The Chicken Instead Of Pork? You Might Be A Terrorist!

[goofyfish]

The U.S. is collecting the data for a massive passenger database, intended to increase passenger profiling.

After two days of talks in Brussels, U.S. Deputy Customs Commissioner Douglas Browning and officials of the European Commission agreed on an interim arrangement that would require European airlines to provide passenger data to U.S. authorities starting March 5.

In return, the United States gave assurances about the "appropriate handling" of the records, which include not only names but also the passenger's itinerary, contact phone number and other details, such as credit card numbers. (Full text here)

Heck, I always have the slice of generic, non-exotic fish. I must be a super-terrorist.

Peace.

[Tiassa]

Airplane fish? That stuff should be banned by the Geneva Conventions.

I don't know what to say. Right now I'm choking over news stories of a student sent home for an anti-Bush t-shirt, and it dawns on me that the US--and I would swear I saw the UK earlier today (I could be wrong)--calling for all citizens to get the hell out of the way.

So if you don't mind, I'm going to sit back and listen to my Smile bootleg and enjoy a last few minutes of peace.
__________
Just relax. Me and this other cat are gonna straighten you guys out. And then we'll get you into world peace.--Brian Wilson
__________

,
Tiassa

[sycoindian]

Right now I'm choking over news stories of a student sent home for an anti-Bush t-shirt

for real? damm.. that's just crazy...

[GB-GIL Trans-global]

i r bush ind i thenq its bed four nashinol sekirtee two lett peepal heave apinians.

[Tiassa]

Student gets sent home over his anti-Bush T-shirt (The Detroit News)

I had been following a CNN link, but knew it would disappear. While retrieving the above link, I came across this blog: Secret Service questions student for anti-Bush t-shirt (Warblogging)

The headline story is an interesting one, since the kid drew crosshairs over Bush's face, a borderline violation of an archaic but somehow relevant suspension of free speech: Don't threaten the president, even in jest. However, I don't know what they'd do if we burned Dubya in effigy. (The prior sentence may constitute a violation of federal law.)

Of interest, though, is a less-publicized story that made the blog:

This incident reminds me all too much of an earlier incident in which a 19-year-old college student received a visit from the Secret Service -- because of a poster. The poster says "We all HANG on your every word" and featured a picture of George W. Bush. The poster then said "152 dead" -- a reference to executions carried out under Governor Bush's watch.

How did the Secret Service find out about the poster? The same way that they found out about the T-shirt -- someone informed.

Folks, we don't live in Soviet Russia or pre-reunification East Germany. We don't live in North Korea or Iraq or China. We live in a democracy -- and people have a right to say what they want. That poster, this T-shirt, they're legitimate criticism of the president (although, it's true, the crosshairs go a little too far).

Yep ... disagree with Bush's death-penalty policy, you might be a terrorist. After all, even terrorists on suicide missions have to watch their necks.

,
Tiassa

[goofyfish]

Dearborn High School junior Bretton Barber was told Monday to turn his shirt inside out, take it off or go home. He decided to go home rather than surrender his freedom of expression.

Well, he's damn lucky his name is Bretton Barber and he was offered the
option of going home. If his name had been Muhamed Al Zaed he'd have been
given detention -- and I'm not talking about having to stay after school.



Peace.

[Pollux V]

Well, he's damn lucky his name is Bretton Barber and he was offered the
option of going home. If his name had been Muhamed Al Zaed he'd have been
given detention -- and I'm not talking about having to stay after school.

Just in the school's defense, you don't want to start a riot or even a minor fight over anything. I am fortunate enough to have a TV next to the computer while on my "vacation" to Cape Cod, and so I had been watching CNN for several hours. The shirt looks just like this, in case you haven't seen it yet. I'm sorry, but there are a great deal of dipshits out there willing to duke it out in defense of Bush in the hallways of High School. It's not that the administrators were trying to smother his freedom of speech, they were just trying to protect him. I think it's a viable argument. You don't walk into a mosque with a t-shirt that says "I hate arabs." Nor do you walk into a school full of conservative sheep with a shirt that labels the man they worship as a terrorist.

[Tiassa]

Just in the school's defense, you don't want to start a riot or even a minor fight over anything.

When I was in sixth and seventh grade, my school banned quirky haircuts--new wave being the going trend. Overtly sexy apparel--e.g. jean jacket and bra--was likewise out.

And on the one hand, I can understand the idea of a mohawk haircut disrupting class affairs, and, well, hormones are a fact of life. But with the haircut especially, isn't it a matter of prejudice? The haircut is disruptive because people choose to make it so? In the 1990s, I read a news article here and there about boys being prohibited to have long hair at school.

Unlike erections, I think this is the same issue with the t-shirt. Other students are free to think what they want of a kid's shirt, but they also have an obligation to not let their feelings interfere with life.

There were unconfirmed reports on the AP wire in the days after 9/11 of two men arrested in separate incidents. One allegedly shouted praises to Allah on the street while the fires still burned; the other hollered like a prophet that this was predictable--not an act of God but a retribution for foreign policy. While praising Allah might, at that very moment, construe support to the cause of an active enemy, the second man was arrested allegedly because the people around him were about to beat him senseless. Unconfirmed--both wire stories are unavailable to me now.

But it's the same principle: people must be tolerant of expression, period. A t-shirt? An unpleasant reality? We can't just wish it away in handcuffs or send it home to change.

But what can a school do? If the parents of a community have not raised their children to civility, you have to find a way. Personally, I say let the kid take his chances, and if he's beaten, haul his assailants in on federal civil rights charges. That ought to settle the issue both ways. The rest of the kids in the school will learn.

