What's new
Fantasy Football - Footballguys Forums

This is a sample guest message. Register a free account today to become a member! Once signed in, you'll be able to participate on this site by adding your own topics and posts, as well as connect with other members through your own private inbox!

Two Lawyers And Some Molotov Cocktails - The Universities Still Burn From Within (1 Viewer)

rockaction

Footballguy
https://nymag.com/intelligencer/article/lawyers-arrested-molotov-cocktail-nyc-protest.html

It was the fall of 2014 when Rahman and Mattis became friends, in the wake of Michael Brown and Eric Garner’s deaths, the year after the birth of Black Lives Matter. Rizvi had gotten close to Rahman that summer when they traveled together on a law-student fellowship to Israel and Palestine. Most law students start looking for jobs between their second and third years, and an alignment with Palestinian human rights could have been regarded by some as a career-risking move. Upon arriving in Israel, Rahman was stopped and questioned at Ben-Gurion International Airport for more than four hours; already, she was steeped in the language of social justice and racial politics, friends say. All summer long, as race-related anti-police uprisings spread across the U.S. and the Israeli military bombed homes in Gaza, the parallels between the American Black struggle and Palestinian oppression were a topic of conversation among the fellows (excitedly sharing rumors, for instance, that tear-gas canisters used in Ferguson are the same as those used on the Palestinians in the West Bank), and they used the word apartheid to describe the conditions they saw there and at home. Rahman was “very vocal,” one person says; at home, she was already studying discrimination by the NYPD in Arab and South Asian communities. She marched in Haifa in July with Palestinians against Israeli forces, and, upon returning home, wrote an essay decrying Israeli-military violence. “IDF soldiers provoke violence using tear gas, stun grenades, rubber-coated steel bullets, and often, live ammunition at civilians exercising their free speech,” she wrote. 

 
The interviewer asks Rahman a question: “We’ve seen police cars on fire and objects thrown at police, fireworks and that kind of stuff. How do you feel about that?”

Rahman answers the interviewer. “It’s understandable,” she says, not looking at Mattis, wrapping and rewrapping her scarf around her face. “This is the way that people show their anger and frustration,” she says a minute later. “Because nothing else works. Nothing else.” She remains unfailingly polite. At the conclusion of the interview, the video journalist asks her name and she tells him. And then she spells it. U-R-O-O-J.

____________________________________________________________________________

And the bolded is the way that BLM answers these very same questions. 

 
Interesting.

  Quote

About 20 people attended the meeting, the purpose of which was to share information. Rahman didn’t say much, which was typical for her at work. The job at Bronx Legal Services is grinding — many of the clients live in extreme poverty and chaos, processes are sticky, and judges and plaintiffs’ attorneys can be petty, racist, sexist, and mean — but Rahman was always “very chill, very easygoing,” says the same co-worker, a collaborative colleague, compassionate and diligent with her clients and levelheaded in court, willing to engage with the small-bore, unglamorous work of advocating for the vulnerable within the frustrating constraints of the law. Unlike the earnest, paternalistic types who might have previously chosen Legal Aid as a career, the youngest lawyers at Bronx Legal Services have a radical strain — some wear tattoos reading RENT IS THEFT — but Rahman never seemed to be part of that. 
Curious about this racism in NY.  I've never seen any racist acts or met any racist attorneys or judges here in the NC.  @Otis or any other NY lawyers, can you comment on this racism in the NY courts?

I'd share my opinion of the legal service lawyers but it would get me banned.  We had received a HOA violation notice for one of our properties because the tenant were parking in the front lawn in a development (detached garages in back of these homes).  We sent a notice telling them they were in violation of the HOA rules and to either park in the street, driveway, or garage.  The tenants complained that the the neighbors were parking in front of there home (public street) and they needed to be close as possible due to health issues.  We were in the process of eviction as they were there months behind on rent and they were represented by legal aid.  Sometime thereafter I received a Fair Housing Notice of Violation.  Apparently since they were sick, I was denying them reasonable accommodation by not allowing them to park in the front yard.     Interesting enough, at the time I received this complaint, I was 2-3 weeks into the process of working with the town to get a handicapped spot marked on the street in front of their home to assist these tenants by essentially reserving a spot for them.  After a couple of months the state admitted the accusation looked to be retaliatory and that I was in the clear of any wrong doing.  The state agreed to dismiss the case if my whole office took their Fair Housing class.   Not sure what happened with that as i called the guy who was supposed to come in and teach the class a couple of times, but never got a call back.  I'm reasonably sure that whole situation was initiated by the legal aid scum representing them.

 
 I'm reasonably sure that whole situation was initiated by the legal aid scum representing them.
A little harsh in the language, but there's no doubt that people will often try to unjustly use the power of force that the state provides to strong arm a person or two into compliance. Sounds like you got a bum deal. 

 
A little harsh in the language, but there's no doubt that people will often try to unjustly use the power of force that the state provides to strong arm a person or two into compliance. Sounds like you got a bum deal. 
I received a letter today from another one of these worthless lawyers regarding their client's security deposit.  Tenant absolutely trashed the home.  The pet urine soaked through the carpet and pad and the floor had to be sealed.  Neighbors were complaining about the smell coming into their unit.  The dog dug up every blade of grass in the backyard.  Tenant disassembled the garage door opener and the faucets for some reason.  Lawyer is claiming they had the place professionally cleaned.  Wonder why the cleaning crew left the 12 inch dildo behind.  Lawyer is threatening court action.  I can't wait to reply that it would be much appreciated if they saved me the time to file and if they want to send their paralegal to pick up the dong.

 
rockaction said:
The interviewer asks Rahman a question: “We’ve seen police cars on fire and objects thrown at police, fireworks and that kind of stuff. How do you feel about that?”

