Well It Was No Cherry Pie...

[Darat]

Or "Have you ever wondered why your father was a great actor but a bad teacher?"

 

[corplinx]

It's civil disobedience, and that's not about legal limits. In spitting on her, he broke the law and should face the consequences.

At the same time, his act of civil disobedience accomplished something.

If he tried to leave the scene without getting arrested, then it is not civil disobedience.....

 

[Beerina]

I find Jane Fonda thoroughly despicable for reasons that have nothing to do with her Vietnam activities, and I abhor her cynical arrogance in delivering a self-serving apology to keep her talentless career in the headlines.

And in a face to face situation, I would never shake her hand, and if prodded, would be delighted to tell her and everyone in earshot what I think about her, probably (no, certainly) resorting to such hyperbole as 'complicit in the deaths of thousands of women'...

I went to see "Agnes of God" because a chick I was interested in wanted to go see it.

Never did get any.

 

[crimresearch]

I was thinking more of her bogus health and fitness industry...

 

[brodski]

You can classify it as anything you want. But in the law, "the unlawful and unwanted touching or striking of one person by another, with the intention of bringing about a harmful or offensive contact" is called battery and it's a felony in these here parts.

I was not attempting to make a legal argument here, I was intening to try and draw a moral line somewhere between legitmate protest and "assult" (in its wider definition).

I still hold the view that pie throwing may be a legitmate form of portest, intending to humillate the victim with no real possibility of harm. Spitting howeaver is a differnt matter.
I am well aware that the law in most (all?) places does not agree with me.

 

[Garrette]

Originally posted by brodski:

I still hold the view that pie throwing may be a legitmate form of portest, intending to humillate the victim with no real possibility of harm.

I'd need to know what you mean by "legitimate" before accepting this.

Are you suggesting that if you were the author at a book-signing and several people began throwing pies and threatened to throw more that security personnel and the police should stand by because it's "legitimate?"

 

[crimresearch]

I'm guessing they mean legitimate in the same sense that tea into Boston Harbor, or crossing the bridge in Selma, or sitting at the Woolworths in Greeensboro, or the handful of salt at Dandi were legitimate..even though laws were broken.

 

[brodski]

I'd need to know what you mean by "legitimate" before accepting this.

Are you suggesting that if you were the author at a book-signing and several people began throwing pies and threatened to throw more that security personnel and the police should stand by because it's "legitimate?"

I believe that the legitimacy of an action of protest is directly proportional to harm it is trying to prevent.

Of course I will now be challenged to weigh differing "harms" against each other, but I wont attempt to do that until challenged

In the example you pose, I would argue that this should be dealt with by laws designed to "keep the peace", and these actions are an order of magnitude lower than actions which will cause physical harm.

Protestors in a liberal democracy should expect police action against them which is proportionate to their crimes.

I wont attempt legal definitions here as we are debating across a number of legal jurisdictions

 

[Tmy]

While posing on that cannon was a boneheaded move, doesnt history show us that Fonda was right to protest Nam!?!?

Who thinks Nam was a good idea?

 

[Regnad Kcin]

...I find Jane Fonda thoroughly despicable for reasons that have nothing to do with her Vietnam activities...

"Thoroughly despicable?" Must be some amazing offense(s) she's committed.

...and I abhor her cynical arrogance in delivering a self-serving apology...

A mind-reader, are you? She's explained her position and apologized before. Many times. The biography merely repeats the story.

...to keep her talentless career in the headlines.

Now I know you're just funnin'.

And in a face to face situation, I would never shake her hand, and if prodded, would be delighted to tell her and everyone in earshot what I think about her, probably (no, certainly) resorting to such hyperbole as 'complicit in the deaths of thousands of women'...

WTF?

I was thinking more of her bogus health and fitness industry...

Oh. Okay. Wow.

 

[crimresearch]

I myself find anorexia, bulimia, obesity, body image disorders and so forth to NOT be a source of amusement.

You of course, are free to view them any way you wish.

