BS: Free speech- IF they agree with you

Subject: BS: Free speech- IF they agree with you
From: beardedbruce
Date: 24 Apr 07 - 09:06 AM

Professor fired over class discussion of shootings
POSTED: 11:12 a.m. EDT, April 23, 2007

BOSTON, Massachusetts (AP) -- An adjunct professor was fired after leading a classroom discussion about the Virginia Tech shootings in which he pointed a marker at some students and said "pow."

The five-minute demonstration at Emmanuel College on Wednesday, two days after a student killed 32 people on the Virginia Tech campus, included a discussion of gun control, whether to respond to violence with violence, and the public's "celebration of victimhood," said the professor, Nicholas Winset.

During the demonstration, Winset pretended to shoot some students. Then one student pretended to shoot Winset to illustrate his point that the gunman might have been stopped had another student or faculty member been armed.

"A classroom is supposed to be a place for academic exploration," Winset, who taught financial accounting, told the Boston Herald.

He said administrators had asked the faculty to engage students on the issue. But on Friday, he got a letter saying he was fired and ordering him to stay off campus.

Winset, 37, argued that the Catholic liberal arts school was stifling free discussion by firing him, and he said the move would have a "chilling effect" on open debate. He posted an 18-minute video on the online site YouTube defending his action.

The college issued a statement saying: "Emmanuel College has clear standards of classroom and campus conduct, and does not in any way condone the use of discriminatory or obscene language."

Student Junny Lee, 19, told The Boston Globe that most students didn't appear to find Winset's demonstration offensive.

Subject: RE: BS: Free speech- IF they agree with you
From: Mrrzy
Date: 24 Apr 07 - 09:11 AM

? Doesn't sound discriminatory to me... but then again, adjuncts get fired all the time. I used to be an adjunct at PVCC and was fired for coming out as an atheist.

Subject: RE: BS: Free speech- IF they agree with you
From: JohnInKansas
Date: 24 Apr 07 - 09:20 AM

The title is, I believe, true in many contexts.

That's one of the reasons that Fred Phelps gets to picket funerals, but those participating in the funeral rite don't have the right to speak freely without harrassment by Phelps and his gang.

John

Subject: RE: BS: Free speech- IF they agree with you
From: Greg B
Date: 24 Apr 07 - 09:32 AM

This is a clear legacy of the Imus debacle.

As surely as night follows day, the 'fire them' mentality has
spread, straight to where it will cause the most harm --- in
the realm of academic freedom.

Welcome to the slippery slope, folks.

Subject: RE: BS: Free speech- IF they agree with you
From: Bill D
Date: 24 Apr 07 - 10:43 AM

a Catholic college, hmmm? I suspect he'll get another job...and maybe damages in court.

Subject: RE: BS: Free speech- IF they agree with you
From: katlaughing
Date: 24 Apr 07 - 10:57 AM

ON the other hand, students are still exercising their rights, even at a conservative Mormon establishment:

KSL News) BYU students wanting an alternative commencement speaker to Vice President Dick Cheney could get their wish, thanks in part to a local filmmaker.

The Deseret Morning News reports shortly after director Steven Greenstreet posted video footage online from an April 4 protest at BYU, the donations came pouring in.

By Monday afternoon, students, faculty and alumni received more than $12,000.

The money should be able to fund an alternative commencement at Utah Valley State College.

Meanwhile the uproar has drawn national attention because it's seen as a sign the Bush administration's support is waning. Cheney will speak at BYU's commencement on Thursday.

Subject: RE: BS: Free speech- IF they agree with you
From: Ebbie
Date: 24 Apr 07 - 11:15 AM

So "most students" didn't seem upset by the graphic discussion? Evidently at least one student was.

To me, it seems a bit early to carry on a demonstration of the event. (And by a professor who taught Financial Accounting?) I know that I cringed involuntarily a couple of times recently when a television commercial showed a noisy, unruly classroom.

Subject: RE: BS: Free speech- IF they agree with you
From: GUEST,meself
Date: 24 Apr 07 - 11:23 AM

Once or twice a year for about as long as I can remember, there are news reports of some absurd firing related to whatever the current "hot issue" is. Usually it is a teacher or professor somewhere in the States that is fired. And sometimes there are news reports of some not-so-absurd firing related to the current hot issue. ... I don't think this has anything to do with the Imus affair.

Subject: RE: BS: Free speech- IF they agree with you
From: beardedbruce
Date: 24 Apr 07 - 11:29 AM

katlaughing, So, what I see is that a "Catholic liberal arts school " has a different set of rules than a "conservative Mormon establishment" where there is available a viewpoint that is ( presumed to be) in opposition to the school administration...

And you think it is ok that the liberal school should stifle free discussion?

Subject: RE: BS: Free speech- IF they agree with you
From: katlaughing
Date: 24 Apr 07 - 11:41 AM

I didn't want to start a new thread and should probably have posted that to some other thread, but this one seemed okay as it was also dealing with college issues.

Don't put words into my posting or assume anything, BB. I think the professor was being opportunistic and it was too soon to be so graphic in his demonstration. I would have walked out if I'd been in his classroom. These kinds of controversies are not new: Ward Churchill.

