The primary site for this blog mirror is HERE. Dissecting Leftism is HERE (and mirrored here). The Blogroll. My Home Page. Email me (John Ray) here. Other mirror sites: Greenie Watch, Political Correctness Watch, Education Watch, Recipes, Gun Watch, Australian Politics, Immigration Watch, Food & Health Skeptic and Socialized Medicine. For a list of backups viewable in China, see here. The archive for this site is here or here. (Click "Refresh" on your browser if background colour is missing)
****************************************************************************************



3 July, 2009

School forbids anti-abortion t-shirt



The McSwain junior public high school in Merced, California, has forbidden one of its students from wearing an anti-abortion t-shirt -- citing a violation of its school dress code banning any "suggestion of tobacco, drug or alcohol use, sexual promiscuity, profanity, vulgarity, or other inappropriate subject matter." The "inappropriate subject matter" phrase is enormously vague and arbitrary but that seems to be what they think catches the t-shirt. It is too vague to be constitutional. What if criticism of Obama is seen by the school as "inappropriate" (which it probably is)? The young lady, Anna Amador, who wore the shirt is now suing the school. Eugene Volokh has the legal arguments:

"That strikes me as a clear First Amendment violation under the Supreme Court's decision Tinker v. Des Moines School Dist. (1969). If junior high school students have a constitutional right to wear a black armband to protest the Vietnam War, at least until there's some serious evidence that the armband is likely to cause substantial disruption, they must have an equal right to wear a T-shirt to protest abortions.

And nothing in the school district's motion suggests that the student was ordered to change shirts because of a risk of disruption; the school district apparently thinks that it can just categorically ban any T-shirts that deal with this "inappropriate" "subject matter." One might argue, as Justice Thomas has (and as Justice Black before him had), that Tinker should be overruled; but it's the law, and school districts should comply with it.

Source

Note: The picture above illustrates the shirt, not the plaintiff.



Icecream advertisement banned in Britain



We read:

"Regulators have banned an advertisement that showed a priest and nun looking as though they were about to kiss. The image was thought “likely to cause serious offence”.

The Advertising Standards Authority received ten complaints about the advert for Antonio Federici Gelato Italiano ice cream after it appeared in Delicious magazine and Sainsbury’s Magazine. In the picture, the priest was wearing rosary beads and holding a pot of ice cream above the slogan “Kiss temptation”.

The authority said the advert breached decency rules. “We considered that the portrayal of the priest and nun in a sexualised manner and the implication that they were considering whether or not to give in to temptation, was likely to cause serious offence to some readers,” the ruling states.

Antonio Federici said that it was a “tongue-in-cheek portrayal celebrating forbidden Italian temptations”. He added that it was significant that the image did not show the nun and priest touching, or kissing"

Source

2 July, 2009

The Leftist bias of the ADL shows yet again

Leftists would like to see free speech for themselves only. They never stop attacking the speech of others.

"Anti-Defamation League Regional Director Asserts That "Freedom of Speech Does Not Extend to Racist Groups": That's the view of Alan Potash, the ADL's regional director for Nebraska, Iowa, and Kansas. Pretty appalling, it seems to me -- simply false as a statement of current free speech law (which it sounds like it is), and deeply misguided as a matter of what the law should be.

And in the wake of attempts to condemn Israeli policies as racist, it should be pretty clear to American Jews that such a position could easily be turned around them. After all, any university administration that takes the view that Israeli actions towards the Palestinians are racist could easily conclude that defenders of those actions are racist as well, and therefore suspended or driven off campus. Or how about Orthodox Jews (and perhaps quite a few other Jews as well) who believe that homosexuality is against God's will? Once "racist groups" lose their free speech rights, it's hard to see why "homophobic groups" wouldn't equally lose them.

