In the small town of Aspen, CO- home to exceptional skiing and quaint shops (and formerly John Denver), a controversy has brewed. It appears there is a film on the internet titled “Judea Declares War on Germany.” I haven’t seen it, nor have I even heard of it before this recent flap. By the title, I am surmising the film bends towards the anti-Semitic and attempts to justify the Nazi led attempt at genocide.The controversy arrives courtesy of Steve Campbell of Glenwood Springs, CO. He asked local television station GrassRoots TV to air the film. Knowing the film would be extremely controversial, the station’s board of directors opened the subject for debate. Most people haven’t seen the film, but believe it is a film depicting denial of the holocaust. But Campbell says the film does not deny the holocaust, but tries to show other evidence that is not widely discussed.
It seems to me, by the title and the description given by Campbell, that the film is severely titled against the Jews. An attempt to justify the attempted genocide by Nazi Germany. Of course, if the people who believe in censorship have their way, the good folks in Roaring Fork Valley may never know what the film depicts.
Believe me, I can understand, and have a hard time not siding with, the good, decent, upstanding folks who don’t want this film aired. More than the likely the film is not more than a pack of vile, disgusting half-truths and out-and-out lies. But does that mean it should be banned? It was banned in Australia already. Of course, it can’t be shown in France or Germany because holocaust denial is actually a crime in those places. Are we to do that here as well? Are we to make a crime out of exercising one’s free speech?
While the Constitution of the United States of America guarantees us, each and every one of us, free speech, it guarantees nothing in the way of a forum for that speech. It does not dictate that every television or radio station or newspaper or magazine must broadcast our speech, or give any air or print time to that speech. So while the GrassRoots TV station will be completely within its rights to not air the film, I tend to think along the lines of Harvie Branscomb who, at the meeting, declared:
“I’m scared of information totalitarianism.â€
As well as Sheila Markowitz, of Glenwood Springs, CO who, at the same meeting, stated:
“I am afraid when I’m told I can’t see something, I would rather have this be seen and let people decide.â€
Look, people by and large are not idiots. Even the lefties out in Aspen, CO are not idiots. Heck, if they can afford to live in Aspen, they have to be doing something right. By refusing to allow this film to be seen, the board is telling the folks of Roaring Fork Valley that they are too stupid to know what is truth and what is fiction. That they are so stupid they will all suddenly become skinheads just by watching this film.
I know this much, if someone says that I can’t watch a film or read a book because it is bad for me, I’m pretty much going to run out and do just that. I would have to see what is so bad that it required being banned. I remember the movie “Children of the Damned” when I was quite a bit younger. I remember wanting so badly to see that movie because the newspaper adverts declared in big bold letters “Banned in Cleveland” – or it could have been Chicago, or some other city, but that isn’t the point – the point is, by declaring that movie to be banned I just had to see the movie! I had to see what it was about. I didn’t like the movie much as I recall, it seemed fairly banal. But it got me to see it.
Now I’m probably going to feel the inexplicable need to hunt down this movie and watch it. Just because the government of Australia says their citizens can’t, and even more so because it seems like the board of directors at GrassRoots TV will also tell their viewing audience they can’t see it either. I’m pretty sure I can find the thing on the YouTube. source
I feel bad for my kids. I really do. It has to suck to be a kid in this day and age. First, one learns in kindergarten they have to be wary of who they speak with and how they touch them. We have seen incidents where five year old kids are charged with sexual harassment because they give their kindergarten teacher a hug. Or because they give another school mate a hug or a peck on the cheek.