That said, I have demonstrated for the right to free speech for folks I didn't like whose lyrics I abhorred, but I defended their right to rap.

Subject: RE: BS: Free speech- IF they agree with you
From: dick greenhaus
Date: 24 Apr 07 - 12:07 PM

"Freedom of Speech" is protected only insofar as the Federal Government is prohibited from inhibiting it. Nothing about private employers.

Subject: RE: BS: Free speech- IF they agree with you
From: Greg B
Date: 24 Apr 07 - 03:30 PM

Dick--- indeed, you are correct about 'First Amendment' freedom
of speech. On the other hand, there is a very long-standing tradition
of academic freedom that, if Emmanuel College's professors had any
sense, would cause them to refuse to administer final exams or post
final grades until such time as their colleague was reinstated.

Ebbie--- the notion of 'academic freedom' is cross-discipline. That
is, if you hire a 'professor' you assume that he or she is sufficiently
educated to be fairly able to comment on that which is not in his or
her area of specialty, or perhaps in an area which has not yet been
invented. This might fairly come under the discipline of 'ethics,'
which is within the purview of 'financial accounting' (c.f. Enron,
Quest Communications, Apple Computer,                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                         et al). So you don't castigate
a History professor for commenting on what might be described as
theology. It's all connected. Particularly in a 'liberal arts'
university.

Regarding Mormanism--- they're at times a bit of a conundrum. While
being very personally strict and conservative, particularly within
the family, they also have a certain 'live and let live' ethos
which can surprise and delight. Perhaps it's their relatively recent
experience of religious persecution which leads to that. Make no
mistake--- if you're a LDS kid at BYU, you have quite a strict code
to live up to. On the other hand, a gay colleague from my Novell days
told me that being gay in Provo, UT felt safer than in a lot of other
more 'enlightened' places.

On the other hand, Catholic colleges and universities are struggling
with identity as Catholic institutions vs. Academic freedom. Notre
Dame has decided to go one way--- hosting the 'Vagina Monologues.'
'Ave (Dominos Pizza) Maria University' a different one, pretending
that if it isn't in communion with Mother Church it doesn't exist
except to be refuted.

Subject: RE: BS: Free speech- IF they agree with you
From: GUEST,Carl
Date: 24 Apr 07 - 07:09 PM

Overheard on a talk show.
I bel;ieve in free speech.
But, people are saying things they shouldn't be saying.
And, we have to do something about it"?

A question, who decides?

Subject: RE: BS: Free speech- IF they agree with you
From: Donuel
Date: 24 Apr 07 - 10:13 PM

simple

Free speech is for corporations first.

It was decided in court that corporations are living entities entitled to free speech. (this limits their liability by the way)

Corporate media companies have abolished the fairness doctrine and are seeking total deregulation from any anti trust laws and liability to the public for any reason.

Media and portions of the goverment are seamless entities.

When the Constitutions was written it was not forseen that free speech would first serve mega media monoplies so that one view, one idea, one version would be spread among the masses.

but thats what we have today.

free speech for the individual is frought with peril.
Depending on what you say the full force of the Federal Goverment can be brought to bear. Afterall the new courts have ruled that reasonable cause is any damn thing they can think up before during and after the vilation of your civil rights and privacy.

Do I think I am being "oppressed" by the system? I don't think I am important or rich enough to be oppressed.
But the NSA still has a record of all my calls, the FBI has a file on me because I talked to some important people and anything I check out from the library is freely given to homeland security and FBI without my being told.

Now we have sneak and peek legal for all law inforcement entities.

Yeah I'm free to speak, but far from the original intent of the US COnstitution.

Subject: RE: BS: Free speech- IF they agree with you
From: Riginslinger
Date: 25 Apr 07 - 04:38 PM

"? Doesn't sound discriminatory to me... but then again, adjuncts get fired all the time. I used to be an adjunct at PVCC and was fired for coming out as an atheist."

          I had a similar experience at a public Community College.

Subject: RE: BS: Free speech- IF they agree with you
From: Joe Offer
Date: 25 Apr 07 - 05:09 PM

I dunno. I think I'd like to see more information or a pattern of action before I pass judgment on Emmanuel College. It sounds like the professor may have used a "shock jock" approach to the situation, which has school campuses all over the country paralyzed with fear.

During a week of Los Angeles rioting, police departments all over the country were uptight. My son decided to set up his band in a parking garage in downtown Sacramento, and drew an audience of a couple hundred. Police showed up in riot gear, and blockaded the garage. Somebody in the audience threw a bottle (or bottles) at the cops, and it could have become a serious incident. I think was pretty dumb for my kid to provoke the cops during a week like that, but my kid liked ot provoke cops. Now he's a little older, and maybe not quite so provocative (I hope).

And I think it may have been pretty dumb for the professor to speak of a mass killing in a provocative manner so soon after it happened. Did the college overreact by firing the professor? I don't know. If the school has shown a pattern of repressing free speech, then I'd be likely to think this incident might also be an indication of repression.

The fact that the school is Catholic isn't enough to pass judgment on it for repression, either. As pointed out above, conservative Ave Maria Pizza University in Florida is repressive about everything, and Notre Dame put on The Vagina Monologues (but not without controversy). So, it's a mix.