What about groups that express deep religious hostility, as I've heard many Jews do with regard to the Jews for Jesus? Perhaps such hostility is justified, or perhaps not, but after "racist groups" lose their First Amendment rights, "religiously bigoted groups" might come close behind. I think free speech protection even for the "ideas we hate" is the right approach in general; but even if the ADL is narrowly focused on its own community's concerns (as some groups well might), it should still, I think, reach the same result.

Note that the director isn't even making the ostensibly narrow arguments in favor of banning speech that advocates violence, or that uses epithets, or some such. So long as you are a "racist group[]," "freedom of speech does not extend" to you. I hope the national ADL promptly condemns Mr. Potash's statements.

Source

The ADL was set up to defend Jews. They do Jews no favours by behaving like Nazis themselves. Political censorship was integral to Nazism. The ADL is a disgraceful organization. They frequently find opportunities to attack Christians too. They are mentally still in the shtetl. Potash is a fertilizer. Mr Potash's brain certainly needs some fertilizing.

Note: The critic of Potash whom I quote above is Eugene Volokh (born as Yevgeniy Vladimirovich Volokh), of Soviet Jewish origins. So don't tar all Jews with the slimy attitudes of the ADL.



VA: Gun rights advocates say Coliseum staff challenged free speech rights

We read:

"The Virginia Citizens Defense League is used to fighting for the right to carry guns. But now it’s having to defend the right to wear stickers about carrying guns. The group says officials at the Richmond Coliseum recently attempted to stop members from handing out blaze-orange ‘Guns Save Lives’ stickers before an appearance by radio and television talk-show host Glenn Beck. ‘It’s bad enough they’re trying to trample the Second Amendment. Then you come and attack the First,’ President Philip Van Cleave said, referring to the U.S. Constitution’s guarantees of the right to bear arms and to free speech.”

Source

It's an enormous battle for Americans to retain their constitutional rights in the face of ceaseless Leftist atttacks on those rights.



Hate speech from a Princeton economist

Warmism supporter Paul Krugman says in the NYT:

"So the House passed the Waxman-Markey climate-change bill. In political terms, it was a remarkable achievement.

But 212 representatives voted no. A handful of these no votes came from representatives who considered the bill too weak, but most rejected the bill because they rejected the whole notion that we have to do something about greenhouse gases.

And as I watched the deniers make their arguments, I couldn’t help thinking that I was watching a form of treason — treason against the planet.

Source

The usual punishment for treason is death so this runs very close to incitement to violence.



1 July, 2009

Maine Fines Group for ‘Inflammatory Anti-Muslim Message’

The Christian Action Network runs afoul of bureaucratic political correctness:

"An organization in the national spotlight recently for producing a documentary identifying several dozen potential terrorist training compounds in the U.S. has offended the sensibilities of Maine bureaucrats, who have fined the organization $4,000, alleging among other things that the group sent out mailings containing an “inflammatory anti-Muslim message.”

The group in question, the Christian Action Network (CAN), received notice of the fines and the fundraising ban in a May 6 letter from Elaine Thibodeau of the State of Maine’s Department of Professional and Financial Regulation. Enclosed in the letter was a prepared consent agreement for CAN to sign agreeing to all of the state’s allegations, waiving all rights to appeal, and agreeing to pay the $4,000 fine. As part of the consent agreement, CAN is required to agree to all of the state’s allegations, including their assertion that their mailing amounted to hate speech.

“These bogus charges and fines the State of Maine has imposed are nothing but an attempt to stifle our free speech and silence our organization from speaking out about the steady creep of radical Islam in America,” CAN president Martin Mawyer told Pajamas Media. “We fully intend to appeal the state’s penalties because if they successfully silence us here, we will quickly find that we won’t be able to speak out anywhere.”

But what has Maine bureaucrats roiling is a fundraising mailing sent by CAN (a copy of which was provided to Pajamas Media) regarding a public school curriculum used in California requiring students to pray to Allah, dress up as Muslims, adopt Muslim names, and learn the five pillars of Islam. Since Christians and Jews are not given similar accommodations, CAN encouraged their supporters to send a petition to Maine Gov. John Baldacci asking him to prevent such instruction in Maine public schools...