Add to this the fact that now, at Percy Julian Middle School in Oak Park, ILL kids are not even allowed to hug anyone on school grounds…at all….ever. Hugging, banned. I try to wrap my mind around this whole deal, but I am miserably failiing. The reason, according to the principal, is because some students were forming what she called “hugging lines” in the hallways, giving each other hugs and making it difficult for some kids to get through the hallways. Okay, sure, there is a problem there, but really, is banning hugs the answer? Sadly, Victoria Sharts (the principal – I don’t think, in this case, ‘your principal is your ‘pal’ really fits here), believes that people should only hug at airports and family renuions. That makes me sad, really. That this lady is so devoid of emotion and any kind of caring human contact that she feels hugs are inappropriate anywhere by an airport or family reunion. It makes me wonder how such a cold person could be in charge of a middle school.
In addition to the hugging thing, over to the left a bit, and down the map we look at Colorado Springs, CO. There, the elementary schools have banned the age old game of tag. Yes, that is correct, it is not unlawful to play tag at recess in Colorado Springs, CO. It seems that some kids that played tag, didn’t want to be chased. So instead of telling the kids “don’t play tag” they just ban the whole shebang. It is like the little girl several years back who was being charged with assault for hitting a kid with a ball while they were playing…dodgeball. If one doesn’t want to be hit with a ball, don’t play dodgeball. If one doesn’t want to be chased, don’t play tag. But instead of just telling the kid not to play tag, the make it so no one can play tag. I suppose that way the kid who didn’t like being chased doesn’t feel like an outsider. Heck no, they probably just feel ostracized now. I know what my kids are like. And if this had happened to them, the whiny cry-baby kid would certainly not be welcome in any other games played. They would go out of their way to keep away from him. After all, if the kid is slow, does that mean a foot race is no longer a valid option at recess?
And what, to many kids, is one of the greatest holidays of all time is under attack as well. The holiday where kids get loads of candy, don’t have to be good, don’t have to wait for some bearded fat man, and can wear a disguise. Yes, I’m speaking of Halloween. The Kohl Elementary School in Broomfield, CO (again with the Coloradoans – when I lived there, we used to joke that Colorado was being Californicated – I guess that is over and the Californicators have won) has eliminated their Halloween celebration. In its place is – you guessed it – a “Fall Festival”. What the heck is a Fall Festival? And why are we celebrating the Fall? What does the Fall do that is so special it requires a festival? My guess is, some dimwitted parents of some kid complained that Halloween – for whatever reason – was simply inappropriate. So, in order to be ‘inclusive’ the school scraps Halloween, and replaces with this some crap festival. It seems to me it would have been better to just scrap the whole thing altogether. Not have any celebration in the fall. It isn’t like the kids are not going to celebrate Halloween anyway. They are still going to dress up in costumes and go trick or treating. They are still going to stay up light on 31 October eating way too much candy. The only thing this accomplishes is 1) kids don’t get to wear their costumes to school and 2) teachers have to come up with some lame excuse as to why they are having a great big party on 5 Oct.
No way. For all those who think they would like a second go ’round at youth, you can have it, I don’t want it. When I was a kid, we ran the neighborhood. In school we played tag, and dodgeball, and we had schoolyard fights. And you know what? Never were the police called. Not once was a kid arrested or accused or charged with anything. Usually we ended up in the principal’s office. And later that night we would end up on the wrong side of dad’s belt. But today? No way Jose. I’ll leave the mess that is childhood today to the kids.
The problem with so-called hate crimes is, that almost every crime can be construed as a hate crime. The problem with that is, when nearly every crime is a hate crime, the heinousness that the label of ‘hate crime’ is supposed to portray, becomes watered down. It gets to the point (and I think we are arriving there pretty fast) where there are so many actions – many terribly minor – that are classified as ‘hate crimes’ that people just quit thinking of a ‘hate crime’ as something particularly heinous.
Case in point, Tabitha Vandyke, a PetSmart employee and a lesbian. Some numb-nuts wrote “die [expletive]” on the inside of her locker at work. The police, of course, are calling it a hate crime. Now, sure, it was insensitive, offensive, rude and vandalism…but a hate crime? Whatever.