The only difference between her and faith healers IMHO, is that she used the celebrity of her family name to peddle her quack books and videos, and to sell the false hope to sick people that they too could look just like her, while she knew that her physique was the result of binging and purging.

Just out of curiosity, what exactly *would* Fonda have to do before you would stop being her apologist?

 

[Regnad Kcin]

I myself find anorexia, bulimia, obesity, body image disorders and so forth to NOT be a source of amusement.

And Jane "Thoroughly Despicable" Fonda is responsible for that hyperbolic list, how?

You of course, are free to view them any way you wish.

Merely asking you to detail your stance.

The only difference between her and faith healers IMHO, is that she used the celebrity of her family name to peddle her quack books and videos, and to sell the false hope to sick people that they too could look just like her, while she knew that her physique was the result of binging and purging.

I'm not aware of that latter claim. Of course, even if true, one can't dismiss every aspect of the woman's efforts. Unless one has a hard-on for her to begin with.

Oh, and as for her "quack books and videos," are you suggesting that if I went and looked I would find no medical, nutritional, or other qualified advisors to the programs?

Just out of curiosity, what exactly *would* Fonda have to do before you would stop being her apologist?

Apologist? And when have you stopped beating your wife?

 

[peptoabysmal]

They all ought to be locked up.
Though, spit is way worse than food (pre-chewed only).

When Ann Coulter came to Tucson she got hit with a pie. The two idiots that did it were "detained" and arrested. She recently wrote a screed about the whole affair. Apparently the charges against the pie throwers were dropped. According to Ann, the local prosecutor, a Democrat, just dropped the charges. Pima County is not a safe place for conservatives. The local rag ran the entire column with a lame feedback question at the end and a note that there was an accompanying story in the local section.
When you read the news story you see that the charges were dropped because neither Ann nor the arresting officer showed up. No mention of this fact in the Coulter column.

I think the paper should have done a better job of pointing out her blatant misstatements. Could the prosecutor sue her for libel???



Story
http://www.dailystar.com/dailystar/allheadlines/70634.php

Coulter
http://www.dailystar.com/dailystar/allheadlines/70648.php

Daredelvis

IIRC both pies missed the target. 2 and Oh.

Here's Ann's rebuttal FWIW:

I was never asked to attend any trial. Are crime victims in Pima County typically required to pester prosecutors with endless "When's the trial?" phone calls? This trial received even less publicity than my recent speaking engagement at the school. I didn't even get one of those "haven't heard from you lately" postcards the publisher sends after you let a magazine subscription lapse.

The need for a prosecutor to call me as a witness still seems completely absurd in light of the in-living-color videotape of the entire assault, vividly showing each element of the crime. But if called by the prosecutor, I would attend the trial with relish. I can't wait to see if the defendants will try the novel "guy who throws like a girl" defense.

PIES, LIES & VIDEOTAPE
The link is the home page, which changes from time to time, there is a story archive on the site.

 

[crimresearch]

"I'm not aware of that latter claim. Of course, even if true, one can't dismiss every aspect of the woman's efforts. Unless one has a hard-on for her to begin with."

What a beautiful example of the mentality of the religious right.

Jane is now a born again Christian, so all you have to do is stick your fingers in your ears, and close your eyes, and you aren't 'aware' of any claims....
Which even if they did exist, probably aren't true, and even if they are true, she isn't responsible for them.



Keep on goosestepping Nick.

 

[Garrette]

Originally posted by brodski:

I believe that the legitimacy of an action of protest is directly proportional to harm it is trying to prevent.

Agreed.

Originally posted by brodski:

Of course I will now be challenged to weigh differing "harms" against each other, but I wont attempt to do that until challenged

I won’t challenge you to do so as long as you recognize that the need to do so is ultimately there.

But I’m really not trying to be either nitpicky or pedantic.

Originally posted by brodski:

In the example you pose, I would argue that this should be dealt with by laws designed to "keep the peace", and these actions are an order of magnitude lower than actions which will cause physical harm.

Okay.

Originally posted by brodski:

Protestors in a liberal democracy should expect police action against them which is proportionate to their crimes.

