Tongue Tied 3

2008-05-19T00:13:00.001+11:30

The Finnquisition

Canada is not alone in using the power of the government to suppress political speech. A blogger is on trial at the moment in Finland for making statements similar to those of the song mentioned in the post below. The song was dealt with in a private way -- by an employer firing someone. The involvement of government is much more threatening -- because a government can deprive you of your liberty completely, by imprisoning you.

Below is a section of the trial transcript that gives you the idea of what is going on:

"Prosecutor: You write, "For the Africans, looting, rape, nepotism, corruption, clan warfare, superstition and impulsive homicide are business as usual". What is this claim based on?

Blogger: On well-known facts. There are a lot of dictators and wars in Africa. There was a genocide in Rwanda in the 1990s due to intertribal conflicts between the Hutus and the Tutsis. Apart from the Darfur crisis in Sudan, there was also a civil war in Sudan between the Arab Muslim government in the north and the black Christians and other non-Muslims in the south. In Congo, the dictators Mobutu Sese Seko and Laurent Kabila killed millions of people. In Zimbabwe, the dictator Robert Mugabe has killed hundreds of thousands of people. Idi Amin, the dictator of Uganda, killed hundreds of thousands of people. I could go on and on about this. Don't you ever read the newspapers or watch the news on TV?

Source

What it is socially unacceptable to mention in America, is prosecutable in Finland. Truth is irrelevant.

2008-05-19T00:12:00.000+11:30

Another forbidden word!

The "Schw****" word. We read:

"94 WYSP morning host Kidd Chris has been fired over a racist song performed by an in-studio guest in March. WYSP program director John Cook also lost his job over the fallout from the song "Schwoogies," sung to the tune of Blondie's "Call Me," that was performed March 21 in studio by a guest named Lady Gash.

"We found the song to be highly offensive and completely inappropriate for broadcast on our airwaves. When senior management of the station learned that it had been played, they took immediate steps to prevent it from ever appearing on the station again," CBS Radio spokeswoman Karen Mateo told us moments ago. "At the same time, we launched an extensive internal investigation into the situation including a thorough review of the editorial controls and systems we have in place to prevent this type of content from airing. We instituted additional educational training for the station, and have taken appropriate disciplinary action, including termination of the individuals involved." Mateo declined to comment on whether Kidd Chris would be paid out the life of his contract, which was to last another three years.

Source

The forbidden words are given in full at the link above, which is sort of interesting. It is OK to print them but not sing them?? In case they get taken down, I have also reposted them here.

To me what the song says is just a colloquial but not unreasonable commentary on the high rate of black crime and the lifestyle associated with that -- but the main issue is presumably the particular words used to make that commentary. I, of course, do not agree that ANY word is too offensive to be uttered. I am of the old "sticks and stones" persuasion. But I seem to be in a very small minority on that.

The academic objection would be that the song constitutes stereotyping -- but the thing is a song, not a dissertation -- and the song does not in any case say "ALL blacks". It leaves quantification up to the listener. And if you mentally insert "some" or "many", what the song says is defensible as a truth claim. But some truths may not be uttered these days, of course.

2008-05-18T00:22:00.002+11:30

Dutch cartoonist update

We read:

"The Dutch authorities have arrested the cartoonist Gregorius Nekschot (a pseudonym. Nekschot means deathblow, litt: “shot in the back of the neck” [An interview with Nekschot here]). The judicial authorities in Amsterdam said yesterday that the cartoonist was arrested as a suspect for the criminal offense of “publishing cartoons which are discriminating for Muslims and people with dark skin.”

The cartoonist was arrested on Tuesday, while the police searched his house for “discriminating evidence.” His computer, backups, usb sticks, mobile phone and a number of drawings were confiscated.

Nekschot was released two days later but it is possible that he will be charged following a complaint in 2005 by the Dutch imam Abdul Jabbar van de Ven, an indigenous Dutchman who converted to Islam.

Source

The guy is a hero, considering the Muslim-loving Dutch authorities and the lack of protection for free speech there.

2008-05-18T00:22:00.001+11:30

Federal law grants MySpace immunity

We read:

"A federal appeals court has ruled that MySpace.com is immune from a lawsuit over the alleged sexual assault of a teenage girl by a man she met on the social networking website. The 5th US Circuit Court of Appeals' decision today upholds the dismissal of the lawsuit.