A Catholic high school in Sacramento fired a teacher last year because she had volunteered for Planned Parenthood before she worked at the high school. Was that a repressive action on the part of the high school? Well, it sounds like it would be, but what actually happened was that a repressive bishop forced the firing because he saw it as an opportunity to grandstand on the abortion issue - and the plucky nuns who run the high school got at least some of their self-esteem back by banishing the right-wingers who had ratted on the teacher.

Before passing judgment on Emmanuel College, or on the professor it fired, I'd like to know more.

-Joe Offer-

Subject: RE: BS: Free speech- IF they agree with you
From: McGrath of Harlow
Date: 25 Apr 07 - 06:18 PM

It's not a bad idea to make some effort to get at the actual facts in an incident before passing judgement on the basis of a snippet in the press.

Subject: RE: BS: Free speech- IF they agree with you
From: GUEST,meself
Date: 25 Apr 07 - 06:21 PM

Not nearly as much fun though ...

Subject: RE: BS: Free speech- IF they agree with you
From: beardedbruce
Date: 27 Apr 07 - 12:42 PM

School newspaper editorial prompts teacher transfer
POSTED: 11:18 a.m. EDT, April 27, 2007

WOODBURN, Indiana (AP) -- A high school teacher who faced losing her job after a student newspaper published an editorial advocating tolerance of gays can continue teaching at another school.

Amy Sorrell, 30, reached an agreement that allows her to be transferred to another high school to teach English, said her attorney, Patrick Proctor.

"The school administration has said in no uncertain terms that she's not going to be given a journalism position," Proctor said.

Sorrell, who had been an English and journalism instructor at Woodlan Junior-Senior High School, was placed on paid leave March 19, two months after an editorial advocating tolerance of homosexuals ran in Woodlan's student newspaper, The Tomahawk. Sorrell had been the newspaper's adviser.

School officials in the conservative northern Indiana community about 10 miles east of Fort Wayne said Sorrell did not comply with an agreement to alert the principal about controversial articles.

The agreement she signed includes a written reprimand that says she neglected her duties as a teacher and was insubordinate in refusing to obey school officials' orders.

Sorrell said she is "very proud" of Megan Chase, the student who wrote the editorial calling for tolerance and acceptance of gays, and the Tomahawk's other writers and editors. But she said she could not financially afford to fight the school district over her discipline.

Subject: RE: BS: Free speech- IF they agree with you
From: GUEST,meself
Date: 27 Apr 07 - 12:55 PM

Sad. Pathetic. Fits right in with the Richard Gere story and the one about the pay being shut down in Pakistan.

Subject: RE: BS: Free speech- IF they agree with you
From: Stilly River Sage
Date: 27 Apr 07 - 11:48 PM

This story was bad enough when they turned the kid over to authorities. Now it is worse (though he's better off for not going into the military in this day and age). These people are narrow-minded IDIOTS. Knee-jerk reactionaries. IDIOTS (it bears repeating).



Marine Corps Drops Student After Essay
April 27, 2007

CHICAGO - Allen Lee was on the verge of realizing a dream to become a Marine after signing enlistment papers this month. But one violent, profanity-laced English essay later, the 18-year-old's future with the Marine Corps appears to be over.

Because of pending criminal charges stemming from his essay, Lee's recruiter told him Friday that the Marine Corps has discharged him from his contract, said Sgt. Luis R. Agostini, spokesman for the Marine Corps Recruiting Station Chicago.

"Basically, he is no longer an applicant to become a Marine," Agostini said.

The senior at suburban Cary-Grove High School was charged this week with two misdemeanor counts of disorderly conduct after the principal turned his creative writing essay over to police.

Lee initially faced just one charge, but an amended complaint filed Thursday cited a second passage.

"In light of recent events (at Virginia Tech), that is part of the context of what happened that makes the reaction all the more reasonable," said Tom Carroll, first assistant state's attorney in McHenry County.

Lee, who has a 4.2 grade-point average and never has been in trouble before, is being tutored at administrative offices while school officials decide his future, said his lawyer, Thomas Loizzo.

The charges are a product of paranoia, born of the massacre of 32 students at Virginia Tech by a social outcast who then killed himself, Loizzo said.

"Once the dust settles, once they look at this through clearer glasses, we think that the state will do the right thing and dismiss the charges," Loizzo said.

The essay, written Monday, reads in part, "Blood, sex and booze. Drugs, drugs, drugs are fun. Stab, stab, stab, stab, stab, s...t...a...b...puke. So I had this dream last night where I went into a building, pulled out two P90s and started shooting everyone, then had sex with the dead bodies. Well, not really, but it would be funny if I did."

The teacher told students: "'Be creative; there will be no judgment and no censorship,'" Thomas Loizzo said. "There was never any warning from the teacher that if she determined the paper to be offensive, she would then pass it along to the authorities."

School district spokesman Jeff Puma declined to discuss the specifics of the essay or Lee's future, citing privacy concerns.

"The essay was inappropriate in that it caused a question about safety," Puma said.

The charges could result in a $1,500 fine and as many as 30 days in jail if Lee is convicted.

