Comments about Sue Blackwell demands freedom of speech for Hizbullah and Hamas but not for Engage :
Paul Miller posted on July 03, 2007 at 01:06:56 PM
It is not inconsistent to be against anti-Semitism and Holocaust-denial yet to call for free speech for anti-Semites and Holocaust-deniers.
It IS inconsistent to call for free speech for anti-Semites and Holocaust-deniers yet to threaten to bring legal action against one's interlocuter in a debate in order to silence him. That is because if anti-Semites and Holocaust-deniers ought to be allowed to say whatever they please (which in my opinion they indeed ought to be allowed to do) then certainly ANYONE else ought to be allowed to say whatever they please, too (which I believe anyone ought indeed to be allowed to do).
It IS inconsistent to call for free speech for anti-Semites and Holocaust-deniers yet to threaten to bring legal action against one's interlocuter in a debate in order to silence him. That is because if anti-Semites and Holocaust-deniers ought to be allowed to say whatever they please (which in my opinion they indeed ought to be allowed to do) then certainly ANYONE else ought to be allowed to say whatever they please, too (which I believe anyone ought indeed to be allowed to do).
Bill posted on July 03, 2007 at 04:00:02 PM
Let's see, they're using religious arguments to justify killing Jews. That's not anti-semitism or holocaust denial or incitement to genocide. It’s religious expression.
Uh.... As dumb as this is, I’d step carefully here. Coupling this with what Blackwell is trying to pull on Jon Pike, it hits me as a half-baked way to repeat the following stunt to use dodgy rules to create the textbook example of the Chilling Environment:
This school year, San Francisco State University tried to shut up and shut down their local conservative group by playing the god-card, *themselves*! (Thank's to Brian, I have to side with the other side *again*.) In that case, they brought charges against them for stepping on flags belonging to Hamas and Hezbollah, both to protest terrorism. BUT, since the flags had the word "god" written in Arabic script, they were brought up on charges of religious defamation (which is still constitutionally protected speech in California even at private schools) and threatented to dissolve the chapter. As such, SFSU presented a clear impression that they were out to shut them up for the semester while the charges were "pending due process," thus putting them in operational limbo while their accusers could hammer on them under the guise of critizing people who were "already under investigation".
That the people managing the charges never questioned that using god's name to justify terrorism was real defamation to peaceful religionists itself showed a clear double standard since the charge-bringer-upper at SFSU has more legal status in the short term than any constitutional protections due to the chargee. Despite their claims of following due process the delay provided plenty of time for the chargers to change their narrative more than once as well as hang a sword of the charged students head for almost a semester while their legal aid talked to a brick wall. The net effect is that you can use tactically mismanaged "due process" to safely run your own defamation campaign against somone with whom you have disagreement until a hearing well out in the future -- under the guise of *them* defaming *you.*
The students were "acquitted" but it still was no picnic for them since there still could be institutional retaliation against them.
Now since Blackwell is at another institution than Jon, she doesn’t have a back door to pull those kind of shenanigans on Pike or Engage for that matter since it’s "national" except for anyone at her school. But no doubt someone will find issue with Engage posting Article 7 in a manner that does not put these groups in a positive light.
Close this windowUh.... As dumb as this is, I’d step carefully here. Coupling this with what Blackwell is trying to pull on Jon Pike, it hits me as a half-baked way to repeat the following stunt to use dodgy rules to create the textbook example of the Chilling Environment:
This school year, San Francisco State University tried to shut up and shut down their local conservative group by playing the god-card, *themselves*! (Thank's to Brian, I have to side with the other side *again*.) In that case, they brought charges against them for stepping on flags belonging to Hamas and Hezbollah, both to protest terrorism. BUT, since the flags had the word "god" written in Arabic script, they were brought up on charges of religious defamation (which is still constitutionally protected speech in California even at private schools) and threatented to dissolve the chapter. As such, SFSU presented a clear impression that they were out to shut them up for the semester while the charges were "pending due process," thus putting them in operational limbo while their accusers could hammer on them under the guise of critizing people who were "already under investigation".
That the people managing the charges never questioned that using god's name to justify terrorism was real defamation to peaceful religionists itself showed a clear double standard since the charge-bringer-upper at SFSU has more legal status in the short term than any constitutional protections due to the chargee. Despite their claims of following due process the delay provided plenty of time for the chargers to change their narrative more than once as well as hang a sword of the charged students head for almost a semester while their legal aid talked to a brick wall. The net effect is that you can use tactically mismanaged "due process" to safely run your own defamation campaign against somone with whom you have disagreement until a hearing well out in the future -- under the guise of *them* defaming *you.*
The students were "acquitted" but it still was no picnic for them since there still could be institutional retaliation against them.
Now since Blackwell is at another institution than Jon, she doesn’t have a back door to pull those kind of shenanigans on Pike or Engage for that matter since it’s "national" except for anyone at her school. But no doubt someone will find issue with Engage posting Article 7 in a manner that does not put these groups in a positive light.