Source

If you read further in the link provided you will see that the Maine bureaucrats are now resorting to lies to defend their unconstitutional actions.



Protecting the Hollywood dream: Must not hint that Tom Cruise is a dud in bed?



Hollywood actress Katies Holmes (above) is married to Hollywood actor Tom Cruise. "Bruno" is in Australia at the moment, getting a lot of TV coverage.

"Channel 10 censored a gag by Sacha Baron Cohen's character Bruno on Rove on Sunday night that mentioned US actor Katie Holmes. During his chat with McManus, Bruno called PM Kevin Rudd "hot" and looked down McManus's pants, but Ten hit the censor button when Holmes' name was mentioned.

In reference to his alter-ego Cohen, Bruno said: "I hear his wife gets less sex than Katie Holmes." But Holmes's name was beeped out when the interview went to air.

A spokeswoman for Roving Enterprises refused to comment on why the censorship took place. She said censorship was a joint decision between Roving Enterprises and the network.

Source

30 June, 2009

Polar bear expert censored by Warmists

No dissent from the Warmist Gospel allowed: Mitchell Taylor, who has studied the bears for 30 years, was barred from a U.N. conference about them

"Over the coming days a curiously revealing event will be taking place in Copenhagen. Top of the agenda at a meeting of the Polar Bear Specialist Group (set up under the International Union for the Conservation of Nature/Species Survival Commission) will be the need to produce a suitably scary report on how polar bears are being threatened with extinction by man-made global warming.

Dr Mitchell Taylor has been researching the status and management of polar bears in Canada and around the Arctic Circle for 30 years, as both an academic and a government employee. More than once since 2006 he has made headlines by insisting that polar bear numbers, far from decreasing, are much higher than they were 30 years ago. Of the 19 different bear populations, almost all are increasing or at optimum levels, only two have for local reasons modestly declined.

Dr Taylor had obtained funding to attend this week's meeting of the PBSG, but this was voted down by its members because of his views on global warming. The chairman, Dr Andy Derocher, a former university pupil of Dr Taylor's, frankly explained in an email (which I was not sent by Dr Taylor) that his rejection had nothing to do with his undoubted expertise on polar bears: "it was the position you've taken on global warming that brought opposition".

So, as the great Copenhagen bandwagon rolls on, stand by this week for reports along the lines of "scientists say polar bears are threatened with extinction by vanishing Arctic ice". But also check out Anthony Watt's Watts Up With That website for the latest news of what is actually happening in the Arctic. The average temperature at midsummer is still below zero, the latest date that this has happened in 50 years of record-keeping. After last year's recovery from its September 2007 low, this year's ice melt is likely to be substantially less than for some time. The bears are doing fine.

Source

To the Green/Left, truth is irrelevant. Destruction is all.



Wimbledon admits good-looking female tennis players get centre court

This was being furiously denied just days ago. I mentioned it on 22nd.

"Good looks count for more than tennis ability when it comes to choosing which women play on Wimbledon's centre court. A succession of easy-on-the-eye unknowns have appeared in Wimbledon's prime arena this year while some of the top women's seeds have been relegated to lesser courts.

The All England Club admitted that physical attractiveness is taken into consideration. Spokesman Johnny Perkins said: "Good looks are a factor."

A BBC source said: "It's the Wimbledon play committee, not us who decides on the order of play. "But obviously it's advantageous to us if there are good-looking women players on Centre Court. "Our preference would always be a Brit or a babe as this always delivers high viewing figures."

Source

29 June, 2009

Canadian "Human Rights" boss exemplifies what she is denying

We read:

"Canadians are uninformed and deliberately misinformed about the hate speech provisions of human rights law, and are engaged in a debate that is "completely unbalanced," according to Jennifer Lynch, chief commissioner of the Canadian Human Rights Commission.