Lee hopes to re-enlist if the charges are cleared and he's allowed to return to school, said his other attorney, Dane Loizzo.

Lee wrote in a statement provided by his attorney that he has completed military entrance exams, including a psychiatric evaluation.

"If I'm qualified to defend the country, I believe I'm qualified to attend school," he wrote.

Subject: RE: BS: Free speech- IF they agree with you
From: GUEST,meself
Date: 28 Apr 07 - 12:33 AM

Heard the kid's lawyer interviewed - he did not characterise the writing as an "essay", but as an exercise whereby the class had been instructed to just write, non-stop, whatever came into their heads, not to mentally edit or censor, just write, write, write. This is not an unusual sort of creative writing exercise, to "get yourself started". Apparently some of the offending bits were quotations from Green Day songs.

However, there was in the midst of it all a bit that could be taken, in the current climate, as a not-so-veiled death threat directed at another teacher, with whom this student has had some difficulties. The lawyer played it down, but I think I would have been troubled by it if it had been handed in to me. So I think this is another instance where I would want to know more before making up my mind. It is disturbing, though, that police involvement so often seems to be the first rather last recourse in school issues.

Subject: RE: BS: Free speech- IF they agree with you
From: beardedbruce
Date: 08 May 07 - 07:07 AM

Palestinian militants attack school festival
POSTED: 3:32 a.m. EDT, May 7, 2007

Story Highlights• Bodyguard of a Fatah lawmaker killed, six others wounded
• Muslim extremists said a festival the school was hosting was un-Islamic
• Protesters accused the top U.N. Gaza official of weakening people's Islamic faith
• Same bombers of Internet cafes and pool halls in Gaza believed responsible

From Isra Muzaffar
CNN

GAZA CITY (CNN) -- Palestinian militants on Sunday attacked a United Nations school festival in southern Gaza, killing the bodyguard of a Fatah lawmaker, according to Palestinian security and medical sources.

Six others were wounded in the incident at the al-Umariya School in Rafah, near the Gaza-Egypt border, the sources said.

The gun and homemade bomb attack on the school began with a protest by Muslim extremists in long robes, who said a festival the school was hosting was un-Islamic, according to The Associated Press.

One protester's sign said the U.N. "is turning schools into nightclubs," AP reported.

Protesters also accused the top U.N. official in Gaza, John Ging, who was in the school, of leading a movement to weaken people's Islamic faith, AP said.

An hour before the attack, about 50 Salafist militants had been prevented by security guards from entering the school and distributing fliers protesting the festival, security sources said.

Officials from the United Nations Relief and Works Agency (UNRWA) -- both Palestinian and foreign -- attended the festival, which consisted of sports and cultural skits.

As everyone began to leave at about 1 p.m. (1000 GMT), the militants detonated explosive devices and began opening fire. The bodyguard of Palestinian Legislative Council member Majed Abu Shamaleh was shot and killed in the attack, an aide to Abu Shamaleh told CNN.

Security guards protecting the festival returned fire. The six wounded include students' relatives, as well as militants, according to Abu Shamaleh's aide.

The shooting appeared to be carried out by the same extremists behind a string of bombings of Internet cafes and pool halls in Gaza, said Abu Shamaleh.

Police said they were interrogating two of the gunmen.

Subject: RE: BS: Free speech- IF they agree with you
From: beardedbruce
Date: 14 May 07 - 01:47 PM

from the Washington Post:

Dead Air in Caracas

By Jackson Diehl
Monday, May 14, 2007; Page A15

For years defenders of Venezuelan President Hugo Ch?vez have harped on what they described as the domination of the country's independent media by his opponents -- proof, it was said, that Ch?vez was no dictator. Two weeks from today that argument will lose all credibility. By then, Radio Caracas Television, or RCTV, Venezuela's most popular television network, will almost certainly be off the air -- on Ch?vez's personal order.

A lot has been happening in Venezuela the past few months. Having obtained the power to rule by decree from a rubber-stamp congress, Ch?vez has nationalized telecommunications and electricity companies, taken over oil fields developed by multinationals, and formed a single pro-regime political party. For Venezuelans, however, the loss of RCTV will be the greatest shock. For 53 years the television network has been a national institution, counted on for its wildly popular soap operas and variety shows as well as for its news coverage. It was on RCTV that Venezuelans saw Neil Armstrong step onto the moon in 1969, the first live-from-satellite broadcast in the country's history.

The young technician who managed to set up that first link, Marcel Granier, passed through Washington recently on a somewhat forlorn tour of Western capitals. Now the director of RCTV, the 65-year-old Granier was playing his last cards in an attempt to save the network that has been his life's work. Vilified as a traitor and counterrevolutionary by the four television networks that Ch?vez now controls -- as well as by surviving private stations that struck deals with the strongman -- Granier looks more like a grandfather than a political warrior and sounds more analytical than angry about his predicament. He makes a good case that RCTV's closure will be seen as the final turning point in Ch?vez's journey from freely elected president in 1999 to neo-socialist dictator.