Another case in point, one or more numb-nuts ran around a Hartford, Conn neighborhood creating graffiti on peoples’ cars and garages. Some of the symbols scribbled were swastikas. Now the police are investigating it as a hate crime. It doesn’t appear that any one person, or type of person was targeted for this graffiti spree, but what the heck, let’ all jump on the hate crime bandwagon and call it that.
It is incidents like these (and there are plenty) that weaken the whole idea of a ‘hate crime’. It is incidents like these that will mean the demise of what the designation of ‘hate crime’ was supposed to be. Simply calling someone a name, or displaying a horrible symbol is not a hate crime people.
*** CONTENT WARNING THE CONTENTS OF THIS RANT CONTAIN WORDS THAT ARE VULGAR AND OFFENSIVE. WHILE I USUALLY KEEP MY POSTS CLEAN, AND RATHER ‘PG’ RATED, I FELT I COULD NOT RANT ABOUT THIS SUBJECT, AND MAINTAIN THAT COMPOSURE, SO I AM GIVING WARNING NOW. IF THE READER IS OFFENDED BY WORDS, PLEASE DO NOT READ FURTHER – YOU HAVE BEEN WARNED ***
This is disturbing to me. Back in March the Guardian Unlimited reported the New York City council voted unanimously to ban the word ‘nigger’ from New York City. Yes, I know, it was a symbolic ban. And there is not teeth in the ban, and even if there were, there is no way to enforce the ban. And frankly, banning the word nigger is not really a problem. But what is coming out of that ban is a problem.
Bigsibling is shocked! Shocked I tell you! A study at UCLA (where else?) revealed that women are attracted to men with….wait for it…muscles. A study was needed to figure this out. While I would hope to high heaven that no hard-earned tax dollars went to this study, I fear my hopes would be quickly dashed if the financing of such an important and relative study were revealed.
After all, just because the hard chiseled muscle bound guys always have women hanging of their arms, doesn’t mean that women actually like muscular men better than non-muscular men. It only shows that they like to hang off their arms.
Armed with this information, the world is a much better, safer and cleaner place to live. With this kind of knowledge, we are on the verge of solving the problems of world hunger, Islamofascists, Fashinistas and even…dare I say it?…global warming!
Just when I start to think it can’t get any worse, something like this comes along. This is the story of a lady who has allergies. Now, my wife has allergies. My kids have allergies. And I can sympathize with this lady for her allergies. She doesn’t have the regular kind of allergies. No, this woman is allergic to certain chemicals and detergents. So much so that if her co-workers wear perfume, she gets sick, takes some time off, and has even landed in the hospital.
A rational, reasonable person with the problem might want to take steps to avoid this problem. They might want to, oh, say wear a mask when around the offensive perfumed ladies of the office. They might…say…talk to their boss about possibly getting a seating place away from the others, something of a ‘non-perfuming’ section.
But that is not what Miss-I-can’t-be-around-anything-that-smells-nice does. What she decides is the best course of action is instead of trying to do something to make herself more comfortable in her environment, she wants to make everyone else change so she can be more comfortable. She wants to have perfume (and I suppose smelly soaps as well) banned in the workplace. That’s right folks. This lady, instead of taking measures to make herself feel better, is suing the city of Detroit to make them ban perfume.
She claims to have problems even in the detergent section in shops. She can’t wear perfume, she can’t use detergent. So it is only natural for her to want to make everybody just like her. To want to force other people to be as she has to be. Frankly, I am not certain that I would want to work with a person who doesn’t wear perfume, and can’t use detergent. It is not that difficult to imagine what an office would smell like in short order if everyone quit wearing perfume, aftershave, etc and stopped using detergents.
We are becoming, instead of a nation of the people, by the people and for the people, a nation of the person, by the person and especially for the person. This lady is a prime example of the increasing selfishness of people in America. Instead of taking measures to ensure she is less discomforted by her surrounding – measures that would only impact her – she is trying to force the environment around her to bend to her wants.