The Texas girl's family had sued MySpace and its parent company, News Corp, claiming that MySpace did not protect young users from sexual predators.

The court says federal law bars such lawsuits against web-based services like MySpace.

Source

If this decision had gone the other way, it would have placed a huge censorship requirement on social networking sites

2008-05-18T00:21:00.000+11:30

New York bans use of noose to intimidate

We read:

"Displaying a noose with the intention of threatening or harassing someone is now a felony under New York law - punishable by up to four years in prison.

Gov. David Paterson signed the legislation Thursday. It was proposed after the highly publicized "Jena 6" case in Louisiana and elsewhere in the country and some cases in New York.

Last September, a noose was found hanging in a locker room at the Hempstead Police Department on Long Island. The next month, a noose was found hanging on a black professor's door at Columbia University.

The [far-Leftist] Southern Poverty Law Center documented nearly 50 incidents of nooses displayed in high schools, workplaces and other venues around the country after the "Jena 6" incident. Normally, the group hears of a dozen or so cases in a year, according to its Web site. [And how many of those were placed by attention-seeking Leftists?]

The display of a noose was added to an existing law that makes it a crime of first-degree aggravated harassment to harass, annoy, threaten or alarm a victim chosen for reasons of bias. Displaying swastikas on property without permission from the owner and setting fire to a cross in public view are already included in the statute.

The conduct should be punished regardless of that, he said. The governor recommended a second change - eliminating the part of the law that allows a property owner to give permission for a swastika or noose to be displayed for an intimidating purpose.

Source

Most nooses seem to be the work of Leftist fakers so this law might catch some interesting fish.

2008-05-17T00:15:00.001+11:30

Dutch cartoonist arrested under hate speech law

We read:

"A Dutch publisher says a well-known political cartoonist has been arrested on suspicion of violating hate speech laws with his work. A spokeswoman for Uitgeverij Xtra said Friday that the cartoonist who works under the pseudonym Gregorius Nekschot was arrested Tuesday and held overnight before being released.

"He was arrested with a great show of force, by around 10 policemen," the spokeswoman said. She asked that her name not be used because the cartoonist and publisher have received death threats.

Nekschot is known primarily for cartoons mocking Muslims and leftists, though the spokeswoman said he is a satirist who targets "any strong ideology". Amsterdam public prosecutors did not return repeated calls seeking comment.

Source

It will be interesting to see how this develops.

2008-05-17T00:14:00.000+11:30

Salvation claims hateful?

This guy thinks so and I am pretty sure many Leftists would agree:

"There is a form of hate speech that hasn't been addressed properly, and that is the teaching of exclusivity of salvation: the idea that "we" will be with God after death and "they" won't. This is spiritual terrorism, the ultimate hate speech, and there have been few things more destructive of peace and freedom the world over. Maybe it served humanity once; it doesn't anymore.

Source

It's probably already illegal in Canada. Lots of clergy have been prosecuted there for one thing or another. That salvation is a basic claim of Christianity cuts no ice these days of course: "I am the way and the truth and the life. No one comes to the Father except through me"? No more, buster! John 14:6 can go jump these days.

2008-05-16T00:22:00.002+11:30

UT administrator sacked for criticizing homosexuality

This follows up a post here on 7th

"A high-ranking University of Toledo administrator has been fired for speaking out. UT's associate vice president of human resources was put on paid administrative leave about 2 weeks ago after writing an opinion column in the Toledo Free Press.

Crystal Dixon just received verbal notification from the University of Toledo that she has been fired. It's all for speaking her opinion in a copy of the Toledo Free Press.....

Late this afternoon 13abc spoke with Crystal Dixon. She says her termination is clearly a violation of her 1st amendment right for free speech, religious discrimination, and race discrimination. Now she is pointing the finger at University leadership

Source

I suspect that this homosexual pandering is going to cost the university a lot of money one way or another. They will probably buy her off eventually. She's black so that will help her. Blacks have much more free speech than the rest of us do. Only homosexuals trump them.

The lawyers are already gearing up

2008-05-16T00:22:00.001+11:30

British police try to shoot the messenger

As you will see on today's POLITICAL CORRECTNESS WATCH, the politicized British police have just been forced to eat crow.