Agreed.

Originally posted by brodski:

I wont attempt legal definitions here as we are debating across a number of legal jurisdictions

Okay. I’m not really interested in legal parsing anyway.


What I take from all this is that you think the following:

1. Pie throwing in this instance would have been appropriate if the thrower accepted the legal consequences

2. Non-violent intervention by police or security forces to stop the pie thrower would have been acceptable

3. Tobacco spitting crossed the line of legitimacy but still merited only non-violent intervention


This, btw, is my own position on this. Apologies if I am mistaken in ascribing it to you.

 

[brodski]

What I take from all this is that you think the following:

1. Pie throwing in this instance would have been appropriate if the thrower accepted the legal consequences

2. Non-violent intervention by police or security forces to stop the pie thrower would have been acceptable

3. Tobacco spitting crossed the line of legitimacy but still merited only non-violent intervention


This, btw, is my own position on this. Apologies if I am mistaken in ascribing it to you.

I think you have summed up my position nicely.
Thanks

 

[Regnad Kcin]

What a beautiful example of the mentality of the religious right.

The religious right. Would that be me?

Well, you learn something new every day.

Jane is now a born again Christian, so all you have to do is stick your fingers in your ears, and close your eyes, and you aren't 'aware' of any claims....

No. I'm not aware of any claims of or supporting evidence for Jane Fonda's physique having been the "result of binging and purging." Why? For the same reason I'm not aware of what underarm deodorant you occasionally get around to using: the info hasn't popped up on my radar, and I haven't been all that interested in investigating in the first place.

You made the claim that Jane Fonda is "thoroughly despicable" for being "complicit in the deaths of thousands of women." You'll need to back that up with more than an attack on my "religious right" "mentality."

Which even if they did exist, probably aren't true, and even if they are true, she isn't responsible for them.

Wanna know what's true? A statement that can be supported with sufficient and compelling evidence. Your spouting of anti-Jane Fonda rhetoric may make you a righteous hero to some. All I'd like to see are some facts.

Keep on goosestepping Nick.

And yet your quiver contains none, it seems.

 

[aerocontrols]

2. Non-violent intervention by police or security forces to stop the pie thrower would have been acceptable.

1) What is 'non-violent' intervention?

2) If a security detail allows someone to throw something at the person they are protecting, and afterwards they have no good answer* for the question "How did you know it was a pie, and not a grenade?" then they should be fired and replaced with a security detail that will stop the security breach. If the bodyguards restrain themselves because what looked like it might be 'only salad dressing' from a right-wing nutball turns out to be acid from a fundamentalist islamic nutball who objects to Fonda's fitness/beauty past, then restraint is going to look pretty stupid in hindsight.

*A good answer might be "He wasn't carrying anything, spitting was a completely unexpected assault"

 

[Regnad Kcin]

Oh, and as for her "quack books and videos," are you suggesting that if I went and looked I would find no medical, nutritional, or other qualified advisors to the programs?

Well, a quick Google turns up one such person: Daniel Kosich, PH.D.

One of the leading authorities on fitness, weight management and nutrition. Daniel Kosich is President of EXERFIT Lifestyle Consulting in Denver. With a Ph.D. in exercise physiology from BYU and formerly on the faculty in exercise science at the University of Maine, Dr. Koisch is the author of GET REAL: A Personal Guide to Real-life Weight Management, contributing editor for Shape and technical advisor from New Woman. Dr. Koisch, former Program Director for Jane Fonda Workout, is a chapter author for the American Council on Exercise's Personal Trainer Manual & Lifestyle & Weight Management Consultant Manual. He is the technical advisor for more than 25 video exercise programs and is frequent presenter at international fitness conferences and author of numerous articles on fitness and health. Daniel serves on the advisory board at Results Plus.

Shall I expect another rolleyes smilie from you?

 

[varwoche]

Well, a quick Google turns up one such person: Daniel Kosich, PH.D.Shall I expect another rolleyes smilie from you?

A different sort of medical knowledge may be required in order to understand your correspondent RK.