Welcome to AikiWeb Aikido Information
AikiWeb: The Source for Aikido Information
AikiWeb's principal purpose is to serve the Internet community as a repository and dissemination point for aikido information.

Sections
home
aikido articles
columns

Discussions
forums
aikiblogs

Databases
dojo search
seminars
image gallery
supplies
links directory

Reviews
book reviews
video reviews
dvd reviews
equip. reviews

News
submit
archive

Miscellaneous
newsletter
rss feeds
polls
about

Follow us on



Home > AikiWeb Aikido Forums
Go Back   AikiWeb Aikido Forums > Open Discussions

Hello and thank you for visiting AikiWeb, the world's most active online Aikido community! This site is home to over 22,000 aikido practitioners from around the world and covers a wide range of aikido topics including techniques, philosophy, history, humor, beginner issues, the marketplace, and more.

If you wish to join in the discussions or use the other advanced features available, you will need to register first. Registration is absolutely free and takes only a few minutes to complete so sign up today!

Reply
 
Thread Tools
Old 10-23-2006, 02:40 PM   #1
Neil Mick
Dojo: Aikido of Santa Cruz
Location: Santa Cruz, CA
Join Date: Jun 2002
Posts: 225
Offline
Freaky! T-shirt Terrorism

Is your T-shirt harboring terrorists?

I just bought this T-shirt from here, after hearing the story of the eevel T-shirt (I know, I'm a sucker for dissing the Man).

Maybe, after reading the story of this infernal apparel, you'll be inspired to do the same. But, I'd consider carefully, wearing it on ferries, planes, or public transit (esp in NY). Your choice of clothing that day might just turn into a battle over your right to free speech.

Apparently, Raed Jarrar was

Quote:
forced to remove a T-shirt that bore the words "We will not be silent" before boarding a flight at New York.
Raed Jarrar said security officials warned him his clothing was offensive after he checked in for a JetBlue flight to California on 12 August.

Mr Jarrar said he was shocked such an action could be taken in the US.

US transport officials are conducting an inquiry after a complaint from the US Arab Anti-Discrimination Committee.

JetBlue said it was also investigating the incident but a spokeswoman said: "We're not clear exactly what happened."
When they told him to remove the eevel T,

Quote:
He refused, arguing that the slogan was not offensive and citing his constitutional rights to free expression.

Mr Jarrar later told a New York radio station: "I grew up and spent all my life living under authoritarian regimes and I know that these things happen.

"But I'm shocked that they happened to me here, in the US."

After a difficult exchange with airline staff, Mr Jarrar was persuaded to wear another T-shirt bought for him at the airport shop.
Apparently, the shirt o' satan cropped up again, when Stephanie Schwartz dared to wear the demonic apparel on a Staten Island ferry.

Quote:
AMY GOODMAN: And tell us exactly what happened and when it happened.

STEPHANIE SCHWARTZ: Sure. Two weeks ago, I got on the Staten Island Ferry. It was a Monday morning, and I was wearing this t-shirt.

AMY GOODMAN: And for our radio listeners, what does it say?

STEPHANIE SCHWARTZ: It says, "We will not be silent," both in Arabic and then in English. And as soon as my friends and I sat down on the ferry, four Coast guard -- armed Coast Guard officers came and, you know, positioned themselves around us and -- you know, a lot of times on the ferry, you'll see Coast Guard people patrolling, but I've never seen four people stand in one place that long. And I kind of joked to my friends, like, "Do you think it's because of my t-shirt?" But I didn't really believe that they would have made such a big deal about it. And we sat there for the half-hour ferry ride, and they didn't move.

And as I was getting off the boat, I was stopped by a security guard who said, you know, "Excuse me, Miss, but you better not wear that shirt on the ferry again." And I was kind of taken aback. "Excuse me? You know, what are you talking about?" And he said, "Well, I don't think it's safe. This is a high-security area." And, you know, I asked him, "Well, what's unsafe about this shirt? What do you think it means?" And he didn't actually comment on what the shirt meant. He just asked me, you know, "Isn't it in Arabic?" And I said, well, you know -- I just kind of looked at him incredulously. I couldn't believe he was actually saying that.