Some British documentary makers went around British mosques undercover and filmed various Mullahs inciting violence against unbelievers. The resulting film was shown on British TV.

So what did the police do? What the Mullahs said was clearly in breach of British law against preaching violence so the police went and rounded up all the Mullahs concerned -- right? In your dreams! The cops prosecuted the film-makers instead! They said the film stirred up hatred. It was a truly Orwellian inversion of what actually happened -- that it was the Mullahs who were stirring up hatred.

Anyway the wheels of justice eventually ground down the nonsense and the police were rightly sued over their perverse actions. They have now paid a big sum in compensation and apologized for their actions.

But, amid all the furore, the Muslim hate-speech has remained protected. It appears that none of the Muslim hate-speakers recorded in the film have been prosecuted or will be prosecuted. The main aim of the police exercise -- protecting Muslims from the standards that others have to obey -- has been achieved.

2008-05-15T00:32:00.001+11:30

Outrage at a carved pulpit in a Belgian church

That guy being trodden on down the bottom of the centuries-old carving above is our old friend Mohammed. You can guess the rest. Details here

I noted a similar "outrage" in Spain on Feb. 19th

2008-05-15T00:31:00.001+11:30

You can call GWB a Chimp and Leftists often do but ....

So why not Obama? Are people afraid that Obama really does have Chimp characteristics? I guess I'm not allowed to ask that. But I did not create the above cartoon. You can buy it on t-shirts. See here

2008-05-14T00:25:00.002+11:30

Freedom of expression has a win in Sweden

You do normally have to go to a higher court to get such freedom in Sweden:

"A local politician from the Malmo suburb of Burlov has been acquitted of charges of agitation against an ethnic group. Dahn Pettersson of the local Allianspartiet had previously been convicted by the Malmo District Court and fined the equivalent of 100 days' pay after he submitted a legislative proposal to the Burlov town council connecting heroin smuggling with Kosovo Albanians residing permanently in Sweden.

But the Court of Appeals reversed the lower court's decision and ruled instead that the proposal didn't prove Pettersson intended to disrespect Kosovo Albanians as a group....

According to the Court of Appeals, the text of the proposal could be read as saying that Kosovo Albanians are especially inclined to be involved with the heroin trade and therefore cause homelessness and other societal problems.

Ultimately, the court choose to release Pettersson, arguing that freedom of expression and the right to criticize current policy is important, especially when it comes to political debate.

Source

Albanians are Muslims and you must not speak any evil of those wonderful people in Sweden.

2008-05-14T00:25:00.001+11:30

Facebook sued over fake page

We read:

"A judge has ordered the social networking site Facebook to turn over information identifying the person who set up a fake profile in the name of a high school dean. Marion Superior Court Judge Robyn Moberly issued the order Friday, a day after Roncalli High School Dean of Students Tim Puntarelli sued the Web site, alleging harassment and identity theft by the unidentified creator of the profile.

Facebook, based in Palo Alto, Calif., removed the fraudulent profile from its site after Roncalli officials reported it last month. A Facebook spokeswoman declined comment to The Indianapolis Star. The AP sent an e-mail seeking comment from Facebook. Facebook's privacy policy requires a court order or subpoena before it will release identifying information.

The lawsuit said the posting included "pictures and messages inappropriate for a dean of students to send to a student." Moberly's emergency order required Facebook to preserve all information from the deleted profile....

Similar profiles have been the subject of lawsuits in other states and have led to debate over whether they are defamation or parody protected by the First Amendment.

Source

I don't see any 1st Amendment issues here. Libel is libel and someone has obviously been misrepresented in a damaging way here.

2008-05-13T00:38:00.000+11:30

MN: Three suspended for not standing for pledge

We read:

"Three small-town eighth-graders in Minnesota were suspended by their principal for not standing Thursday morning for the Pledge of Allegiance, violating a district policy that the principal now says may soon be reworded to protect free speech rights. ... The head of the Minnesota American Civil Liberties Union said that the school's actions against the students are unconstitutional, and his office informed the district of that today in a strongly worded letter."

Source

The ACLU is clearly right on this one. The case above does not seem to involve religion but various groups (e.g. Quakers) have religious objections to the pledge so the first amendment clearly protects their freedom of religion. I am rather surprised that the pledge has lasted so long, given its plain violation of the first amendment in such cases. A voluntary pledge is OK of course.