"We welcome this debate. We want it to be an informed debate in the right forum, a place where people can have an informed dialogue. [That place is] Parliament, and parliamentary committees. This why we did a special report to Parliament [last week]. That's the appropriate forum," she said in an interview.

She criticized Conservative MP Russ Hiebert for relying on "one source that is full of misinformation," in his study of the CHRC in a parliamentary subcommittee. But she placed most of the blame on conservative author Ezra Levant and his blogging allies for spreading "misinformation" about the CHRC's mandate and practices.

Source

The stupid b*tch can't even hide her biases when she tries. She wants to restrict all debate to Parliament: None of that nasty public speech stuff. Nobody interested in the topic is "misinformed" about her odious regime. We have all seen the shallow and biased grounds on which Ezra Levant and Mark Steyn were targeted. If she wants respect for her fief she should cease all harassment of political speech.



A new naughty word: "scuffer"

Whining Scottish cop complains about a word of dubious meaning

"David Cameron has ordered an investigation into a claim that a Tory MP manhandled and racially abused a Scottish policeman during a demonstration in Parliament Square. Mark Pritchard is accused of calling PC Ray McQuarrie a ‘scuffer’ – said to be slang for peasant – and of trying to push him out of the way when his route to the Commons was blocked.

PC McQuarrie complained to his superiors and wrote to Mr Cameron asking for an apology, claiming Mr Pritchard, 42, had been drinking when the alleged incident occurred before midnight. Mr Cameron asked Chief Whip Patrick McLoughlin to investigate....

PC McQuarrie obtained his definition of scuffer from the online Urban Dictionary. It calls them a ‘peasant underclass, known for wearing “prison white” training shoes and Burbery check,’ it adds they like ‘drinking cheap spirits/wines on the street and from a bottle, drink pints of lager until they cannot stand at which point they attempt to fight anybody within arms length’. They are also said to ‘chain smoke, write in pigeon English, constantly swear and spit and regard petty theft and violent crime as a game’.

However, Urban Dictionary also gives another definition as a ‘hegemonic power tool of the state, law enforcer’. Other dictionaries say ‘scuffer’ is merely Northern slang for a policeman.

Mr Pritchard last night said: ‘It is the case that when my route was blocked by police officers I objected. ‘I was, however, neither abusive towards them, nor did I push anyone. I did not use the words ‘Scottish scuffer’. ‘Until the complaint was drawn to my attention I had never heard of, let alone myself used, this expression

Source

It sounds like rather a good word. I will try to remember it. It might come in handy.



28 June, 2009

Leftists being devious about "Hate Crimes" bill?

From the Leftist "Media Matters":

"CNN's Deborah Feyerick reported the charge from "some lawmakers and religious groups" that the hate crimes bill "could be used to criminalize conservative speech on abortion or homosexuality." But she did not note that the bill specifically states, "Nothing in this Act shall be construed to allow prosecution based solely upon an individual's expression of racial, religious, political, or other beliefs."

Source

What the above appears to overlook is that the bill has undergone various changes during its now rather long life and I must confess that there might have been a recent change that has escaped me. As far as I can see, however, Media Matters is referring to an older version of the bill rather than the current one. What is apparently the current text of the bill is here. The definitions it refers to are from H.R.3355 (Violent Crime Control and Law Enforcement Act of 1994) and can be found here. Earlier versions of the bill did explicitly include a statement that speech was not targeted but that has now gone. At the end of the bill there is simply a pointless assertion that the bill does not attack any constitutional protections (such as the 1st Amendment).



Free speech vs. surveillance in the digital age

A good post from a Leftist site:

"Tools of mass communication that were once the province of governments and corporations now fit in your pocket. Cell phones can capture video and send it wirelessly to the Internet. People can send eyewitness accounts, photos and videos, with a few keystrokes, to thousands or even millions via social networking sites. As these technologies have developed, so too has the ability to monitor, filter, censor and block them....

