Man charged with upskirting on an escalator at Charles/MGH

Transit Police report arresting a local man at the Charles/MGH Red Line station yesterday afternoon on charges he used his his phone to take a photo up a woman's skirt while they rode up an escalator on the inbound side.

Police say both the victim and a witness described Abdul Ahmed, 26, to officers, who found and arrested him not long after.

Innocent, etc.

Neighborhoods: 

Topics: 

Free tagging: 

Ad:

Comments

The editor of this website regularly moderates and refuses

By on

to post certain comments. But this baseless xenophobic, racist crap is OK? I'm sure the editor has convinced himself that he's smarter and more educated than the editors of Barstool Sports and is doing a much greater service to the community - but at the end of the day, with his shaming of small-fry with mental problems as offered up by the MBTA rent-a-cops, and his de-facto blessing of comments like this - he's not. Stick to the RW Emerson walks around Jamaica Pond, please.

up
Voting is closed. 15

Hah!

By on

If you want more walks around Jamaica Pond, I'm more than happy to oblige. I haven't posted any photos of the swans recently.

I'm just a guy at my dining-room table. I admire the business David Portnoy's built, so, no, I don't think I'm smarter than him. Am I doing a greater community service? Beats me, but I'm not sure how extensive his coverage of BPS issues is.

As for racist crap, yes, you got me there. Fish's comments are, indeed, reprehensible, but I admit I give more latitude to people who sign up for accounts and use them, in part, because at least you know where they're coming from based on the fact they use the same user name time after time.

I'm glad you don't have any sexual harassment happening to you. Male privilege is great, ain't it? But it's a major issue for oh, 51% of the population and, sorry, if you don't want to read about upskirters or rapists trying novel approaches to getting their convictions thrown out, well, yeah, maybe Barstool Sports would be more worth your time.

up
Voting is closed. 83

Always amaze me

By on

We've met so many times.. you're such a quiet guy :-) But man, you have a way with words. You certainly do what I call a "Julia" (aka a Julia Sugarbaker.. a women who could very eloquently read someone)

up
Voting is closed. 11

Oh booFhoo

Adam allows a lot of posts of varying opinions, and from differing views. To me this is necessary in order to have conversations about topics of all types. The idea that a person must be silenced since their opinion isn't popular isn't helpful for anyone. It merely allows a first amendment for some, but not others: a one-sided conversation is what I call it. This is typical of a mindset that respects the first amendment, right up until they hear something unfavorable to them, and demand the speaker cease all speaking immediately. So yes, posters such as O-FISH-L do post opinions and express views that readers might not like. Guess what though, readers don't have to read his words. The great thing about the Internet is you can read articles, without reading comments, try it out, you might like it.

Adam does a service to the community that many others don't. He covers shootings that are missed by many other news sources, he's connected people when tragedy has stricken, such as after the Boston Marathon bombings, and once again, he gives his readers a voice.

up
Voting is closed. 48

Respectfully disagree. I think there's great value in

knowing that even in our Great Enlightened Commonwealth, alternately hilarious and terrifyingly dumb, hateful fuckheads like Fish walk among us. If you think fascism can't happen here, maybe think again, and be grateful that uHub does something to expose the kind of benighted citizens who would happily enable it. Forewarned is forearmed.

up
Voting is closed. 53

Racist? Have you been waiting

Racist? Have you been waiting all week for the chance to call someone a racist? Please do continue to tell us all about Fish. Adam also lets other questionable posts fly that would be posts you politically agree with. Relax Barstool hater

up
Voting is closed. 26

MBTA cops are not rent a cops!

By on

They are the real deal and yes they deal with a lot of mental health issues, homeless and drug addicts ,sexual deviants and school fights on a daily basis. They do the best they can with limited resources. There are more state troopers and rangers protecting the state house than the Transit police have on the whole system on a daily basis..

up
Voting is closed. 16

The editor of this website

By on

The editor of this website regularly moderates and refuses to post certain comments.

So, those comments must be yours, or how else would you know that? It's HIS website, and you're a guest here. He can moderate what goes on here, he puts his name on it. So start your own blog, if you don't like how Adam runs his.

I'm sure the editor has convinced himself that he's smarter and more educated...

Yeah, yeah, yeah. The all-knowing "anon" who knows what's going on in somebody else's head. Okay.

up
Voting is closed. 24

Oh Adam,

By on

Are you tying innocent annons to chairs and forcing them to read a comment on Uhub again?

So desperate.