And he said, "Well, you remember what happened on that JetBlue flight?" referencing over the summer, when Raed Jarrar was wearing the same shirt boarding a JetBlue flight at JFK. And I said, "Yeah, I remember that incident. I think it was racial profiling, because they didn't allow him to wear the shirt on the plane, simply because it was in Arabic, and they said they didn't have a translator to tell them what it meant." And he said, you know, "Well, obviously you're not a threat to us, but someone else wearing that shirt might be." And, you know, I asked him if he meant by that that, you know, an Arab wearing a shirt with Arabic script on it would be considered a terrorist. And he didn't answer the question. He just told me again that I better not wear this shirt on the ferry.
OK, so what does "We Will Not Be Silent," mean?

We Will Not Be Silent: Movement Grows to Challenge Racial Profiling at Airports

Quote:
LAURIE ARBEITER: Well, the original statement was made by a student resistance movement in Nazi Germany called the White Rose. They tried to encourage the German population to resist the Nazis and Hitler by sending leaflets out into the German population. And the fourth leaflet they signed, "We Will Not Be Silent," and that was why we took that statement and translated it into those four languages that we wear today.
The White Rose

Quote:
White Rose (German: die Weiße Rose) was a World War II non-violent resistance group in Germany famous for a leaflet campaign in which they called for active opposition to the Nazi regime.

The group initially consisted of five students, all in their early twenties at Munich University. Between June 1942 to February 1943 they prepared and distributed six different leaflets, in which they called for an end to Nazi oppression and tyranny through active opposition of the German people. Hans Scholl and his sister Sophie led the rest of the group, including Christoph Probst, Alexander Schmorell and Willi Graf. They were joined by a professor, Kurt Huber, who drafted the final two leaflets. All six members of this group were arrested, tried, convicted and executed by beheading. A seventh leaflet was found in possession of the students at the time of their arrest by the Gestapo.
So...to put this all together: Jet Blue, the Staten Island ferry, and (possibly?) other transit's in and around NY (poss elsewhere?) are trying to force people to remove clothing printed with a message, originally a slogan from a student anti-Nazi group, that now expresses solidarity and anti-war sentiment.

And thy want ppl to remove it, because it is offensive???

To whom....Fascists?

And, Raed Jarrar was told that wearing something in Arabic at an airport is like

Quote:
RAED JARRAR: "going to a bank and wearing a t-shirt that reads, "I'm a robber.""
Really, there's only one, reasonable response to that:

We Will Not Be Silent
  Reply With Quote
Old 10-23-2006, 04:17 PM   #2
Hogan
Join Date: Jul 2001
Posts: 106
Offline
Re: T-shirt Terrorism

I'm more concerned about a little 90-something woman going on trial for daring to say that muslim headscarves on women dated to sexual rites...

I'm aghast!

http://theaustralian.news.com.au/sto...0-2703,00.html
  Reply With Quote
Old 10-23-2006, 10:00 PM   #3
roninroshi
 
roninroshi's Avatar
Location: MT
Join Date: Aug 2006
Posts: 50
United_States
Offline
Re: T-shirt Terrorism

We've gone over the edge w/this GWB paranoid foolishness!!! Terrorist's under every leaf and behind every blade of grass...
  Reply With Quote
Old 10-24-2006, 12:01 AM   #4
Gernot Hassenpflug
Dojo: Aunkai, Tokyo
Join Date: Jun 2005
Posts: 319
Japan
Offline
Re: T-shirt Terrorism

Quote:
John Hogan wrote:
I'm more concerned about a little 90-something woman going on trial for daring to say that muslim headscarves on women dated to sexual rites...

I'm aghast!
Damn, and there's me thinking that no matter what a woman wears it's part of sexual rites.
  Reply With Quote
Old 10-24-2006, 11:00 AM   #5
Guilty Spark
 
Guilty Spark's Avatar
Location: Flordia
Join Date: May 2006
Posts: 300
United_States
Offline
Re: T-shirt Terrorism

Remind me not to wear my MAKE LOVE NOT JIHAD T-shirt.