It's not just that Ch?vez is eliminating, at a stroke, the media that gave the biggest platform to his opponents. Almost as significant is the way he has gone about it. The process against RCTV has consisted almost entirely of statements by the president on television. The law governing the license Ch?vez says he is withdrawing has been ignored; RCTV's appeals to the courts have gone unanswered. Protests and appeals from the Organization of American States, the Chilean senate, the Inter-American Commission on Human Rights, the Inter American Press Association, and countless human rights and press freedom NGOs have been answered with crude insults. Ch?vez called OAS Secretary General Jose Miguel Insulza "pendejo," a vulgarism referring to pubic hair.

"Say what they say, do what they do, howl where they want, the license will not be renewed," was the way Ch?vez put it. In other words, neither domestic nor international institutions matter in a regime that is becoming increasingly personal. "Ch?vez's position is that 'no one can change the decisions I make,' and anyone who tries to do so is a traitor," Granier says. "That includes the judges on the Supreme Court, the OAS -- anyone who disagrees with him is an enemy."

Those whom Ch?vez calls enemies suffer more than insults. Granier says some 150 journalists and station workers have been assaulted by pro-government thugs. He distributes photos of one of several attempts to storm the station made by Ch?vez's gangs, who set a truck on fire and sent it hurtling at RCTV's front entrance. No one has been held accountable for the attacks.

In his countless television appearances, Ch?vez has made clear that his problem with Granier and RCTV is political. He accuses both of supporting an abortive coup against him in 2002. There's no question that Granier and most of his journalists oppose the government. During the attempted coup the network broadcast movies and music videos. Granier says that if Ch?vez believes that amounts to treason he's welcome to prosecute the station or its directors in the government-controlled courts. "If I'm guilty, charge me," Granier said. "He's never done it."

Ch?vez apologists frequently claim that his actions might look bad to foreigners but are hugely popular in Venezuela. This one is demonstrably not. A poll in April by the firm Datanalisis showed that 70 percent of Venezuelans oppose the closure of RCTV, including 40 percent of those who call themselves Ch?vistas. Demonstrations in support of the network have attracted thousands to the streets of Caracas.

That's not likely to matter much more than the statements of support Granier has been collecting in the United States and Europe. "I take responsibility before the entire world" for shutting the network, Ch?vez said recently. Granier notes somberly that there is no statute of limitations for human rights crimes in Venezuela. He can only hope that one day, that statement will be part of the case in which Ch?vez is held accountable.

Subject: RE: BS: Free speech- IF they agree with you
From: beardedbruce
Date: 25 May 07 - 03:33 PM

Myanmar extends Suu Kyi detention

POSTED: 10:22 a.m. EDT, May 25, 2007

YANGON, Myanmar (AP) -- Defying an outpouring of international appeals, Myanmar's military government Friday extended the house arrest of pro-democracy leader Aung San Suu Kyi by another year, a government official said.

The official confirmed that a car seen entering her home Friday afternoon carried officials presenting her with a new detention order, which will keep her confined to her residence for a fifth straight year.

The official asked that neither he nor his agency, which is concerned with security affairs, be named, because he is not authorized to speak to the press. The government normally makes no official public announcement of such actions.

Suu Kyi, the 1991 Nobel Peace Prize laureate, has spent 11 of the past 17 years in detention, and is not even allowed any telephone contact either with the outside. Her current one-year detention order was due to expire on Sunday.

The extension had been widely expected, although many international groups and dignitaries had called for Suu Kyi's freedom.

Paulo Sergio Pinheiro, the U.N.'s independent expert on human rights in Myanmar, called it a "very regrettable decision."

"I think this is very counterproductive in terms of making a transition to democracy," he told The Associated Press by telephone from Cape Town, South Africa. "They say they are moving ahead. But they continue to hold 1,200 political prisoners, including the main members of the opposition."

Nyan Win, a spokesman for Suu Kyi's National League for Democracy party, said the organization had not yet been able to confirm the government action.

"However, if the detention is extended despite demands by the international community, this is a very uncivilized action," he said.

The first sign of the extension came when a silver-gray Toyota Hi-Ace car with tinted windows was seen by neighborhood residents entering Suu Kyi's compound at 3:55 p.m.

The identity of the people in the vehicle was unknown, though they were almost certain to have been officials because she is allowed no visitors. They stayed for about 10 minutes. The detention order takes effect when it is read out to the person concerned.

Suu Kyi has been held continuously since May 30, 2003, when her motorcade was attacked by a pro-junta mob during a political tour of northern Myanmar. The government considers her a threat to public order.

The ruling junta turned a deaf ear to the appeals for her freedom from abroad, and harassed and detained her local supporters, who have been holding prayer vigils for her release.

On Wednesday, the 10-country Association of Southeast Asian Nations, or ASEAN, of which Myanmar is a member, broke with its policy of noninterference to urge the country's generals to free Suu Kyi and speed up democratic reforms.

They joined former world leaders, a group of female U.S. Senators and pro-democracy activists around the world who have recently pressed for an end to her detention.

In a letter last week to Senior Gen. Than Shwe, the junta's chief, 59 former world leaders -- including former U.S. Presidents George H. W. Bush, Jimmy Carter and Bill Clinton, and former British Prime Ministers John Major and Margaret Thatcher -- urged Suu Kyi's release.