;)

up
Voting is closed. 11

Self-deport

if you're not a conscientious and educated enough American to understand and honor the concept of due process, as enshrined in our Constutution, ya feckin' ignorant bigot.

up
Voting is closed. 40

Yes, very good. Despite

Yes, very good. Despite looking like someone who could've pitched the seventh for the Sox tonight, you have won the game of "Spot the 'Foreign' Name". You receive the grand prize of getting to choose whether the accused, if convicted, has to take Amtrak or Greyhound home, which for all we know could be Delaware.

up
Voting is closed. 24

Fish's comments are reprehensible or well informed?

By on

Reprehensible or truthful? If the man's name was Paddy O'Keefe or Tony Baloney, I would still call for deportation for this type of crime. Sick.

Recall the deported Irish "electrician" defended by disgraced Boston Globe columnist Kevin Cullen. The Irishman was dangerously performing electrical work without a license but who cares? I called for his deportation.

A great friend of mine was deported for driving with a broken headlight and no MA License. His phone taken at the booking desk, he couldn't reach me. 10 year ban on coming back. Rules are rules! It's not reprehensible, it's the law.

up
Voting is closed. 22

It's very possible

By on

No, I bet Fish does have a handful of great friends, unless they've all been deported.

up
Voting is closed. 11

Fish collects illegal immigrant friends

By on

He has a whole pack of them. When he is a bit lonely and down in the dumps, he drops a dime on one of them, and has him deported, and then he feels much better.

up
Voting is closed. 16

it'll be a great day on UHub

By on

When we all stop responding to Fish.

He never says anything new, it's always the same, racist, xenophobic trolling tripe and probable lies about having been a law enforcement officer. It's disingenuous to even claim that such comments play some sort of noble role in "encouraging debate", they don't. He's not here for debate.

All he wants is attention and craves validation from the internet. Do not give it to him.

up
Voting is closed. 23

You are giving attention to

You are giving attention to him... and stop judging. You call him racist and everything under the sun and don’t even know the guy. Where is the tolerance on your behalf? You sound like Trump

up
Voting is closed. 16

You bet your ass I'm judging him.

And it doesn't take a lot of judgment to figure out that Fish is a racist ass, based on his long history of posting here, including his first post above.

Intolerance of intolerance is not intolerance, if you follow me, though I suspect you don't. You sound like one of those dim Trumpies.

up
Voting is closed. 21

Are you really that blinkered?

By on

Maybe intolerance of intolerance isn't a vice, but blanket tarring of stuff and people you don't agree with as racists and bigots and fascists when none of that is actually true is no virtue.

up
Voting is closed. 14

Flag on the Play

By on

IMAGE(https://i.imgflip.com/1eeklx.jpg)

10 yard penalty. First down.

up
Voting is closed. 13

the individual in question

By on

has a long history available for everyone to see.

kind of like you do, too.

up
Voting is closed. 9

So...

By on

but blanket tarring of stuff and people you don't agree with as racists and bigots and fascists when none of that is actually true

Phew. Good thing that's not what's happening here.

up
Voting is closed. 13

So the answer is yes, for you

By on

Maybe your tune will change when they come after you for something innocuous-but-now-declared-evil.

up
Voting is closed. 10

for the record

By on

you're saying xenophobia is "innocuous"..

do i have that right?

just want to make sure.

up
Voting is closed. 12

I'm saying

By on

that picking and choosing whom you let in didn't used to be called "xenophobia."

On the grounds that you're not really a xenophobe for locking the door to your house, are you?

up
Voting is closed. 7

but what happened here

By on

was that (at least one of) our resident racists saw a brown person with a beard and called for his deportation.

that's racism and xenophobia.
now, claiming "it's like locking your door" is just more xenophobia on your part.

keep it up, really, you're doing quite well.

up
Voting is closed. 7

Actually, the history of this

Actually, the history of this country picking and choosing who they let has always been xenophobic. The whole of the laws and standards that are being implemented today are racist. The republican leadership are making it more so. Just the fact that we are putting so much effort into the mexican border when most people arrive by airplane shows it. Are a bunch of european children separated from their parents at Logan?

up
Voting is closed. 12

He wouldn't know that history

By on

It might conflict with his perception that he was somehow elect when he came here and they let him stay because he was extra special.

up
Voting is closed. 11

Actually no. And it's nothing to apologize for.

By on

If the world were uniformly populated by the same sorts of people with the same cultural values and traditions, then slapping sanctions and restrictions on them for the sole reason of the flag on their passport would not be a tenable position. But the world is populated by many diverse and discordant groups of people who have spent most of the time since the exodus from Africa thinking up new and interesting reasons for beating the shit out of their neighbors. An open door policy for large numbers of people who still hold that view in any meaningful capacity is not a policy that leads to long-term success.