Quote:
Your choice of clothing that day might just turn into a battle over your right to free speech.
Wear certain colours in specific gang controled areas of the city and you'll get more than a battl eover free speech.

I agree 100% mind you, this whole your with us or your the enemy paranoia is dumba nd probably exactly what OBL was after (and knew the US would do) when he attacked.

Last edited by Guilty Spark : 10-24-2006 at 11:03 AM.

If you're hungry, keep moving.
If you're tired, keep moving.
If you value you're life, keep moving.

You don't own what you can't defend
  Reply With Quote
Old 10-24-2006, 11:05 AM   #6
James Davis
 
James Davis's Avatar
Dojo: Ft. Myers School of Aikido
Location: Ft. Myers, FL.
Join Date: Apr 2005
Posts: 716
United_States
Offline
Re: T-shirt Terrorism

Quote:
Neil Mick wrote:
Is your T-shirt harboring terrorists?
Not to my knowledge.

Quote:
Neil Mick wrote:
(I know, I'm a sucker for dissing the Man).
No! Really?


Quote:
Neil Mick wrote:
Maybe, after reading the story of this infernal apparel, you'll be inspired to do the same. But, I'd consider carefully, wearing it on ferries, planes, or public transit (esp in NY). Your choice of clothing that day might just turn into a battle over your right to free speech.
Anybody that attends a public school, goes to a shopping mall, or walks down a certain block in a certain neighborhood has to consider carefully what they wear that day.



Quote:
Neil Mick wrote:
OK, so what does "We Will Not Be Silent," mean?
Apparently, it's synonymous with "We Want To Be Noticed".



Quote:
Neil Mick wrote:
So...to put this all together: Jet Blue, the Staten Island ferry, and (possibly?) other transit's in and around NY (poss elsewhere?) are trying to force people to remove clothing printed with a message, originally a slogan from a student anti-Nazi group, that now expresses solidarity and anti-war sentiment.
Without a disclaimer about its original context, most security personnel are unlikely to know what it's all about.


Quote:
Neil Mick wrote:
And thy want ppl to remove it, because it is offensive???
To the uninformed, perhaps it is.

Quote:
Neil Mick wrote:
To whom....Fascists?
Well, I guess that fascists might find it offensive. It might also be misconstrued by people who didn't do an internet T-shirt search before they left for work that morning. Let's face facts; If I lived in NY, I might have a different initial reaction to something like that too. Bad Religion is one of my favorite bands. When I chose to wear a T-shirt with the band name on it, I ended up explaining its meaning to many a little nosey old lady. I got sick of the unwanted attention.

They might deny it, but these people want the attention they're getting. They're mission to battle racial profiling probably has good intentions, so what are they complaining about? They're getting their face time; The message is getting out.

Pioneers get the arrows.

The T-shirt is doing exactly what its creators designed it to do.


Where's the problem?

"The only difference between Congress and drunken sailors is that drunken sailors spend their own money." -Tom Feeney, representative from Florida
  Reply With Quote
Old 10-24-2006, 02:24 PM   #7
Neil Mick
Dojo: Aikido of Santa Cruz
Location: Santa Cruz, CA
Join Date: Jun 2002
Posts: 225
Offline
pssst~ it's the racism, Jack

Quote:
James Davis, Jr. wrote:
It might also be misconstrued by people who didn't do an internet T-shirt search before they left for work that morning. Let's face facts; If I lived in NY, I might have a different initial reaction to something like that too. Bad Religion is one of my favorite bands. When I chose to wear a T-shirt with the band name on it, I ended up explaining its meaning to many a little nosey old lady. I got sick of the unwanted attention.
Fine. But you missed one salient detail: the issue that makes this issue different from using fashion to be politically hip.

Quote:
And, Raed Jarrar was told that wearing something in Arabic at an airport is like "going to a bank and wearing a t-shirt that reads, "I'm a robber.""
This is ALSO about racial profiling (funny how you always seem to miss the elements of racial discrimination, in an issue). Unless "Bad Religion" also applies to someone's ethnicity: it is similar only in ppl's lack of understanding.