I have some ’splainin to do here. First off, this is my blog. I own it. I devise the content for it. I pay the server space to house it. I supply the database that drives it. I have invested time and effort and little money in this baby. I like this blog. The reason this blog exists is because this beaner has opinions and ideas, and he wants to voice them. That is the beauty of the internet. The little guy is no longer silenced, but can be heard by many, many peoples of all walks of life.
What this blog is NOT is a forum for personal grievances, vendettas or other attacks. This is not a place where I will allow one visitor to maliciously demean and launch personal attacks against another visitor. With that in mind, I have been exchanging emails with a visitor who’s comment on a post I have not allowed to be posted. The comment follows:
[NAME REMOVED], has your psychiatrist been in touch with you yet? He’s looking for you, something about they released you too soon. Apparently only spending one year in that psychiatric unit wasn’t enough. I gave him your home address, I’m sure it won’t be long till the men in the white coats are knocking at your door – again.
Maybe I am just over sensitive. But this type of stuff I will not allow. It is unnecessary, and it’s only purpose is to try and cause emotional distress against one of my visitors. What is also disturbing about this post, is the reference to her “home address.” The poster seems to me to be maybe a little unstable – maybe not – but if he has this kind of hatred for her, and has her home address, who knows? The email exchange is below:
—————————- Original Message —————————-
Subject: Re: You comment at The Bigsibling Blog
From: bigsibling at bigsibling dot com
Date: Wed, June 13, 2007 9:24 am
To: [NAME REMOVED]
————————————————————————–
Here is the difference [NAME REMOVED], when she posted her criticism of you, she supplied her opinion and supporting links. Whereas you merely lashed out with a personal attack. I cannot control that you believe she ‘cyberstalks’ you.
Now, I fully understand, and even expect you to not grasp the almost, but not quite, completely unsubtle differences between her comment and your response.
I have no problem with people who disagree with me, and their comments and responses are more than welcome. But demeaning personal attacks are not welcome when launched against my visitors.
You can attack me all you want. Believe me, this beaner has seen more hatred directed against my people than you have killed terrorists (which, according to you, is quite a lot).
Again, I will not allow you to direct personal attacks against my visitors using my bandwidth, my database and my storage.
Thank you for visiting, and I certainly hope you continue to visit and leave comments.
=Bigsibling
[NAME REMOVED] is my cyberstalker. She’s all over the net, trashing me,
you allow this, yet you fail to allow me to respond to her. Most sites
have banned her.
[NAME REMOVED]
[LOCATION REMOVED]
Serving God and Country
http://[LINK REMOVED]
http://[LINK REMOVED]
—– Original Message —-
From: “bigsibling at bigsibling dot com”
To: [NAME REMOVED]
Sent: Wednesday, June 13, 2007 8:59:07 AM
Subject: You comment at The Bigsibling Blog
[NAME REMOVED],
I am deleting the message you left for [NAME REMOVED] at my blog
(http://www.bigsibling.com) because if you want to pick a fight with her,
or otherwise spew your hatred of her, please do so on your own blog, or in
her forums (http://[LINK REMOVED]). My blog is not the place to air
and/or resolve personal grievances.
But thanks for visiting! I do appreciate anyone who stops by.
=Bigsibling
To be certain, I have contacted the person this attack was directed against, and let her know about his post – which I can certainly see as a veiled threat (mentioning her home address and people coming to her door and what-not).
Oh, and I’ll update this post if new emails are exchanged. Just so everything it out and in the open. I have removed names, email and website addresses.
Photo of Greensburg aftermath stolen from the Associated Press (thanks in advance or not suing me!)
Greensburg, Kansas. For those who have had their heads in a hole, this was the town that, on Friday night, was wiped off the face of the earth by a 1.7 mile wide category EF-5 tornado with reported winds of over 200 miles per hour. That is faster than most NASCAR drivers travel.