Josh Silver, executive director of Free Press, a media policy group, says the actions of Iran and China should alert us to domestic surveillance issues in the U.S. He told me: “This technology that monitors everything that goes through the Internet is something that works, it’s readily available, and there’s no legislation in the United States that prevents the U.S. government from employing it. ... It’s widely known that the major carriers, particularly AT&T and Verizon, were being asked by the NSA [National Security Agency], by the Bush administration ... to deploy off-the-shelf technology made by some of these companies like Cisco.” The equipment formed the backbone of the “warrantless wiretapping” program.

Thomas Tamm was the Justice Department lawyer who blew the whistle on that program. In 2004, he called The New York Times from a subway pay phone and told reporter Eric Lichtblau about the existence of a secret domestic surveillance program. In 2007, the FBI raided his home and seized three computers and personal files. He still faces possible prosecution. Tamm told me: “I think I put my country first ... our government is still violating the law. I’m convinced ... that a lot more Americans have been illegally wiretapped than we know.”

The warrantless wiretapping program was widely considered illegal. After abruptly switching his position in midcampaign, then-Sen. Barack Obama voted along with most in Congress to grant telecom companies like AT&T and Verizon retroactive immunity from prosecution. The New York Times recently reported that the NSA maintains a database called Pinwale, with millions of intercepted e-mail, including some from former President Bill Clinton.

U.S. Attorney General Eric Holder was recently asked by Sen. Russ Feingold if he felt that the original warrantless wiretap program was illegal:

Feingold: “[I]s there any doubt in your mind that the warrantless wiretapping program was illegal?”

Holder: “Well, I think that the warrantless wiretapping program, as it existed at that point, was certainly unwise, in that it was put together without the approval of Congress.”

Feingold: “But I asked you, Mr. Attorney General, not whether it was unwise, but whether you consider it to have been illegal.”

Holder: “The policy was an unwise one.”

Source

So Holder is leaving the way open to do just what the Left condemned GWB for doing. So if Obama wants to eavesdrop on the conversations of HIS version of "terrorists" -- such as ordinary American gun owners -- he can do so. Rather chilling to free speech!



27 June, 2009

Beware federal meddling with the Internet

We read:

"The Senate Commerce Committee on Tuesday urged President Barack Obama’s pick for chairman of the Federal Communications Commission, Julius Genachowski, to “fix” what many in Congress see as a dysfunctional agency. And Genachowski’s vow at his confirmation hearing to make the FCC “a model for transparency, openness, and fairness” is encouraging—and likely will suffice for him to breeze on through the full Senate.

But Americans should be wary of allowing such a powerful federal agency to start defining what “openness” and “fairness” mean when it comes to regulating the Internet. Genachowski is a firm believer in “net neutrality,” a concept that would shift the management of Internet traffic out of the free market and into the hands of bureaucrats. Net neutrality is a policy in search of a problem to solve—and one that would put barriers in front of a vibrant market that is successfully and quickly meeting the needs of consumers. The market punishes Internet service providers who manage their networks poorly because consumers have a simple recourse: They can pick another ISP. When government starts regulating the flow of Internet traffic in ways that degrade the Web experience, consumers will find the FCC is not so responsive.

Source

Wright State University agrees to recognize Christian student group

We read:

"Officials at Wright State University have agreed to reverse their decision to deny recognition of a Christian student group after receiving letters and public exposure from both the Alliance Defense Fund Center for Academic Freedom and the Foundation for Individual Rights in Education.

WSU officials told Campus Bible Fellowship, which has existed as a registered student organization at the university for more than 30 years, that in order to obtain recognition for the 2009-2010 school year, they would likely need to abandon a requirement that its voting members and officers abide by faith-based principles.