The T-shirt is aimed at security-guards and monitors who check JFK and the ferries in NY, and they should not be merely profiling Arabs, merely because of their nationality, or language.


Quote:
They might deny it, but these people want the attention they're getting. They're mission to battle racial profiling probably has good intentions, so what are they complaining about? They're getting their face time; The message is getting out.

Pioneers get the arrows.

The T-shirt is doing exactly what its creators designed it to do.

Where's the problem?
It's the racism...and you seemed to miss it.

Quote:
Raed Jarrar wrote:
But we ended up just buying another t-shirt with, like, "New York" or something. And I covered my first t-shirt, and I felt really bad about it. I informed them that I'm not doing this as a compromise. I'm doing it, because I don't want to get arrested, I don't want to lose my flight, and I'm going to pursue the issue through legal organizations.

But they did not stop there, in fact. They changed my seat from the beginning of the airplane, and they changed it from like maybe the third seat of the airplane to the last seat or the seat before the last. And they said that -- I asked why. I said, "It's my right to choose my seat. If you have any limitations for Arabs or Muslims to pick their seats, you should inform me on your website." And they said, "No." They just mumbled something about a, you know, baby, like "We need the seat for another person," or something. But I felt really bad, because this reminded me of what used to happen to African Americans in the '40s and '50s, where they used to be sent to the back of buses because there were black, and I felt that I'm being sent to the back of airplane because I'm an Arab and because I'm brown.
They might want the attention, on the issue (which is why ppl WEAR T-shirts with political slogans); but they clearly do not want to be treated like the very thing that they are protesting.

Last edited by Neil Mick : 10-24-2006 at 02:27 PM.
  Reply With Quote
Old 10-24-2006, 05:24 PM   #8
James Davis
 
James Davis's Avatar
Dojo: Ft. Myers School of Aikido
Location: Ft. Myers, FL.
Join Date: Apr 2005
Posts: 716
United_States
Offline
Re: pssst~ it's the racism, Jack

Quote:
Neil Mick wrote:
This is ALSO about racial profiling
No joke.
Quote:
Neil Mick wrote:
(funny how you always seem to miss the elements of racial discrimination, in an issue).
Funny how you always use the word "always" when passing judgement on me.
Quote:
Neil Mick wrote:
Unless "Bad Religion" also applies to someone's ethnicity: it is similar only in ppl's lack of understanding.
So you admit that there's similarity? WOOHOO!!
Quote:
Neil Mick wrote:
The T-shirt is aimed at security-guards and monitors who check JFK and the ferries in NY, and they should not be merely profiling Arabs, merely because of their nationality, or language.
Then how about "STOP RACIAL PROFILING", or "FAIR TREATMENT FOR ALL" written in arabic, instead of some phrase that could be misconstrued as a jihad battle cry?

Wait for it...

Because they wanted people up in arms! They wanted to do something to alarm security! They wanted to make security guards look like racists.




Quote:
Neil Mick wrote:
It's the racism...and you seemed to miss it.
He was wearing a shirt that called attention to himself!

Not everybody wearing those T-shirts is of obvious middle eastern descent. It could be that he was placed toward the back of the plane so less MORONS would see the shirt and decide to take offense. Security personnel have to worry about redneck knuckleheads in addition to the guy wearing the shirt.

Quote:
Neil Mick wrote:
They might want the attention, on the issue (which is why ppl WEAR T-shirts with political slogans); but they clearly do not want to be treated like the very thing that they are protesting.
Whites who marched alongside Dr. Martin Luther King, Jr. were often treated very badly. They still marched. If the people who were persecuted for wearing these shirts still choose to wear them on vehicles of mass transit in the future, I applaud them for their bravery.

I still say that there are smarter ways to do it. Make your message readily apparent, instead of ambiguous.

Print T-shirts that read "RACISM SUCKS" and "STOP RACIAL PROFILING" in a few languages, and quite a few of those security guards would be asking where they could get one.