"There's no doubt that Aung San Suu Kyi is not going to be released from house arrest," Larry Jagan, a journalist based in Bangkok, Thailand who specializes in Myanmar, said earlier this week.

Jagan and others predict Suu Kyi's status won't change until at least the National Convention finishes drafting a new constitution and probably not until a referendum on the constitution and elections are held -- a period of three or four more years.

The convention is the first step on the ruling junta's seven-stage "road map to democracy," which is supposed to culminate in free elections at an unspecified future date.

The junta took power in 1988 after crushing vast pro-democracy demonstrations in Myanmar, then known as Burma. It refused to hand over power when, on May 27, 1990, Suu Kyi's party won a general election by a landslide, insisting the country first needed a new constitution. The military has continued to rule while persecuting members of the pro-democracy movement.

The United Nations, the European Union and the U.S. government regularly call for the release of Suu Kyi -- along with more than 1,200 other political prisoners.

The U.N.'s Pinheiro said it was disappointing that Myanmar extended the house arrest despite appeals from all over the world. He also criticized the junta for "refusing humanitarian appeals" concerning prisoners serving sentences as long as 70 years.

"It's completely unacceptable," he said.

Subject: RE: BS: Free speech- IF they agree with you
From: beardedbruce
Date: 17 Sep 07 - 06:02 PM

Venezuela's Chavez may take over schools

By IAN JAMES, Associated Press Writer
Mon Sep 17, 2:49 PM ET



CARACAS, Venezuela - Venezuelan President Hugo Chavez threatened on Monday to close or take over any private school that refuses to submit to the oversight of his socialist government as it develops a new curriculum and textbooks.

"Society cannot allow the private sector to do whatever it wants," said Chavez, speaking on the first day of classes.

All schools, public and private, must admit state inspectors and submit to the government's new educational system, or be closed and nationalized, with the state taking responsibility for the education of their children, Chavez said.

A new curriculum will be ready by the end of this school year, and new textbooks are being developed to help educate "the new citizen," said Chavez's brother and education minister Adan Chavez, who joined him a televised ceremony at the opening of a public school in the eastern town of El Tigre.

The president's opponents accuse him of aiming to indoctrinate young Venezuelans with socialist ideology. But the education minister said the aim is to develop "critical thinking," not to impose a single way of thought.

Subject: RE: BS: Free speech- IF they agree with you
From: Rapparee
Date: 17 Sep 07 - 09:57 PM

Both sides of the political spectrum will, if given the chance, impose their ideas on society. They will use force if necessary. For example, Salvator Allende was a Socialist:

October 1972 saw the first of what were to be a wave of confrontational strikes. One by one, owners of trucks were joined by small businessmen, some (mostly professional) unions and some student groups. Other than the inevitable damage to the economy, the chief effect of the 24-day strike was to induce Allende to bring the head of the army, general Carlos Prats, into the government as Interior Minister. Allende also instructed the government to begin requisitioning trucks in order to keep the nation from coming to a halt. Government supporters also helped to mobilize trucks and buses but violence served as a deterrent to full mobilization, even with police protection for the strike breakers. Allende's actions were eventually declared unlawful by the Chilean appeals court and the government was ordered to return trucks to their owners.

Eventually, he was killed in a revolt that involved the CIA (Nixon was President of the US) and brought Augusto Pinchot to power.

On the other hand, there was Francisco Paulino Hermenegildo Teódulo Franco Bahamonde:

After winning the civil war, he dissolved the Spanish Parliament, establishing an authoritarian regime that lasted until 1978, when a new constitution was drafted. During the Second World War, Franco maintained a policy of neutrality, although he did assist Nazi Germany and Fascist Italy on a small scale, most famously by sending troops (known as the Blue Division) to aid Nazi Germany in the occupation of Russia. Before the invasion of the Soviet Union by the German Army, Franco and Hitler met in Hendaye the 23rd of October 1940. In addition, during the Cold War, the United States established a diplomatic alliance with Franco, due to his strong anti-communist policy. American President Richard Nixon toasted Franco, and, after Franco's death, stated: "General Franco was a loyal friend and ally of the United States."

Franco's state combined corporatism, nationalism, and a focus on traditional values. From 1947 and until his death he was de facto regent of Spain, which he ruled as a dictator, repressing dissident opinions through institutionalised torture, concentration camps (such as Los Merinales in Seville, San Marcos in León, Castuera in Extremadura, and the Camp of Miranda de Ebro), heavy prison sentences, and the application of the death penalty against criminals and political opponents. After his death Spain began a transition to democracy.

My brother became "conservative" when a prof in one of his grad school classes taught things about the Vietnam business that were flat-out wrong: he knew they were wrong because he'd been there when they happened. He very nicely told the prof this, and she called him (to his face) "a baby-killer" and told him HE was wrong because one of the books she'd read...anyway, he was "suppressed" because what he told from his own experience disagreed with her pre-conceived ideas.

Frankly, a plague on both their houses. I will give you the liberty to express whatever you want as long as a) you take responsibility for what you say and b) allow me the same thing.