“Christian student groups shouldn’t be discriminated against for their beliefs,” said ADF Legal Counsel Jeremy Tedesco. “Just as other student clubs should not be forced to abandon their beliefs to be recognized by the university, neither should this club. Requiring a Christian club to be run by non-Christians is like requiring a Young Democrats club to be run by Republicans. It makes no sense, and it is unconstitutional. We are pleased that WSU understands this and has demonstrated that it is willing to respect the constitutional rights of the members of Campus Bible Fellowship.”

WSU denied CBF official recognition during the 2009 winter quarter because it requires its voting members and officers to subscribe to the group’s Articles of Faith. CBF sought assistance from FIRE, which issued a letter to the university. WSU granted the group recognition during the 2009 spring quarter but told the group that, in order to retain it for the following academic year, it would likely need to abandon its faith-based principles. When the situation appeared to require litigation, FIRE referred the club to the ADF Center for Academic Freedom, which helped revise CBF’s constitution and provided assistance on other legal matters.

ADF attorneys sent a letter along with CBF’s recent 2009-2010 recognition application to WSU officials. After receiving the letter, WSU officials agreed to allow CBF to keep their faith-based requirements and still register as an official student organization for the upcoming school year.

Source

26 June, 2009

"Secret Flirts" game teaches girls 'toxic' lessons

We read:

"FAMILY groups have attacked a video game that teaches young girls how to flirt, describing it as a dangerous sexualisation of youth culture.

Called Secret Flirts, the game for Nintendo DS claims to show girls how to "make everyone fall for you".

A promotional video providing a walk-through of Secret Flirts starts with a groovy young girl giving a sly wink and a Cupid's arrow piercing a pink heart.

The first "lessons" of the game teach girls to do their make-up and choose clothes and accessories.

The next lesson is to "improve your attraction" by going to a hairdresser, a beauty centre and a gym. Then players are ready to listen to advice from the "Love Coach".

"Become more irresistible day after day – then win the heart of the boy of your dreams," Secret Flirt promises.

Source

Hard to see what's objectionable about it. There is no mention of sex in it as far as I can see. What is wrong with a girl wanting to be attractive? I suspect that it is only dried-out old uglies who are protesting.



Strange new experience: Freedom of speech upheld in Germany

We read:

"A popular website that lets students rate their teachers will remain online after a court ruled against a complaint. Germany's federal court of justice rejected the case of a woman who argued her rights had been infringed by pupils who gave her bad grades.

It found that the rights of the woman, a teacher of German and religion, had not been compromised by the ratings and that pupils had a right to offer an opinion as long as they did not hinder her professionally. "The opinions expressed are neither abusive nor insulting," the court said in a statement. "The plaintiff did not show that she had been harmed in any specific way."

The court said collection, storage, and transmission of ratings by online portal spickmich.de was therefore permissible without the assent of the plaintiff.

The website allows students to award teachers marks on a scale from one (very good) to six (unsatisfactory), the same scale on which German pupils are graded. Categories assessed include "cool and funny," "popular," "motivated," "human," and "good teaching."

The lawyers of the woman, who had been given a rating of 4.3 for her German teaching, argued that the site was unfair and inaccurate because users rate subjects anonymously. This could lead to multiple ratings by the same person, as well as ratings by people with no connection to the school or teacher in question, they argued.

But the court said in this case, the right of the individual to express an opinion outweighed these concerns.

Source

Good that there are some such cases.





25 June, 2009

Jack Black risks fury with Bible rant

We read:

"Jack Black is as black and white as the furry animal he played in Kung Fu Panda when it comes to biblical discussions. His latest outburst may upset a number of religious groups after making jokes about the Bible - insisting the sacred text was written by "an idiot."

World Entertainment News says Black, who was raised as a Jew, dismissed the stories of the Old Testament and admitted he doesn't believe the Biblical writings.