"The only difference between Congress and drunken sailors is that drunken sailors spend their own money." -Tom Feeney, representative from Florida
  Reply With Quote
Old 10-24-2006, 05:38 PM   #9
mriehle
 
mriehle's Avatar
Dojo: New School Aikido
Location: Stockton, CA
Join Date: May 2002
Posts: 320
United_States
Offline
Re: T-shirt Terrorism

Quote:
Grant Wagar wrote:
Remind me not to wear my MAKE LOVE NOT JIHAD T-shirt.
Ah, c'mon. Show a little backbone.

Quote:
Grant Wagar wrote:
Wear certain colours in specific gang controled areas of the city and you'll get more than a battl eover free speech.
I taught for a very short while in a program for kids who'd had problems in school. For many of them, the problems were rooted in gang involvement or drug use. It's made be very sensitive to the color thing.

I wear black.

My wife doesn't understand, but I wear black.

Quote:
Grant Wagar wrote:
I agree 100% mind you, this whole your with us or your the enemy paranoia is dumba nd probably exactly what OBL was after (and knew the US would do) when he attacked.
I'd go further and say that GWB may have realized where it could go with just a little nudge from him and helped it along.

  Reply With Quote
Old 10-24-2006, 06:34 PM   #10
Neil Mick
Dojo: Aikido of Santa Cruz
Location: Santa Cruz, CA
Join Date: Jun 2002
Posts: 225
Offline
Re: pssst~ it's the racism, Jack

Quote:
James Davis, Jr. wrote:
No joke.

Funny how you always use the word "always" when passing judgement on me.
Funny, how the conversation about racist discrimination JUST came up, and you professed to missing it then, too.

Quote:
So you admit that there's similarity? WOOHOO!!
There are connections btw everything...clearly YOU seem to think there's one here, too.

Bully for you.

Quote:
Then how about "STOP RACIAL PROFILING", or "FAIR TREATMENT FOR ALL" written in arabic, instead of some phrase that could be misconstrued as a jihad battle cry?

Wait for it...

Because they wanted people up in arms! They wanted to do something to alarm security! They wanted to make security guards look like racists.
Riiight.

James employs the oft-used mindreading skills of the Right. Let's walk thru them, OK?

1. Sone guy wears "we will not be silenced" on board a plane.
2. Freaked-out passengers, hopped up on terror alerts, security checks, and racist stereotypes on TV and movies, get uncomfortable and report their discomfort, to the authorities.
3. The authorities grab the guy and try to make him remove the T shirt, or risk arrest.

What does James get from this? Ooh! The guy was trying to be provocative, even tho he says in interviews and in his blog that he was not intending to offend someone, that

Quote:
One of the two men who approached me first, Inspector Harris, asked for my id card and boarding pass. I gave him my boarding pass and driver's license. He said "people are feeling offended because of your t-shirt". I looked at my t-shirt: I was wearing my shirt which states in both Arabic and English "we will not be silent". You can take a look at it in this picture taken during our Jordan meetings with Iraqi MPs. I said "I am very sorry if I offended anyone, I didnt know that this t-shirt will be offensive". He asked me if I had any other T-shirts to put on, and I told him that I had checked in all of my bags and I asked him "why do you want me to take off my t-shirt? Isn't it my constitutional right to express myself in this way?" The second man in a greenish suit interfered and said "people here in the US don't understand these things about constitutional rights". So I answered him "I live in the US, and I understand it is my right to wear this t-shirt".

Then I once again asked the three of them : "How come you are asking me to change my t-shirt? Isn't this my constitutional right to wear it? I am ready to change it if you tell me why I should. Do you have an order against Arabic t-shirts? Is there such a law against Arabic script?" so inspector Harris answered "you can't wear a t-shirt with Arabic script and come to an airport. It is like wearing a t-shirt that reads "I am a robber" and going to a bank". I said "but the message on my t-shirt is not offensive, it just says "we will not be silent". I got this t-shirt from Washington DC. There are more than a 1000 t-shirts printed with the same slogan, you can google them or email them at wewillnotbesilent@gmail.com . It is printed in many other languages: Arabic, Farsi, Spanish, English, etc." Inspector Harris said: "We cant make sure that your t-shirt means we will not be silent, we don't have a translator. Maybe it means something else". I said: "But as you can see, the statement is in both Arabic and English". He said "maybe it is not the same message". So based on the fact that Jet Blue doesn't have a translator, anything in Arabic is suspicious because maybe it'll mean something bad!
No, James: no racism or profiling, here. Just a yahoo who wants to provoke the authorities...move along, nothing to see.