That's only "racist" to the extent that cultural differences and long-term endogamy aren't neatly separable, and it's only "xenophobic" in the literal sense: a fear of danger from without. Labeling it that is a rhetorical trick. The implication is that xenophobia is irrational. It's not.

up
Voting is closed. 9

Ok wow

Definition of exodus
1 capitalized : the mainly narrative second book of canonical Jewish and Christian Scripture — see BIBLE TABLE
2 : a mass departure : EMIGRATION

Leaving Africa in chains in the bottom of a boat forced to lay in your own shit is not an exodus.

up
Voting is closed. 12

To be fair

I think he was referring to Humanity's origin in Africa, and its spreading out from there. No, not an exodus. Diaspora, maybe.

up
Voting is closed. 8

That's ok

By on

I could have said "since we climbed down from the tree tops" and someone somewhere somehow would have called it racist.

up
Voting is closed. 6

Dishonest

Generalizations about human nature to support the necessity of immigration rules does not hide the history of actual US immigration law. That’s what I mean by dog whistle. I am sorry I let you bait me.

up
Voting is closed. 9

I'll admit you've got me perplexed

By on

If you believe that immigration laws are in fact justifiable by the fact that the nature of humanity is not all smiles and sunshine...how can you object to the application of that thinking as unjustified on the grounds of it being racist?

I really don't understand it. Not bating, not trolling, but asking:

If human nature as a rule devolves into behaviors that make the relative peace and prosperity we enjoy here untenable, then it stands to reason that we have a duty to ensure that the people we let in are not the type of people who are likely to engage in those behaviors.

People who come from unstable and dysfunctional societies are more likely to engage in those behaviors than people who don't. Therefor people seeking to enter here from those places merit more scrutiny than people from places that are not dysfunctional relative to our society.

And people who are allowed to enter from dysfunctional places ought not to be allowed to enter in numbers that are large enough that there will a critical mass that embers of any old-world grievances can stay lit. For the very same reason it must be our policy that new immigrants should be assimilated: learn the language, live and/or work outside of ethnic enclaves, and even intermarry.

If any of those are objectionable to you, then fine, say so. But if none of those are, then neither is putting that into practice.

up
Voting is closed. 6

It must be exhausting,

spending all day creating imaginary liberal foes so you can argue against phantom positions that no one in the real world s taking.

It's easy to see, what with strawmen assaulting you from all sides, you're the real victim here.

up
Voting is closed. 6

And yet here you are

By on

accusing me of making up enemies after spending most of this thread calling me names. That takes effort too.

up
Voting is closed. 5

Who needs to accuse you of anything?

Your love of shitty, transparent bad-faith arguments is on display in every uHub thread you post in. And sorry-not-sorry: if you choose to go to bat for uHub's most notorious racist with a boatload of smarmy sophistry and obvious strawman-slinging, you're gonna get called an asshole, asshole.

up
Voting is closed. 7

In another time and place you would have been a great prosecutor

By on

The time I'm thinking is the 1600s and the place is Salem, Mass.

I'm not arguing in bad faith and I'm not engaging in sophistry of the smarmy or un-smarmy variety. I don't know you IRL, and you don't know me. You just assume I've got an extra special set of white sheets in my closet because you've allowed yourself to believe that that's the only possible explanation for not being an ardent leftist. That's unfortunate but you shouldn't confuse it with a character defect on my part.

And you're damn right I'm going to bat for Fish. He says controversial stuff and so do I. If the articles of faith are that he deserves a "You're a horrible human being" where an "I disgree because" will do, the mob has won: no one can say anything, and after a while then no one will think anything.

I make no apologies for refusing to go along with the will of the mob.

up
Voting is closed. 6

Sorry, left one out. In addition to bad-faith

arguments and sophomoric, tortured fake logic, you're also fond of resorting to the Dear Leader's tactics, in this case whining, "Witch hunt! I'm the victim of a witch hunt!"

I guess it takes a Swiss Army Knife of dishonest tactics to pretend you're not just straight-up defending Some Very Fine People. (And your're not the ACLU: Fish doesn't get censored here.) That weak sauce only works on people dumb enough to be Trumpies. The angry, violent liberal mob here on uHub sees right through that drivel.

up
Voting is closed. 5

Get help Slim

By on

Get a shrink, take up a sport if you're able, hell just find a real human being to talk to.