He says, "Do you believe that God came down and went 'I have to make the Earth'? And then said, 'I'm going to invent nighttime and daytime'. You don't invent nighttime, it's just the Earth turning. It was written by kind of an idiot. "He didn't know basic stuff. I don't believe that God - and there may be a God, I'm not saying there isn't.

Source

There have of course been riots in the streets over this and death threats from angry Christians. Sorry! Wrong religion.



Once again, the thoughts come out in a heated moment

I don't suppose it's big news but many homosexuals don't think very highly of one-another either:

"Police have charged the tour manager of the Black Eyed Peas with assault after he allegedly gave celebrity blogger Perez Hilton a black eye outside a Toronto nightclub.

Hilton said he got into an argument with band members Fergie and will.i.am at the Cobra nightclub early Monday morning and was punched outside by Polo Molina, the band's tour manager. They were at the club following a Sunday night video awards show.

Hilton, who is openly gay, said in interview with The Associated Press that he called will.i.am a "faggot," a gay slur, inside the club after the musician told the blogger not to write about his band on his Web site.

Source

The homosexual "community" now seems intent on excommunicating their one-time hero over his use of such a naughty word. Details of the furore here.



24 June, 2009

No free speech for tobacco companies?

We read:

"The marketing and advertising restrictions in the tobacco law that Congress passed last week are likely to be challenged in court on free-speech grounds. But supporters of the legislation say they drafted the law carefully to comply with the First Amendment. The law's ban on outdoor advertising within 1,000 feet of schools and playgrounds would effectively outlaw legal advertising in many cities, critics of the prohibition said. And restricting stores and many forms of print advertising to black-and-white text, as the law specifies, would interfere with legitimate communication to adults, tobacco companies and advertising groups said in letters to Congress and interviews over the last week, the NY Times reports.

The controversy, legal experts say, involves tension between the right of tobacco companies to communicate with adult smokers and the public interest in preventing young people from smoking. Opponents of the new strictures, including the Association of National Advertisers and the American Civil Liberties Union, predict that federal courts will throw out the new marketing restrictions. They say, for example, a 2001 Supreme Court decision struck down a Massachusetts rule that had imposed a similar ban on advertising within 1,000 feet of schools, reports Times writer Duff Wilson.

Source

Israel jails journalists for Gaza invasion report

We read:

"An Israeli court has jailed two journalists for two months for reporting troop movements in Israel in the hour before Israeli forces entered the Gaza Strip at the start of an invasion in January. The two men, both Palestinian residents of Israeli-occupied East Jerusalem, were convicted on Sunday of breaching military censorship regulations in their reports on troop movements for Iranian media from the Israeli side of Gaza’s border on Jan. 3. Journalists working in Israel are, in principle, not legally allowed to report any military or security developments without first clearing their report with the military censor.”

Source

They would have been shot as traitors in an earlier era. Military censorship has the very important aim of saving lives among the troops



23 June, 2009

Sometimes the thoughts come out

An Australian-born tennis star uses a derogatory South African term:

"[West Australian] teen tennis star Brydan Klein has been fined the maximum possible amount by the ATP for racially abusing a South African opponent during a tournament in the UK.

Klein was suspended by the Australian Institute of Sport after he was accused of calling Raven Klaasen a "f***ing kaffir" during the clash at a tournament in Eastbourne.

And despite issuing a public apology, the ATP handed down a $14,000 fine to Klein, saying further penalties could arise out of a full investigation. In a statement, Klein said he deeply regretted his actions.

Source

This is an interesting exercise in onomastics (the study of names) for me. From the Dutch surname and brown skin, Klaasen is presumably what was once called a "Cape Coloured" (person of mixed race) and the epithet would have been very wounding to him -- as Cape Coloureds always hated being lumped in with the "Bantu" (an official term for wholly native Africans).