Quote:
Not everybody wearing those T-shirts is of obvious middle eastern descent. It could be that he was placed toward the back of the plane so less MORONS would see the shirt and decide to take offense. Security personnel have to worry about redneck knuckleheads in addition to the guy wearing the shirt.
Ohhh...I get it. So, when they next institute separate entrances on the plane for the varied races: you'll justify that as keeping the Arab T-shirt-wearing extremists away from the knuckleheaded yahoo's who might take offence, right?

Quote:
Whites who marched alongside Dr. Martin Luther King, Jr. were often treated very badly. They still marched. If the people who were persecuted for wearing these shirts still choose to wear them on vehicles of mass transit in the future, I applaud them for their bravery.
Well, that's my plan, at least. Only on certain, specific days. We T-shirt-wearing terrorists LOVE our timetables and anniversaries, after all.

Quote:
I still say that there are smarter ways to do it. Make your message readily apparent, instead of ambiguous.

Print T-shirts that read "RACISM SUCKS" and "STOP RACIAL PROFILING" in a few languages, and quite a few of those security guards would be asking where they could get one.
You have a point. The phrase IS ambiguous, in context. But, if ppl simply asked what the term meant, instead of complaining to the stewardess that the Asian T-shirt man might be a TERRORIST; then this whole thing just might have ended a footnote.

Two anecdotes:

---In 2004 I went an Aikido-related trip to Turkey. In both directions, I encountered a man, dressed head to toe in flag-emblazoned Americana. He had a matching baseball cap and print shirt with big-tacky, American eagles; and F-16's. His manner was tense, haughty, arrogant: almost as if he were daring someone to ask about his clothes (who knows? Maybe he was playing at being an anti-terrorist, in reverse).

Whatever his questionable reasons for dressing (that deserve an emergency visit from the fashion police ), he sure made ME uncomfortable. Did this guy get a stern warning from security? Did he get any problems passing thru Customs? Please: they were too busy, scoping out for any dangerous and suspicious perp's, who might be Guilty of Travelling While Asian.

---After the illegal invasion of 2003: a common graffiti-tag (esp in NY) was: "We are Everywhere."

Scary? Only if you decide not to include yourself, in the sentence. There are/have been too many voices of authority, and elsewhere, that would rather we be silent. Too many people today in the US are afraid of the wrong things.

Fear your government: not the Asian's.
  Reply With Quote
Old 10-24-2006, 07:38 PM   #11
deepsoup
Dojo: Sheffield Shodokan Dojo
Location: Sheffield, UK
Join Date: Jun 2001
Posts: 524
Offline
Re: pssst~ it's the racism, Jack

Quote:
James Davis, Jr. wrote:
Then how about "STOP RACIAL PROFILING", or "FAIR TREATMENT FOR ALL" written in arabic, instead of some phrase that could be misconstrued as a jihad battle cry?
So what if it actually was a jihad battle cry? If you no longer have freedom of speech in the US, kindly ask Mr Bush to shut up about "liberty". And if wearing a t-shirt with something (anything) written on it in Arabic is reason enough to arrest someone, its time to start freeing people from oppression a little closer to home.
  Reply With Quote
Old 10-24-2006, 10:40 PM   #12
gdandscompserv
 
gdandscompserv's Avatar
Join Date: Sep 2004
Posts: 1,214
United_States
Offline
United States Myths - and their realities

By Rey Barry
"Americans have free speech"

Among our bundle of exaggerations pleasant to believe, none is more alluring or deceptive than "We have Free Speech."