2008-05-13T00:29:00.000+11:30

Anti-illegal immigration group censored

We read:

"When members of an anti-illegal immigration group offered to sponsor litter cleanup on local roads, they never imagined California officials would offer them an Adopt-a-Highway stretch near a Border Patrol checkpoint on Interstate 5, the main artery carrying illegal migrants north from the U.S.-Mexico border.

On Friday, lawyers for the San Diego Minutemen told a federal judge that the state had no right to rescind the offer after state legislators complained to the California Department of Transportation. The group asked that its blue Adopt-a-Highway sign be put back where it stood without incident for about six weeks until the agency removed it in January. "We were moved to silence our message in response to pressure from the open border advocates and the Latino caucus," said Minutemen attorney Robert Fuselier. "It all comes down to one thing: We can't have our speech because if we do, people who don't like it might become unruly and unlawful."

Attorneys for the state contend the sign was removed because of concerns that demonstrators or vandals could create safety hazards for the 160,000 drivers who pass the checkpoint daily and for Minutemen volunteers collecting litter by the roadside.

Hayes asked whether the state would continue moving the Minutemen sign if protests followed it. "It would seem you're saying you're allowing the people who are unhappy with the message to dictate who can be in the program," the judge said. "We can do that," Benowitz responded. "It is not a public forum."

Courts have found otherwise. In 2005, the U.S. Supreme Court sided with the Ku Klux Klan after Missouri officials sought to bar the group from its Adopt-a-Highway program under a regulation prohibiting groups that deny membership based on race or with a documented history of violence.

Source

2008-05-12T00:30:00.001+11:30

More Google censorship?

A reader reports that he got the following response to a Google search that led to this blog:

We're sorry...

... but your query looks similar to automated requests from a computer virus or spyware application. To protect our users, we can't process your request right now.

We'll restore your access as quickly as possible, so try again soon. In the meantime, if you suspect that your computer or network has been infected, you might want to run a virus checker or spyware remover to make sure that your systems are free of viruses and other spurious software.

If you're continually receiving this error, you may be able to resolve the problem by deleting your Google cookie and revisiting Google. For browser-specific instructions, please consult your browser's online support center.

If your entire network is affected, more information is available in the Google Web Search Help Center.

We apologize for the inconvenience, and hope we'll see you again on Google.

It is hard to imagine how a search for something on this blog would look like virus output but who knows?

2008-05-12T00:29:00.000+11:30

An odd crime

Who knew that"ethnic intimidation" was a crime?

"An Italian-born 47-year-old restaurant cook who pleaded guilty to a crime of ethnic intimidation was sentenced today to five years probation and ordered to complete 150 hours of community service in Camden. Superior Court Judge William Cook also ordered Claudio Diventura to write an essay on the evils of racism.

Diventura was arrested after fingerprint analysis showed he had handled a sign with a racist slur written on it. The sign, white lettering on brown siding, was posted in September on a utility pole in Sicklerville and reported to police by a man who was in town visiting a relative. Investigation by the Winslow Township police showed the siding matched some removed from Diventura's home in the first block of South Grove Street in Sicklerville.

Diventura, represented by defense attorney Leonard Baker, did not give any reason for hanging the sign. He apologized to several black court officials who are assigned to Cook's courtroom.

Source

I can imagine that he might be prosecuted for putting up a sign on public property but it seems that the offense was what was said on the sign. Contrary to what Leftists say, SCOTUS has held that "hate speech" is free speech so I suspect that an appeal against this would succeed.

Nobody seems to be saying what was on the sign but, judging from the apology to blacks present in the court, it was something generic like "Africa for the Africans". That would certainly be protected. If however it was an explicit threat, other laws might apply.

2008-05-11T00:31:00.001+11:30

Mark Steyn defying the Canadian thought police

Mark on Hugh Hewitt's show:

"I’ve got, as you know, these outstanding human rights complaints. Ontario, which ruled that it didn’t have jurisdiction to try Macleans Magazine and myself, nevertheless said you know, we don’t have jurisdiction to toss these guys in jail, but we would if we could. That was absolutely extraordinary. They said if we had put this on a sign rather than in a magazine, they would have jurisdiction to prosecute us. So I actually, I’ve actually taped the magazine article to a sign, and I’m going to deliver it to the Ontario Human Rights Commission, and invite the relevant thought police to actually go ahead with their threat. I mean, if it’s just the medium, I say bring it on, as John Kerry would say.