,
Tiassa

[Pollux V]

And on the one hand, I can understand the idea of a mohawk haircut disrupting class affairs, and, well, hormones are a fact of life. But with the haircut especially, isn't it a matter of prejudice? The haircut is disruptive because people choose to make it so? In the 1990s, I read a news article here and there about boys being prohibited to have long hair at school.

Awhile ago on CBS they had a story about a kid with long hair in first or second grade or something. The school wanted it to be shorter, but in the kid's defense they just showed a portrait of Jesus (with long hair, of course).

But it's the same principle: people must be tolerant of expression, period. A t-shirt? An unpleasant reality? We can't just wish it away in handcuffs or send it home to change.

But what can a school do? If the parents of a community have not raised their children to civility, you have to find a way. Personally, I say let the kid take his chances, and if he's beaten, haul his assailants in on federal civil rights charges. That ought to settle the issue both ways. The rest of the kids in the school will learn.

I'm just not so sure. How can we be certain that a cycle of violence wouldn't start up? For all we know there is a huge social barrier in the school, made up of rich conservative jocks against middle and lower class nerds. I'm not sure we can place so much faith in kids, not unlike myself. Chances are, their families feel that they did a damn good job raising their kids to love their president. Who's to say that they wouldn't at least privately want their children to beat the crap out of anyone that would insult Bush? They might just treat their inevitable loss in court as a loss of the battle, not of the war.

There are too many hypotheticals. They might not learn. They might keep fighting, dying. The school just cannot take the chance that someone would get seriously hurt. Because, in the end, if someone were to get brain damage, or a facial deformity, it would all come back to them. They would be ruined from the lawsuits, which would attack both the administrators and the parents of the kids that did the beating-the-crap-out-of. If this happened to me for wearing a shirt like that, I'm not sure I could put a price on having a deformed face.

And, hasn't history shown us that in most, if not all cases, we just don't learn from our mistakes?

[sycoindian]

I'm just not so sure. How can we be certain that a cycle of violence wouldn't start up?

you can't be sure of course..

Chances are, their families feel that they did a damn good job raising their kids to love their president. Who's to say that they wouldn't at least privately want their children to beat the crap out of anyone that would insult Bush?

parents expressing their opinions by germinating such ideas in the minds of their kids... great... they all should get educated.. i dont give a rats ass if they get offended if someone insults their president... just cuz he's a prezodent, doesn't mean he's immune to criticism or even hate... just cuz someone might have an opposing view doesnt mean you should go on a defensive mode... and if those kids do beat the crap outta that kid wearin that tshirt, let the authorities take proper action...

There are too many hypotheticals.

there always are... that doesnt mean you sit tight and watch the world start spinnin backwards...

They would be ruined from the lawsuits, which would attack both the administrators and the parents of the kids that did the beating-the-crap-out-of.

so in the end, it comes down to savin their ass vs lettin the kid express what he feels... if there is a congenial atmosphere in the school and where freedom of speech can be exercised to a certain extent, such an incident would never occur...

If this happened to me for wearing a shirt like that, I'm not sure I could put a price on having a deformed face.

of course not.. it shouldn't happen in the first place... ur just expressin what you believe.. as long as you're not shovin it down someone's throat, its okk.. if you were forcin someone to wear this tshirt, its a different issue.. ppl wear all kindsa tshirts.. vulgar ones, che guevara ones, stalin ones and i've even seen some tshirts with nazi propaganda... no one says shit.. but when you criticize someone from your own homeland, suddenly the secret service has to be called... blowin the entire thing outta proportion..

pollux.. i do see the points you are making... sure, in the end everyone wants to save their own ass.. but that's not a good enuf reason to prohibit someone from sayin anything... more than anything else, i feel that the school was shovin their beliefs on the that kid...

this is one isolated incident.. it has been curbed so that this doesnt start happenin nationwide creatin mass chaos... i wonder how long can they continue to do this... cuz i would like to see chaos...

tiassa.. i concur with what you are saying.. good points..

[Tiassa]

It just keeps striking me that we cannot continue to let people's unwillingness to do the right thing stop our institutions from doing the right thing. Your note of the family that secretly harbors certain sentiments--well, it ain't decent, is it?

It's probably a better argument for uniforms in schools, but ....

Kids need to be allowed to make their political statements. Our institutions have certain obligations to safety, but a life so "safe" that we cannot hurt our own selves is not free. Let the punk take his risks among the savages, honestly.

And, you know, of course the legal systems are screwed up, but how fast of robots do you need to stop one kid from decking another? Haul the assailants in for civil rights charges. Sure it's a waste of twenty years apiece, but every once in awhile, lambs throw themseves to the slaughter so the rest of us can remember how ugly it is. I mean, when I wake up in a country where I can't be mad at the president without risking a facial deformity ....

... It's staggering, you know? ...

I mean, really ... how many school districts could people ruin before society figures out the ruse? Why hold a school responsible for a parent's failure? And, in the end, it might be that the school can't be "safe" enough because people like the hypothetical plaintiffs voted against a funding measure.

What if he's wearing that shirt on the street on a day when "something unthinkable" happens? And suddenly he's surrounded by a mob that wants to beat him for seeming like an enemy. Should the police arrest him for upsetting people who are unable to conduct themselves in a civil and legal manner?

It's just that shutting down expression like that is also licensing those who would silence us all.

thanx,
Tiassa

[Pollux V]

Kids need to be allowed to make their political statements. Our institutions have certain obligations to safety, but a life so "safe" that we cannot hurt our own selves is not free. Let the punk take his risks among the savages, honestly.

Alright, alright. I won't agree, but I will say that your argument, at least, has logic and merit behind it. I'm not positive that I can say the same about my own.

I guess it's all a matter of opinion