Deceptive? If you say, "That's a Japanese car" in many workplaces, it's ok. But if you say , "That's a Jap car," you will be warned not to. If you do it again you'll probably be fired.

Kids who talk in a chat group or in email about getting back at other kids who torment them in school can be arrested, tried, convicted, and jailed, as happened recently to teens in Virginia and other states. They did nothing but talk. That was a crime but the kids didn't know. They were taught they had free speech.

We all know where the belief in free speech comes from. The First Amendment to the US Constitution states, "Congress shall make no law ... abridging the freedom of speech, or of the press ..." The 14th Amendment makes that applicable to the states as well. Our patriotism focuses on that and sees no further, missing all the glaring contradictions.

Yet it's the contradictions that control our life.

Few seem to understand that the First Amendment does not confer ANY absolute right of free speech. What it does is place a limit on the power of one branch of government to control speech, the legislative branch. And even that limit is more myth than reality.

Our government has three branches: Legislative, Executive, and Judicial. The First Amendment only talks about what Congress can do. There's nothing in the Constitution about the Executive or Judicial branch not limiting speech, and those branches do it routinely when it serves their interest.

We see it every day. For example, government employees hired as judges impose gag orders on everyone in the courtroom when they like, and are answerable to no one but other judges.

The entire Grand Jury system, federal and state, operates in secrecy. Free speech? Anyone revealing more than the name and decision can be jailed. And sometimes the agenda and even the decision are secret. There's no free speech whatever there.

The Executive branch routinely requires secrecy of its employees, puts whatever documents it chooses beyond the public eye, can prosecute anyone who violates its often whimsical, self-serving security net.

Departments under the Executive Branch are free to limit our speech if someone feels it serves a public interest. One example: real estate salespeople can be prosecuted for revealing to an inquiring home buyer that someone in a house had AIDS.

This isn't a privacy matter. No one need be named. Merely confirming that someone in a house had AIDS is prosecutable. HUD, the Department of Housing and Urban Development, made that rule. HUD is in the Executive Branch where the First Amendment doesn't apply.

The military, an arm of the Executive Branch, has total control over the speech of its members.

In the daily world such as the family dinner table or a baseball game, an Internet chat room or the workplace, we have only the freedom of speech the person in charge allows.

The First Amendment has no control over limits on speech you set where you make the rules. If your chauffeur or your secretary or your shop foreman tells you off you can fire her. She has no Constitutional protection.

If the father of a Little Leaguer uses language the umpire doesn't like he can eject dad from the ballpark. Dad's speech isn't Constitutionally protected because the Little League is not the government.

That important difference means very few of our daily activities have First Amendment protections.

And in its few protected areas the First Amendment means considerably less than it says. Congress, state legislatures, and local governments have passed hundreds of laws abridging freedom of speech.

None of these is secret. We know them.

For example free speech ends at a line beyond which it's called libel and slander.

Free speech ends at a line beyond which it's called invasion of privacy. That line moves with the times. It moved a lot when the NY Times won a case establishing that public figures have far less privacy than ordinary people.

Free speech ends at a line beyond which it's called commercial speech. There are bookshelves of laws passed by Congress and the states, and libraries of rules made by government departments, limiting commercial speech.

Our run-away intellectual property laws limit speech. If you want to sell Uncle Fred's vintage English riding boots on eBay, don't expect to call them "shabby chic." Designer Rachel Ashwell owns the term "shabby chic", and is a subscriber to eBay's Verified Rights Owner (VeRO) program. If eBay's employees or Rachel's spot "Shabby Chic" in your auction headline, eBay must cancel your auction due to trademark violation.

Congress gave Rachel the right to steal the term shabby chic away from the rest of us. In fact thousands of Rachels have been allowed to steal thousands of everyday terms.

Free speech? Copyright and trademark laws limit your right to use your own name if it's Howard Johnson, or Thom Mcann, or Lillian Vernon, or any of the thousands of names corporations copyrighted or trademarked.

Free speech can put you in jail if it's "fighting speech." You can be prosecuted and jailed for provoking someone.

Free speech can end in a jail cell if it can be called "inciting to riot." It can end in a cell if it's called "reckless endangerment."