Rahman answers the interviewer. “It’s understandable,” she says, not looking at Mattis, wrapping and rewrapping her scarf around her face. “This is the way that people show their anger and frustration,” she says a minute later. “Because nothing else works. Nothing else.” She remains unfailingly polite. At the conclusion of the interview, the video journalist asks her name and she tells him. And then she spells it. U-R-O-O-J.

____________________________________________________________________________

And the bolded is the way that BLM answers these very same questions. 
What they did was horrible - can’t be reasoned or condoned on any level.  Attributing it to all BLM is as bad as attributing George Floyd to all police officers.  

 
What they did was horrible - can’t be reasoned or condoned on any level.  Attributing it to all BLM is as bad as attributing George Floyd to all police officers.  
Not sure whether I was unclear or whether you're misreading my point or something in between. Nobody is accusing BLM of having a role in this by proxy. I'm saying that their answers to the looting, rioting, and violence have been patently unacceptable.

But this really wasn't about BLM at all for me in starting this thread. I want people to look at how entrenched in our universities, and therefore professional lives, that this type of rhetoric and call to action has become. It begins with the typical student, an eye toward the liberal arts which almost necessitates the typical Palestinian/Israeli grievance fest, moves to radicalization along the protest circuits that be, and ends up with a Molotov in a American cop car, all set to explode.

 
Not sure whether I was unclear or whether you're misreading my point or something in between. Nobody is accusing BLM of having a role in this by proxy. I'm saying that their answers to the looting, rioting, and violence have been patently unacceptable.

But this really wasn't about BLM at all for me in starting this thread. I want people to look at how entrenched in our universities, and therefore professional lives, that this type of rhetoric and call to action has become. It begins with the typical student, an eye toward the liberal arts which almost necessitates the typical Palestinian/Israeli grievance fest, moves to radicalization along the protest circuits that be, and ends up with a Molotov in a American cop car, all set to explode.
Got it - I think there's an unfortunate habit in our society (maybe call it tribalism) - we don't admit our faults and the faults of our groups.  I think this is true of BLMs and Police Departments.  We should all strive to be better and own our mistakes. 

 
Got it - I think there's an unfortunate habit in our society (maybe call it tribalism) - we don't admit our faults and the faults of our groups.  I think this is true of BLMs and Police Departments.  We should all strive to be better and own our mistakes. 
And again I'd like to point out that this happens after almost every large sporting event....it's not a mechanism of politics purely

 
Banana,

As always, fine rhetorical form. I should start by saying that I do indeed know Molotovs are tossed and explode on contact. And the Jefferson quote is one I'm familiar with, though you may want to check your source's possessive/contraction issue. But all syntactical issues aside, my issue with the selection is that it gives little weight to thoughts of order and structure within a society when discussing the righteousness of protest. The quote, other than functioning as a citation of authority within your argument, is somewhat unsatisfying as a policy beacon or as something that satisfies the logical demands placed upon it by the need for order in order that there may be rights at all. Thus Jefferson is struck with a conundrum: How exactly to revolt without all subsequent law being meaningless and illegitimate -- or worse yet, subject to similar revolts? Jefferson, ever cavalierly and in keeping with his love of the French Revolution, simply finds this agitation in our nature, as part of natural law, as part of the air we breathe. Only after this expression of bloodshed can then the new construct, the new order, however sanctified or noble, run with more blood from time to time in order for a natural order to once again come to the fore. Perhaps Fichte, who came after Jefferson, could have appealed to his ear that thesis/antithesis/synthesis might substitute for violence, that order is the precondition for liberty. Perhaps then Jefferson might have thought twice about such radically sweeping sentiments. Surely he was capable of such order and centralization when serving as President.

That perfunctory stuff aside, I think I might address the radical chic of the university as something that's been going on in the entire latter half of the twentieth century. (At the Princeton you know so dearly, the proud home of Woodrow Wilson, even earlier). From progressive eugenicists to the communists of the forties and fifties to the radical chic hippie appeasers of the sixties and seventies, higher education has always been left of the general public when it comes to politics. This is hardly a novel assertion, nor one that I need back up with a ton of proof. It reminds me of the graduation speech where the fish are swimming along and the fish asks the father fish "What is water?" That's how the politics of the university are. Everywhere I have gone, I have never run into a professor that didn't readily admit to this. It was in its radical search for truth that the university once posited itself distinct from society. But that search for truth, this century, has been replaced with the search for meaning and more than that, meaning from politics and political struggles. From the anarchists, commies, hippies, and yippies, up through to the apartheid camps protesting South African non-divestment policies in the eighties up through today, I am somewhat surprised that you would not have ever seen the keffiyeh -- that symbol of resistance in the Middle East -- worn by a student in a nod to solidarity with Palestine. To wit: My friend, like your roots in San Francisco, would often witness the burning of Israeli flags at Berkeley. So against that backdrop, I guess I can see why your uncle and family would be surprised by your left coast politics. But the East is more reserved, just not necessarily any less left-wing. But I digress. I'm surprised you'd raise that as a point of contention. The academic offices are teeming with non-profits to go abroad with and join basically any movement one wants. The students, politically-minded, eat it up, the professors know the ins and outs, and thus it is so.

I'm not sure you'd really want to debate that, though, so we'll just stick to the tone and tenor of the article in which the author is surprised that a good, Princeton-educated attorney with a mild demeanor would turn to such tactics. I'd posit that I'm not surprised given the University these days (this century) and its tone and tenor. And we can disagree on that. Such is your right, such is mine. I'm pretty sure if you polled college faculty, you'd find about a nine to one ratio of those considering themselves liberal and those considering themselves conservative. And probably more than that. And with that, I'd ask you to show your work that it's not. 

 

Users who are viewing this thread

Back
Top