Source

2008-05-11T00:30:00.001+11:30

Is "bearings" a slur?

Somewhat to my discomfort I have in the past defended both Bill Clinton and Hillary on this blog. It now seems to fall to me to defend America's great empty vessel as well.

Obama said recently (See e.g. here) that McCain had lost his "bearings". That has widely been interpreted as a slur on McCain's age. Perhaps I am missing something but I do not see that at all. Anyone of any age can lose their bearings at times. I have certainly lost my bearings on some occasions when I have been driving around a strange city and one can certainly lose one's bearings in the course of a long argument.

If Obama had said that McCain was losing his "marbles" that would certainly be an accusation of mental incompetence but I cannot see it for "bearings". I actually think that what Obama said was part of his usual politeness. I think he was just saying that McCain was making a forgivable mistake.

"Bearings" was I think originally a nautical term and referred to the direction that needed to be steered in navigation at sea.

2008-05-10T00:36:00.001+11:30

Must not desecrate Mexican flag

You can stomp Old Glory all you like. One of Obama's buddies did it not so long ago (See above). But trash the Mexican flag and the ACLU wants in

"A high school student says he may file a lawsuit against a physical education teacher who took a Mexican flag he had brought for Cinco de Mayo and put it in the garbage. Clint Straatman denies Froylan Camelo's version of events but said he took the flag Monday because "white kids" might have hurt the 16-year-old. He said he put it in a garbage can because he had no place else to keep it.

Camelo said he was changing into gym clothes at Minico High School in Rupert when Straatman told him, "Give me the flag." "I said, 'What's the problem?'" Camelo, speaking in Spanish, told The Times-News of Twin Falls. "He said, 'The problem is that we are in the United States and not in Mexico.' He grabbed it from me. He threw the flag in the garbage can."

Camelo said he then took the undamaged flag out of the garbage. He said he's been contacted by the American Civil Liberties Union and is considering a lawsuit against Straatman.

Camelo and others brought Mexican flags to the south-central Idaho school to celebrate Cinco de Mayo, the May 5 recognition of Mexico's victory over the French army on that day in 1862. About a third of the student body is Hispanic.

Source

Just a small note about Google censorship. The picture above seems to have been censored from their image cache. I did a Google image search for it and could not find it -- despite it being much in the news lately. In response to the search terms "Ayers" with "flag" it should have been at the top of the page. I guess it is pretty red-hot so Google seem to have done their best to keep it from our eyes.

Maybe after they read this they will restore it. They do seem to respond to criticisms I make of them. I guess they have a team monitoring all adverse mentions of them. They probably search for combinations of the terms "Google" and "evil" -- as critics of Google often mock their proclaimed policy of not being evil.

2008-05-10T00:35:00.000+11:30

Christian group sues Pa. university over free-speech rights

We read:

"A religious student group claims that Shippensburg University violated its free-speech rights by threatening to shut it down because it requires members to be Christians and its president to be a man. The Christian Fellowship of Shippensburg University alleges in a federal lawsuit filed Wednesday that the state-owned university violated a 2004 settlement of a separate lawsuit over the school's student code of conduct.

In that earlier case, a civil liberties group sued the university over a provision in the student code that prohibited "acts of intolerance" including racist, sexist and homophobic speech. University officials said they would revise the code after a federal judge granted a preliminary injunction in 2004 barring the enforcement of that provision.

Steven Aden, a lawyer for the Alliance Defense Fund Center for Academic Freedom, said the latest lawsuit stems from Christian Fellowship's expulsion from campus by the university's Student Senate in February in a dispute over its membership and leadership requirements,

The Student Senate's vice president later told the group that it could resume operating as a recognized student organization, but members still worry about the prospect of further sanctions, Aden said. "The club is under this cloud of suspicion, whereby their practices are being monitored to make sure they don't step out of line," Aden said.

Source

The use of speech codes to ban Christian groups from colleges seems to have passed its peak but there is still a lot of cleaning up to do.

