment

Post by AnneBoleyn »

Wow, you asked a lot, Tabbs, & I can only go by personal experience; I haved lived the academic life for many years, as did my son. I have lived in Madison WI & worked there at their Law School, lived in Massachusetts and had a job at MIT so knew well Cambridge/Boston as a college town; was a grad student at Oxford, England, lived in their town; and of course, New York City for much of my life and had attended CUNY schools as well as private ones. In my observations, ALL University towns are greatly affected by their institutes of higher learning & the intelligensia of the schools "trickle down" (pardon me!) to the townies. It is, by nature, Progressive. I'm not speaking of towns where the local Christian College pervades the atmosphere; but we are speaking of the highest minds on the planet grouped together. Of course the atmosphere will be affected by people who think more liberally, whether in science or humanities.

Hunter did not encourage Matt Lasner in any way, and I don't know his psychology. What he did was, to me, a boorish, immature act not befitting his profession. I also think his outburst was Not Courageous in any way. More like a childish fit, methinks. No true academic encourages this kind of behavior. However, he was on vacation, representing himself, not Hunter. That he works there is a peripheral issue. Maybe he saw her and his mind worked himself into a frenzy, I don't know, I don't know anything else about him other than his act on the plane; in very poor taste in front of her children, IMO. No one needs this, & he should have been smart enough to see his outburst changes nothing.

Critical thinking should be taught, IMO, as early as elementary school, like it was in 'my day!' Our schools are so localized that many of our districts are run by RIGHT WING folks, who won't stand for such communism, socialism as free thinking! Critical thinking IS free thinking after all. The more monied districts do teach critical thinking at a young age. Part of that is questioning authority. This is also where the students are much more likely to attend colleges & universities.

Tax dollars are Not funding political extremism. The best schools. in many cases, not all, are private like the Ivies.

What can I say? Usually, intelligence & liberalism walk side by side, IMO. I don't mean Democrat vs Republican.
User avatar
tabby
Posts: 2511
Joined: Fri Oct 29, 2010 3:41 pm
Location: Virginia

The apparent legality of harassment

Post by tabby »

Thank you for your post! Most of what you wrote was already my understanding but somehow previous posts had jumbled my thinking. I know what you say about colleges/universities to be true.

The critical/free thinking part can be tricky though ~~ everyone thinks they're a critical thinker. I'm sure those far right wing millennials would consider themselves free thinkers for pushing back against the last 8 years of liberalism. All we can do is look objectively at all sides and draw our own conclusions.

I don't have any children so I'm not up on how schools teach their students these days. I went to a private college preparatory high school and never once do I remember politics really playing a part. Same with college. It's certainly possible that it was there but it may be that I simply didn't seek it out. The closest thing I came to an interest in politics at that time was the brief 10 minutes I sat near Elizabeth Taylor who was campaigning for her then husband John Warner while he was running for the Senate. After my 10 minute reverie of being near that lovely woman ended, so did my interest! Appalling but true.

Anyway, thank you so much for taking the time to explain it all to me and helping me fit the pieces together. I don't agree with you on everything but I don't agree with anyone on everything and I'm always loathe to limit myself or commit myself to any one group which I think accounts for my mistrust of institutional politics.
Ahso!
Posts: 10215
Joined: Wed Nov 11, 2009 1:38 pm

The apparent legality of harassment

Post by Ahso! »

Ahso!;1504931 wrote:

I think the same goes for his pick on Israel. While it's no secret that the Trump family is a family of Jewish wannabes (which is actually common within the NY world of affluence), I think he'll assess the situation after giving net-in-yahoo a guy he wants. If after all that a two-state solution is still not achievable, Trump will know it's all a charade, and will then act accordingly. Hopefully, there will still be a few Palestinians left by then.This is either developing quickly or Trump is simply just all over the place with his rhetoric, perhaps responding to, not polls as most politicians do, but, perhaps ratings(?).

President Trump, after promising a radical break with the foreign policy of Barack Obama, is embracing some key pillars of the former administration’s strategy, including warning Israel to curb settlement construction, demanding that Russia withdraw from Crimea and threatening Iran with sanctions for ballistic missile tests.

In the most startling shift, the White House issued an unexpected statement appealing to the Israeli government not to expand the construction of Jewish settlements beyond their current borders in East Jerusalem and the West Bank. Such expansion, it said, “may not be helpful in achieving” the goal of peace.


https://www.nytimes.com/2017/02/02/worl ... trump.html

Obama's public assessment and posture on Israel was correct in the beginning and also at the end of his presidency. Obama rolled over when Netanyahu sicced his embedded congressional dogs on him in the interim. Let's see what Trump does.

I think the Crimea/Russian issue is probably not what the American media has presented it as.
“Those who can make you believe absurdities can make you commit atrocities,”

Voltaire



I have only one thing to do and that's

Be the wave that I am and then

Sink back into the ocean

Fiona Apple

Return to “Current Events”