You are slowly divorcing yourself from reality and you should pick yourself up and stop.

It's not dishonesty and it's not fake logic.

And BTW the ACLU used to believe in defending objectionable speech as a bedrock principle. The logical (here's that fake logic again) corollary to that was discouraging (with words) people from demonizing (as opposed to arguing against) people they didn't agree with because it is very easy for demonization to turn into mob violence. The ACLU used to do things like go to bat for the Klan when they tried to march in Skokie, Illinois. That was brave. Just like going to bat for flag burners was brave. And commendable.

Now here you are blowing your top because you think literal Nazis are going to crawl out from under your bed and get you. So fight fire with fire? Shun as many people as necessary before everyone else who might be wavering gets the idea?

What country do you think you live in?

up
Voting is closed. 5

Do you ever post without making a

feeble, wildly exaggerated straw-man argument? Again: that stuff doesn't work on people with more than two neurons to rub together. If that's your best rhetorical trick, maybe you're out of your depth on uHub, son. Freerepublic might be more your speed.

up
Voting is closed. 6

Quit whining

I called you liar. Address that. How do you pretend that immigration laws were created to protect our borders? National security is a nice idea but that’s not what deportations are used for.

up
Voting is closed. 7

Simple

By on

Laws that are not enforced are not real laws. If we ever need border enforcement, we need it all the time.

up
Voting is closed. 5

tn;dnr

Too narrow; did not read

up
Voting is closed. 6

Again, you are sidestepping

Again, you are sidestepping the point.

1. fish sees brown skin, reads "abdul" and brain farts "Deport"
2. everyone= that's racist
3 Roman = libtards are nazi's if they call deportation racist
4. I post link to the racist history of US immigration law
5. roman repeat
6. but facts
7. roman repeat
8. I tell you to stop lying
9 roman says Laws that are not enforced are not really racist? Border enforcement!

up
Voting is closed. 5

Eh?

By on

Roman says that laws that aren't enforced aren't really laws. So if we want the law, we have to enforce it all the time, not just when politically expedient.

up
Voting is closed. 4

off topic

Your comment has nothing to do with this story. We don't have a fair immigration policy. Because of the history of how the US laws were created, you put the laws in a vacuum because it fits your agenda.

up
Voting is closed. 5

There's no such thing as a "fair" immigration policy

By on

Immigration policy exists entirely to perpetuate a political agenda. That's the whole point of picking and choosing.

Unless you choose to let in everyone from anywhere, it will be unfair to someone somewhere outside of the US. And if you do choose to let in everyone from everywhere, it will be unfair to those inside the US. That's almost a tautology and I don't understand why you're getting worked up over it.

I'm not putting the laws in a vacuum. On the contrary, I am asserting that there is little to apologize for in the way they were written. A country has every right to use any and every arbitrary criterion as a condition for admission.

We could only allow people who are 6 ft tall and over and it would be fine or we could only allow people 5 ft tall and under and it would be fine if our cultural and political philosophy were centered on height and propensity for basketball or suitability to serve on a midget submarine.

I further assert that a damn good philosophy and subsequent set of criteria is only allowing in people who can assimilate, contribute economically, and not bring in the problems of their homeland here. It can certainly seem "unfair" from a certain angle but I'm OK with that because I'd rather my great grandchildren be prosperous and ashamed than live in a third-world country and proud.