Subject: RE: BS: Free speech- IF they agree with you
From: beardedbruce
Date: 18 Sep 07 - 05:31 PM

Cartoonist hiding from al-Qaida threat

By LOUISE NORDSTROM, Associated Press Writer
Mon Sep 17, 1:34 PM ET



STOCKHOLM, Sweden - A Swedish cartoonist who depicted Islam's Prophet Muhammad with the body of a dog said Monday that police have taken him to a secret location and told him he cannot return home following a death threat from al-Qaida in Iraq.

Lars Vilks, who was whisked away by police when he returned to Sweden from Germany on Sunday, said police have described the threats against him as "very serious."

"Police guard was nonexistent before this. It's 100 percent now," he said in a telephone interview. "I can't live in my home, I've only been allowed to pick up some things."

The leader of al-Qaida in Iraq, Abu Omar al-Baghdadi, offered $100,000 over the weekend for Vilks' murder. He said the bounty would be upped to $150,000 if Vilks was "slaughtered like a lamb" and offered $50,000 for the killing of the editor of a local newspaper that reprinted the cartoon on Aug. 19.

"We are calling for the assassination of cartoonist Lars Vilks who dared insult our Prophet ... and we announce a reward during this generous month of Ramadan," al-Baghdadi said, according to transcripts of Islamic Web sites.

Sweden's secret police called in extra personnel over the weekend to work on the case, said a spokesman, Jakob Larsson.

Prime Minister Fredrik Reinfeldt has called for mutual respect between Muslims, Christians and nonreligious groups in an attempt to avert a wider conflict in a country that has received more than 18,000 Iraqi refugees over the past year.

"We are urging calm. We are urging thoughtfulness. We shall reject all those who call for violence and will oppose extremists' attempts to worsen the matter," Reinfeldt told the Swedish TT news agency.

The Nerikes Allehanda newspaper published Vilks' drawings in conjunction with an editorial criticizing Swedish art galleries for refusing to exhibit the cartoons.




http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Lars_Vilks_Muhammad_cartoons_controversy

Subject: RE: BS: Free speech- IF they agree with you
From: beardedbruce
Date: 08 Oct 07 - 03:20 PM

Washington Post:

A Dutch Retreat on Speech?

By Anne Applebaum
Monday, October 8, 2007; Page A17

And now we come to what may be a truly fundamental test, maybe even a turning point, for that part of the world generally known as the West.

The test is this: Are prominent, articulate critics of radical Islam, critics who happen to be citizens of European countries or the United States, entitled to the same free speech rights enjoyed by other citizens of European countries and the United States?

Legally, of course they are. In practice, they can say what they want -- and then they can be murdered for doing so. That means that Western governments have a special and unusual responsibility to them, as many have long acknowledged. It is no accident that the writer Salman Rushdie, upon whom the Ayatollah Khomeini declared a fatwa on Feb. 14, 1989, is still very much alive. Though the details have not been publicized, it is assumed that Rushdie remains, one way or another, under the protection of the British police and secret services, both in Britain and abroad. This protection is completely uncontroversial -- in June, the queen even gave Rushdie a knighthood-- and as a result the fatwa has not prevented him from speaking, writing, publishing, even divorcing and remarrying several times over the past 18 years.

The case of Ayaan Hirsi Ali, the Dutch-Somali politician and writer, is different. Hirsi Ali has been under Dutch police protection since 2002, when her public comments about mistreatment of women in the Dutch Muslim community and references to herself as "secular" led to death threats in Holland.

Though encouraged to remain in the country -- and promised security protection -- by the government then in power, the mood in Holland changed in 2004. That year, a fanatic named Mohammed Bouyeri infamously murdered Theo Van Gogh, the director of a film about the oppression of Muslim women -- and then thrust a knife bearing a note threatening Hirsi Ali, who wrote the film's script, into the victim's chest.

Dutch society became, and remains, bitterly divided in the wake of the Van Gogh murder. Some of Hirsi Ali's compatriots decided it was time to address the issues of women, Islam and integration head on. The Dutch writer Leon de Winter, a defender of Hirsi Ali, talks openly about his country's failure to integrate Muslim immigrants, attributing the problem to the Dutch "guilt complex": "As soon as we let people from the Third World come here to work in our rich country, we . . . somehow saw them as sacred victims."


Others simply want Hirsi Ali and her ilk to go away forever, thereby keeping Holland out of the headlines and Amsterdam off terrorists' hit lists. Unlike the British, who have gotten used to the idea that faraway events can affect them, the Dutch, at least in this century, are more insular. That helps explain why, in 2006, the Dutch government tried to revoke Hirsi Ali's citizenship over an old immigration controversy, and why her neighbors went to court that year to have her evicted from her home (they claimed the security threat posed by her presence impinged upon their human rights). But although she did finally move to the United States, the argument continued in her absence. Last week, the Dutch government abruptly cut off her security funding, forcing her to return briefly to Holland.

The reasons given were financial, but there was clearly more to it. To put it bluntly, many in Holland find her too loud, too public in her condemnation of radical Islam. She doesn't sound conciliatory, in the modern continental fashion. Compare her description of Islam as "brutal, bigoted, fixated on controlling women" with the German judge who, citing the Koran, in January told a Muslim woman trying to obtain a divorce from her violent husband that she should have "expected" her husband to deploy the corporal punishment his religion approves. Hirsi Ali herself says she is often told, in so many words, that she's "brought her problems on herself." Now the Dutch prime minister openly says he wants her to deal with them alone.