But the most interesting thing is where Klein got the term from. It is normally used in Africa only. Western Australia does have a large number of white refugees from South Africa so that may be it. A more remote possibility centres on the fact that "Klein" is often a Jewish surname and South Africa's once-large Jewish population has been moving out of what they rightly perceive as a dangerous place for a long time now. So maybe Klein's parents were South African Jews and he learnt the term from them. There seems to be nothing on the net to say where they come from. On the other hand, Klein does not look at all Jewish. But a "Jewish" look is far from universal among Jews so that tells us nothing.

Onomastics aside, the interesting thing is that Klein clearly thought of Klaasen as a "Kaffir" and it came out in a heated moment. You can suppress speech but you cannot suppress thought. I would think that it is surely best to have thoughts out in the open. Speech is often a poor predictor of behaviour but if thoughts were allowed to be freely expressed it might not be.

The term "Kaffir" is not always derogatory. British parliamentary enquiries into the welfare of the South African native blacks in the 19th century used that term for them (although spelled "Caffre") even though the whole purpose of the enquiry was broadly sympathetic to them. In Apartheid-era South Africa it was often used simply as a racial classifier, though it did also tend to imply a judgment of racial inferiority. It is very risky for a white to use the term at all in South Africa today, of course, though some of the older generation still do. I said a bit more about "Kaffir" on April 23.



German accent now incorrect

Not allowed to refer to the fact that the Nazis were German?

"The Conservative leader used a discussion about his opposition to ID cards to do what appeared to be an impression of a Nazi officer. Adopting an exaggerated German accent, he asked the crowd 'Where are your papers?'

The joke was supposed to be a comment on the draconian nature of the ID card scheme. But it drew gasps from listening voters at the question and answer session in Norwich, and did not quite yield the response he was going for. Critics fear it could even trigger an embarrassing diplomatic row between the would-be Prime Minister and Germany.

A woman in the audience raised her hand and asked him: 'I wonder about the wisdom of you adopting a German accent?'

Mr Cameron's patronising response was worthy of the notoriously offensive hotel boss in the 1970s sitcom Fawlty Towers - in the iconic scene where he addresses German guests - explaining to her: 'It was meant to be light-hearted.'

Source

22 June, 2009

Britain: Must not mention that many female tennis players look attractive

We read:

"As a former Wimbledon champion, Michael Stich might be expected to have an expert appreciation for the skill and dedication required to play tennis at its highest level.

But on the eve of this year’s tournament, the BBC Radio 5 Live commentator has caused outrage among the sport’s female stars by claiming their role is as much about ‘selling sex’ on court as it is about their sporting prowess....

However, not everyone took offence. Two-time Wimbledon singles winner Serena Williams admitted: ‘Sex sells! It’s great for Angelina Jolie and it’s true

Source

A small victory for political free speech

We read:

"A recent federal court decision has grassroots political activists briefly clinking their champagne glasses. Republicans should be taking notes. While the last decade’s campaign finance statutes have almost exclusively benefited unions and liberal causes, recent and pending litigation may finally turn the tide in favor of center-right constituencies.

On May 26, U.S. District Judge Stephan Mickle struck down Florida’s highly restrictive electioneering communications law. The ruling frees community groups to speak freely about candidates and issues without being bogged down in bureaucratic red tape.

Under the law, any group referencing a candidate or ballot issue on any public newsletter or website was required to register with the government and report all spending and donors, including those whose support was never intended to result in political speech. Individuals were required to register after spending just $100 on any political issue. Any failure to comply could have resulted in fines and jail time.

Mickle’s ruling chided Florida’s legislature for its brazenness. “While it is true that the legislature has the power to regulate elections, it does not have the power to regulate purely political discussions about elections,” he wrote.

Florida’s aggressive approach is far from isolated. Legislatures across the nation passed similar statutes in the aftermath of the 2003 U.S. Supreme Court’s decision in McConnell v. Federal Elections Commission, which upheld strict restrictions on electioneering communications and soft money.

Source