up
Voting is closed. 4

1790: Naturalization Act of

1790: Naturalization Act of 1790; Citizenship restricted to free Whites.
Naturalization Act of 1870 revises the Naturalization Act of 1790 and the 14th Amendment so that naturalization is limited to white persons and persons of African descent, effectively excluding Chinese and other Asian immigrants from naturalization1875: Page Law. Congress bars entry of Chinese, Japanese, and “Mongolian” prostitute, felons, and contract laborers.1878: U.S. Supreme Court rules Chinese individuals are ineligible for naturalized citizenship1902: Chinese immigration made permanently illegal; Chinese population sharply declines.Immigration Act of 1917, also known as the Asian Barred Zone Act, imposes a literacy test and establishes an Asiatic Barred Zone restricting immigration from southern and eastern Asia and the Pacific islands, but excluding Japan and American territories of Guam and the Philippines. Because these geographic regions were then home to many of the world’s Buddhists, Hindus, Muslims, and Sikhs, these religious groups were effectively shut out of the United States. The Jones Act makes Puerto Ricans U.S. citizens, eligible to serve in the military but not eligible to vote in national elections.1923: Japanese businessman Takao Ozawa petitions the Supreme Court for naturalization, arguing that his skin is as white, if not whiter than any so-called Caucasian. The Court rules that Ozawa cannot be a citizen because he is not “white” within the meaning of the statute, asserting that the best known science of the time defined Ozawa as of the Mongolian race. In U.S. v Bhagat Singh Thind, the U.S. Supreme Court recognizes that Indians are“scientifically” classified as Caucasians but concludes that they are not white in popular (white) understanding, thus reversing the logic used in the Ozawa case. The lawyers for the United States attacked Thind’s “meltability” by defining Hinduism as an alien and barbaric system and not fit for membership in the “civilization of white men.”1924: Indian Citizenship Act — Native Americans granted U.S. citizenship. Immigration Act of 1924 (also known as the National Origins Act) virtually closes the door on immigration to the U.S. The Act set a percentage for immigrants entering the U.S. at 2% of the total of any nation’s residents in the U.S. as reported in the 1890 census. Eventually the 2% rule is replaced by a limit of 150,000 immigrants annually and quotas determined by “national origins” as reported in the 1920 census. The intent of the law is to restrict the entry of immigrants from Southern and Eastern Europe, while welcoming relatively large numbers of newcomers from Britain, Ireland, and Northern Europe. It also resulted in severely restricting non-Protestant immigration. Initially immigration from the other Americas was allowed, but measures were quickly developed to deny legal entry to Mexican laborer

up
Voting is closed. 3

Ah yes

More projection than a multiplex.

up
Voting is closed. 11

Ignorance of History

Just in case anyone gave you the benefit of the doubt, you have now confirmed once and for all how totally hatefully ignorant of history you are.

No amount of misuse of flashy words will convince anyone with a brain otherwise.

up
Voting is closed. 8

No, bud.

By on

What I was getting at was that what Fish said was blatantly racist. If you don't want to get called a racist, don't say racist things. It's that simple!

up
Voting is closed. 8

As always, you argue in bad faith.

In this case, you're advancing yet another strawman argument. Pointing out that Fish is a racist asshole with a long history of racist assholery, one again exemplified by a post here, isn't "blanket tarring of stuff and people you don't agree with"; the record is there for anyone who cares to read it. He has free rein here to be a loud bigot, but not free rein to escape criticism for it.

Your right-wing bullshit is thin and runny, son, as it always is.

up
Voting is closed. 11

The liberal's creed for 2018

By on

This is no place for hate, except for the hate I have for you.

Truly unfortunate that seemingly good people can't see that that's what they're saying.

up
Voting is closed. 10

The tiredest of right-wing tactics, straight out of

their own Dear Leader's playbook: projecting their own sins onto others. "We're not the haters: *you're* the haters. We're not the violent mobs: *you're* the violent mobs."

Once again, who do you think you're kidding? We see you for what you are. Your junior high debate team tricks don't work on grownups. And it's always useful to see who you choose to defend here. Nice friends ya got there, asshole.

up
Voting is closed. 17

We should judge him.

And we should talk about how deportation has become a dog whistle for racism. It is dishonest to point to white foreigners being deported as cover. This country's immigration laws have a long history of racism.

https://www.google.com/url?sa=t&rct=j&q=&esrc=s&source=web&cd=6&cad=rja&...

But I think we should let Adam figure out what to do with Fish. If the privilege of commenting here was decided by a vote, I would be axed too. He hasn't threatened, doxxed or stalked me from thread to thread. He is just wrong. we can ignore him, or discuss this wrongness as we wish.

up
Voting is closed. 12

Unfalsifiable accusations

By on

If deportation is racist because immigration laws are racist, then you don't have an argument, you have an article of faith.

If denying racism is just what a racist would do, then I'm not going to play.

up
Voting is closed. 9

to be clear, I am saying that

to be clear, I am saying that looking at picture of someone named Abdul with brown skin and brain farting "deport!" is racist. so I guess we agree. Deporting people that commit crimes and don't have legal residency status is a good idea when it is implemented objectively. Unfortunately, this country has never done that.

up
Voting is closed. 15

Women, children and men have

By on

Women, children and men have a right to take public transportation WITHOUT being sexually harassed by perverts like this creep. He should be banned from the T for life. Glad he was caught!

up
Voting is closed. 18

I wish there were this many

By on

I wish there were this many comments/discussions about what we can do to stop men from sexually assaulting women when Adam reports them on UHub (thanks Adam!). Unfortunately there are usually only a few comments.

up
Voting is closed. 6