Moelis & Company spokesperson confirmed that Jonathan Kaye is the man seen in the viral video of the incident in Brooklyn. Following the video’s release, Kaye removed his LinkedIn profile.

Attempts to reach him via an email address matching the Moelis & Co. format were unsuccessful. Moelis & Company did not respond to our queries directly but stated, “We take this matter very seriously and are conducting an investigation.”

I can appreciate a corporation investigating one of its own oligarchs for criminal behavior, I guess, but I would like to know if there is an ongoing police investigation. I hope we hear more about this.

A quick Google search points out a number of articles about this vile human being (who purportedly preached about the importance of “empathy” and “understanding”), so there is certainly attention.

But where are the police? We need a jail sentence here.

As someone else asked: OP, do you really believe this content?

Aside from how horrible and shortsighted this reasoning is, I also need to ask:

If a stranger asked you who you work for, would you answer?

I’m reminded of this:

https://www.automotivelinux.org

You and me both, my friend.

I appreciate you raising this question, thank you.

The final paragraph in the article is also revealing:

In February, McGill said it would divest from companies listed in the Carbon Underground 200, a list of the top 100 coal and the top 100 oil and gas publicly-traded reserve holders, following a years-long campaign by students and faculty members.

Good move on McGill University’s part, even if it’s 2024. Better late than never.

This is a very valid question. They should be produced locally.

You raise excellent questions. I’m awaiting responses from others with meaningful links. We might need to be very patient.

I’m so glad to hear this. I wish it were issued a long time ago, but anyway.

This comment is beautiful. Thank you.

I second that. Thank you.

I found this to be a very well-written article about a concept I wasn’t previously aware of. Here follow some interesting choice quotes - but I recommend reading the actual article:

When activist Jess Piper heard Alabama Republican senator Katie Britt deliver the GOP response to the State of the Union, she had a visceral reaction. The senator spoke in a breathy voice with a soft and sweet quality ― even as she described horrific acts of sexual violence and murder and painted a dystopian picture of the United States.

For Piper, there was no mistaking that sound, which permeated her childhood in the Bible Belt. Britt was using “fundie baby voice.”

Then more context - conveying submission to male authority:

“I would describe ‘fundie baby voice’ as a woman’s voice that is higher than average in both pitch and breathiness,” said Kathryn Cunningham, a vocologist and assistant professor of theatre and head of acting at the University of Tennessee, Knoxville. “While the average woman’s voice is higher-pitched than the average man’s due to a combination of anatomical and social factors, some women who speak this way seem to be intentionally placing their voices higher than their natural pitch range in order to convey submission to male authority and childlike innocence.”

These changes in voice are deliberate:

Deliberate voice changes are very much a reality for women in fundamentalist Christian communities, noted Tia Levings, author of the upcoming memoir “A Well-Trained Wife: My Escape from Christian Patriarchy.”

“From a young age, we were taught over and over again to modulate our voices,” she said. “It was all about sounding sweet, soft, and childlike. There were very strict gender roles, and women were supposed to never sound angry but keep sweet, obey, dress modestly, speak softly, be very feminine.”

Interesting roots:

This sort of Christian vocal training has roots in Helen Andelin’s 1963 book “Fascinating Womanhood.”

“This book encourages fundamentalist Christian women to sound ‘childlike’ in order to convey submission to male figures,” Cunningham said, noting that there are “references to an idealized voice that a compliant, Christian woman should have.”

I found this quote referenced in the article very remarkable:

“It is important to emphasize in this discussion that women’s voices are always scrutinized and policed. The truth is that we can’t win, no matter how we speak.” - Kathryn Cunningham, vocologist and assistant professor

Of such women in power who use the fundie baby voice, the article goes on to quote the following:

“What they produce is a lot of abuse and subjugation,” Levings added. “And it always stings more when a woman is used as a tool of the patriarchy to promote it. They’re the Aunt Lydias and Serena Joys of the program ― brought in and given power when it suits men, but they will be discarded when it’s no longer useful to those men.”

Toward the end of the article, the very valid warning:

Piper urged those who are interested in the fundie baby voice phenomenon to educate themselves on the Christian nationalist movement in U.S. politics and the Project 2025 agenda. Directing ire toward those in power is more useful than tearing down everyday women for the way they were trained to speak.

This article makes clear how Mr. Barnett called on Boeing on numerous dangerous practices, which Boeing fully denied. But it seems the FAA was able to confirm at least some of Mr. Barnett’s testimony.

Here follow some notable parts:

He later told the BBC that workers had failed to follow procedures intended to track components through the factory, allowing defective components to go missing.

He said in some cases, sub-standard parts had even been removed from scrap bins and fitted to planes that were being built to prevent delays on the production line.

He also claimed that tests on emergency oxygen systems due to be fitted to the 787 showed a failure rate of 25%, meaning that one in four could fail to deploy in a real-life emergency.

Mr Barnett said he had alerted managers to his concerns, but no action had been taken.

Boeing denied his assertions. However, a 2017 review by the US regulator, the Federal Aviation Administration (FAA), did uphold some of Mr Barnett’s concerns.

It established that the location of at least 53 “non-conforming” parts in the factory was unknown, and that they were considered lost. Boeing was ordered to take remedial action.

I wonder what the results were for the remedial actions imposed on Boeing in 2017. Were they able to account for the lost parts, particularly in light of Mr. Barnett’s claims of garbage parts being used from the garbage bins?

Sounds like a particular corporation is being scummy.

His death comes at a time when production standards at both Boeing and its key supplier Spirit Aerosystems are under intense scrutiny.

Gosh, this is convenient for Boeing and Spirit. Very, very convenient.

And it’s clear the FAA is pissed:

A preliminary report from the US National Transportation Safety Board suggested that four key bolts, designed to hold the door securely in place, were not fitted.

Last week, the FAA said a six-week audit of the company had found “multiple instances where the company allegedly failed to comply with manufacturing quality control requirements”.

Returning to the top of the article, we see the use of quotes around “self-inflicted”:

Boeing said it was saddened to hear of Mr Barnett’s passing. The Charleston County coroner confirmed his death to the BBC on Monday.

It said the 62-year-old had died from a “self-inflicted” wound on 9 March and police were investigating.

Yeah, the quotes look very appropriate to me.

Rest in Power, Mr. Barnett. I’m truly sorry for you and your family.

This.

This person here is doing the Lord’s work. Thank you, OP, and have a great day.

It’s beautiful! You should be so proud.

Glory to open source, to humanity, to nature.

May I recommend the following, from the renown French physician, Joseph-Ignace Guillotin?

guillotine

This man is my hero.

Many cars are powered by a flavor of Linux called AGL - Automotive Grade Linux

Check out all the brands shown here:

https://www.automotivelinux.org