2008-05-09T00:32:00.001+11:30

'You don't have the right to speak'

Student senate leader tells pro-lifers to censor their message

"A student senate leader at the University of Wisconsin-Stevens Point has told pro-life display supporters they have no right to express their opinion on the volatile issue of abortion.

"It's not your responsibility," Roderick King, a sophomore at the school and member of its student senate, shouted at those who had assembled a display of white crosses in the campus lawn - with university permission. "This [abortion] is a right. You don't have the right to challenge it. Write a paper. Do NOT! Do NOT put this in front of all of us. This is not your right," he hollered, grabbing crosses with both hands, yanking them from the ground, and throwing them to the side.

The campus group Pointers for Life had put up the Cemetery of the Innocents display last week, then spent the next morning repairing the damage from someone who had vandalized the field of rows of white crosses representing the victims of abortion.

Then they were trashed a second time, only this time the pro-life campaigners were armed with a video camera. As students looked on, King led a group of angry students by walking through the rows of crosses and plucking them from the ground and tossing them. Campus security was summoned, and when an officer arrived, most of the students left. King did not.

"The freedom of speech does not cover these signs and symbols," he said, according to a report from Students for Life.... The video shows King's confrontational attitude even with campus security. "I don't care if they have the university's approval," he told the officer. "They're actually making the worst statement here."

But worse is the fact that despite the students' complaint, the Student Government Association has declined to take action.

Source

Typical Leftist arrogance: They just KNOW what is right.

2008-05-09T00:31:00.000+11:30

Swastika not hate speech?

Some strange reasoning at the University of North Dakota after swastikas were plastered up in several places. I guess Jews (Sorry: "Zionists") are not allowed to be offended:

"UND President Charles Kupchella has condemned the racist and anti-Semitic graffiti, saying such actions should not be tolerated on a university campus. But members of the school's Jewish Student Organization have criticized Kupchella for declining to describe the graffiti as a "hate crime" or to describe the image found in West Hall, which looks like a scribbled out swastika with one axis facing the wrong direction.

Source

It's only a hate crime if it offends Leftists or Muslims I guess. Reading between the lines, maybe Muslims put up the swastikas -- and they can do no wrong, of course.

2008-05-08T00:16:00.002+11:30

NY: Must not allege affirmative action!

Leftists go to great lengths to give preference to blacks but you must not say that they give preference to blacks!

"The controversy erupted after Paladino claimed at an education forum two weeks ago that James A. Williams was hired as school superintendent because he is black. Williams has declined to comment, but a former School Board member who sat on a search panel that recommended finalists said Paladino's comments were "totally inaccurate." Betty Jean Grant said Williams' race was not a factor in the process.

At one point during Tuesday's meeting, Paladino seemed to concede the possibility that factors other than race might have figured in Williams' hiring. But he stood by his original statement when a reporter asked him for clarification. "I'm not backing away from anything, because I spoke the truth," Paladino said. He added that the state should step in to try to "straighten up the incompetence" of a school system that he contends is squandering hundreds of millions of dollars.

The Council's Legislation Committee delayed action on a bill sponsored by Davis and Masten Council Member Demone A. Smith asking the state to ban people who engaged in "racially offensive" conduct from obtaining public leases or contracts. Some Council members say that might be unconstitutional. But Smith said he sees nothing wrong with his push to "ban people who deep down don't like the people that they're serving."

Source

2008-05-08T00:16:00.001+11:30

Grand Theft Auto ads in free speech lawsuit

We read:

"The publisher of controversial videogame Grand Theft Auto IV is suing the Chicago Transit Authority for allegedly bowing to pressure and pulling advertisements for the game.

Take-Two Interactive Software accused the transit authority of violating its freedom of speech and contractual rights in the Manhattan Federal Court overnight after ads for Grand Theft Auto IV disappeared without explanation.

The software company accused Chicago Transit Authority and its sales agent, Titan Outdoor, of violating a $300,000 ad campaign agreement that included running posters for the game on the sides of buses and transit display spaces for six weeks between April and June.

The ads were removed after a news report that questioned why the ad campaign was allowed to run in light of a recent wave of violent crimes in Chicago, just days after they were revealed, the suit said.

Source

The Chicago Transit Authority is a government body so the 1st Amendment probably does apply here.