Yesterday Kathleen Sebelius, the governer of Kansas was complaining about how there aren’t enough National Guard troops and equipment in Kansas to send proper aid to the folks in Greensburg because they are all in Iraq and Afganistan.
This morning on CNN, Gov. Kathleen Sebelius (D) said that the state is missing vital National Guard equipment because of the wars in Iraq and Afghanistan. Usually the state has approximately 70-80 percent of its equipment at any given time, but it currently has just 40-50 percent. She added that these shortages “will just make it [recovery] that much slower.”
This sounds horrendous – unless you hear from the folks of Greensburg themselves.
Only hours after the town was flattened, [state senator Tim] Huelskamp said, people were already griping – not because the government wasn’t there with its porta-potties, but because they were there and in the way.
In Greensburg, the ‘first responders’ were not the federal government, or the state government, or the Red Cross, or Salvation Army or anyone else. In Greensburg, the ‘first-responders’ were the citizens of Greensburg, and those from neighboring towns, farms and ranches.
By the time any official government response was sent, the streets of Greensburg were already cleared. People were already being moved and cared for. The neighboring towns sent buses and cars and trucks with winches. They cleared the streets and accounted for everyone. Then the official first responders showed up and kept the good townsfolk of Greensburg et al. from doing what needed to be done.
“It’s a very unique situation,” she [Sharon Watson of the Kansas Emergency Management Office] explained. “It’s not like Katrina. The scale is smaller, but with Katrina, you still had something left. Here – it’s hard to comprehend, but here there is nothing. It’s a complete loss. So we have to make sure it’s safe.”
Well, just what would we do without the government around to protect us from ourselves? It seems to me the good folks of Greensburg had a handle on the situation, and the KEMO people should have sat back and watched and taken notes so they would know what to do in the future.
Yes, Greensburg, Kansas will be rebuilt. And it will cost the tax payers of the United States much less per capita than it would had this happened on either of the coasts. This is because the people who live in Greensburg are Kansans. They built the town the first time without any assistance from good ol’ Uncle Sam, and they’ll do it again. The folks of Greensburg still maintain the independent pioneer spirit that built this nation. The folks of Greensburg still buy into the John Wayne spirit. The rest of the nation could take a lesson from the good people of Greensburg, Kansas.
Some people. Some people give Christians a bad name. One of those people is Rodney Wright. Rodney is black, and a Christian. He is also (presumably) an American. The Islamic Center of South Florida needs and/or wants a bigger mosque (doesn’t matter which). They have the money to pay for the land and build the mosque. They chose the Florida community of Pompano Beach in which to build their new 29K sq ft. mosque.
Then along comes Rodney. He doesn’t like Islam, thinks Islam is the religion of the devil and believes that Muslims, by and large, are all terrorists. Rodney files a suit in court to try and prevent the mosque from being built. The question is…why? He states that the mosque “presents a substantial harm to the well-being, safety and health” of the community.
I get his point. He’s an idiot, but I do get his point. He doesn’t want the mosque because the people using it would be Muslims, and let’s face it, 100% of the hijackers of 9/11 and 100% of the insurgents killing our good soldiers, seamen, airmen and marines in Iraq are Muslim.
I can see where his misguidedness comes from. But because I can understand his lunacy, does not mean it is not lunacy. Mosque in my neighborhood? No problems. Let ‘em build it. The problem I would have is when (and I believe it would be a when, not an if), when those that frequent the mosque begin to complain about the behavior of the neighborhood. About the people next door who are barbecuing ribs, or roasting a pig in their backyard. Complaining about the way the women in the neighborhood dress.
This is where I would start to have a problem. When they start to demand that the neighborhood conform to their way of thinking so as not to offend them. That is where the problem would start for me. But until then, everything would be peachy. That is the American way. Live and let live, just don’t mess with me.
Crescent of Betrayal Blogroll
Kansas Bloggers
Stumble it!
About