Fortunately, Hirsi Ali is already back in the United States, under professional, full-time, well-resourced and for the moment privately organized protection. But this week, the Dutch parliament is due to debate her status once again. And once again, the Dutch will be confronted with the facts that Hirsi Ali remains a Dutch citizen; that the threat to her life comes at least in part from groups based in Holland; that she lives abroad because the Dutch political situation forced her to; and that when she speaks out, she does so in defense of what she believes to be Dutch values.

Whether or not the Dutch like it -- and I'm sure most of them don't -- revoking her police protection will send a clear message to the world: that the Dutch are no longer willing to protect their own traditions of free speech. Resources will be found, and she will recover. But will Holland?

Subject: RE: BS: Free speech- IF they agree with you
From: katlaughing
Date: 09 Jul 08 - 04:58 PM

60 year old librarian removed and ticketed for holding a sign which said "McCain = Bush" outside a McCain "town meeting" in Denver. There is a video available at that link. THIS is OUTRAGEOUS!!

Subject: RE: BS: Free speech- IF they agree with you
From: Lord Batman's Kitchener
Date: 09 Jul 08 - 05:01 PM

I though that Mudcat's policy required that links be provided to source material rather that quoting the complete block of said source material in a post?

Subject: RE: BS: Free speech- IF they agree with you
From: Ebbie
Date: 09 Jul 08 - 05:22 PM

Sheesh! What? I think everybody ought to show up toting signs. How can they get away with this? We appear further down the road than I even surmised. If there is any way this can be publicized, let's do it.

July 23rd is her court date. Do you know at which court, kat?

Subject: RE: BS: Free speech- IF they agree with you
From: Peace
Date: 09 Jul 08 - 05:29 PM

She looks pretty dangerous to me.

Subject: RE: BS: Free speech- IF they agree with you
From: GUEST,Jack the Sailor
Date: 09 Jul 08 - 06:15 PM

Did you see the "pea pod" guy behind her?

His costume was a hoot!.

Subject: RE: BS: Free speech- IF they agree with you
From: Bee
Date: 09 Jul 08 - 06:19 PM

I don't know what they hope to accomplish with such tactics, but it certainly wouldn't encourage me to vote for the guy.

Subject: RE: BS: Free speech- IF they agree with you
From: Stringsinger
Date: 09 Jul 08 - 06:29 PM

Free Speech is a great idea. Too bad it hasn't been introduced into the US.

To accuse Ali as "bringing it on herself" is very much like many male reactions to rape.
"The lady provoked it."

Extremist religions are tearing the fabric of society apart.

The "they" referred to in the thread here is the corrupt contemporary Administration
and their ancillary association with organized Christian, Zionist and Muslim religions.

Subject: RE: BS: Free speech- IF they agree with you
From: katlaughing
Date: 09 Jul 08 - 07:53 PM

Ebbie, none of the news stories I've found say which court. I guess she was ticketed for "trespassing" at an event which was advertised as a "public" event!

It is being publicised qute a bit, I think, through videos on youtube, various news agencies online, plus orgs. like the one to which I provided the link. That link includes a place to send donations if anyone is interested. I'd personally just like to see it get tons and tons of publicity. That video was from MSNBC, so we know it's getting some exposure.

God/dess bless Librarians!!

Subject: RE: BS: Free speech- IF they agree with you
From: Q (Frank Staplin)
Date: 10 Jul 08 - 03:52 PM

This thread started with the subject of the firing of the adjunct professor at Emmanuel College. Joe Offer called for more information, since there was more heat than light in the posted comments. It seemed to me that there must be more to the story, so I went to the Boston Globe, since it is a fairly good paper, and part of the NY Times group.

According to the statement by a College spokesman, Mr. Winset disparaged "the victims as rich white kids combined with an obscene epithet. He did not do this as part of an open debate with his students."
Winset "told the Globe that professors were asked to discuss the shootings with their classes and the dramatization led to a discussion of the massacre's effects on the stock market." He also said "The last weapon in the empty arsenal of the politically correct is to call someone a bigot and that's pretty much what they are doing here."
Tony Wall, chairman of the faculty senate, said in the College statement that "Emmanuel has a broad sense of academic freedom and encourages discussion of controversial issues, "as long as the discussion is carried out in a fair and civil manner." "This was decidly not the case in Mr. Winset's class. Wall said.
"Creating fear and anger in his students with outrageous and disrespectful behavior and language is clearly about power," Wall said in the statement. "In no workplace would such behavior be tolerated."

It is difficult to judge without a tape of the happening, but it seems to me that Mr. Winset went a step too far. One may wonder if other actions by Mr. Winset at the College also may have contributed to his dismissal.

Emmanuel College students are upset over the death of a popular student, who died after his arrest by Boston police following an argument at a sports event. Nothing to do with the Winset firing, but concern about reaction to this event could have affected the thoughts and actions of the Emmanuel faculty senate.