Free speech ends at any arbitrary line Congress draws "in the public interest," as it defines that. In Florida an 86-year-old grandmother was handcuffed and jailed for mouthing off to an over-zealous airport baggage inspector, "What do you think I have in there, a bomb?" That was not a recent case after 9/11: that happened in 1988. Airport speech censorship has reached the level of totalitarian here.

Children are routinely suspended from government-run schools for writing on walls. Free speech ends at defacement. They are being persecuted if something they write disturbs an administrator. A teenage artist who included an anti-social poem in her painting was required to undergo three months of counseling. We read about five-year-olds suspended from kindergarten for pointing a finger and saying, "Bang."

The Internet and shrinkwrap software licenses are loaded today with bars to free speech. One of these, McAfee's claim you can't publish reviews of their products, didn't stand up in court, but someone had to pay thousands of dollars to win that case.

Microsoft now vows to stop anyone from publishing benchmarks of their products without prior permission.

Over-reaching claims are now the norm as Congress partners ever more with business and against customers. Laws like the Digital Millennium Copyright Act (DMCA) effectively nullify the First Amendment. They provide the legal underpinnings for threat and coercion.

Local governments and institutions, universities especially, elevated the censorship of political correctness into law or rules. They dictate that speech which might possibly hurt someone's feelings or be taken as insulting is grounds for fining or firing or expulsion. "That's a Jap car" rather than "That's a Japanese car" will bring quick reprisal in academia especially. No one need actually BE insulted. The mere words trigger penalties.

Speech in the US is free only if it's within approved limits. It's only thanks to the American Civil Liberties Union there aren't more limits to speech, because government is forever erecting barriers the ACLU knocks down.

Popular myth notwithstanding, many nations have as much freedom of speech as we have or more. They didn't in 1776 but they do today. Are they going in one direction while we go in the other?

Some are. A French court recently struck down a string of speech restrictions American software publishers tried to impose there. They are the same restrictions our Congress gave publishers the power to impose on Americans. Our Congress and courts side with the publishers.

The First Amendment was written for people with the Pioneer Spirit. We are people with the Pioneer Stereo. Times have changed and the interpretations of the First Amendment changed. Surveys have shown again and again the First Amendment would not be ratified by Congress, state legislatures, or the people today.

Elections prove Americans don't care because we re-elect lawmakers who don't care. I'm glad the founding fathers aren't around to see this. They believed the people would guard their freedoms and gave us the tools to do it. They never dreamed Congress would systematically betray us and we wouldn't care.

In Thomas Jefferson's hometown there's a huge Free Speech chalkboard on the downtown mall where people can write anything they like. It all gets erased every Thursday. The powerful belief we Americans have in our myth of free speech is important because it helps preserve some. If we didn't believe and act like we have more than we do, we'd have a lot less.

We will always have the right to curse the government. They'd be fools to take that away because its a government survival tactic. Letting people blow off steam harmlessly keeps resentment from building up. Right now you might be motivated but tomorrow you'll be cool.
  Reply With Quote
Old 10-25-2006, 05:02 AM   #13
Michael Varin
Dojo: Aikido of Fresno
Join Date: May 2005
Posts: 567
United_States
Offline
Re: T-shirt Terrorism

I'm not familiar with the author of that piece, but he does a good job of showing how far we have let our government overstep its boundaries. Every federal agency that exists today is un-Constitutional. Congress passes laws left and right that they had no authority to pass (not long ago they passed a bill that bans the consumption of horse meat by humans...I missed that part of the Constitution). And as far as government siding with big business, who do you think was behind introducing all those regulations during the progressive era and who's still in favor of it today? We have to be careful what we ask for...especially when we ask it of government. While, I'm optimistic about the future, America is certainly not the beacon of Liberty anymore. It's sad.

If this sort of stuff bothers you, and you would like to do something about it, I recommend checking out Downsize DC.

By the way, in many of Thomas Jefferson's letters he expressed uncertainty about the long term future of the Republic.

Everyone should expect freedom of speech, but no one should expect speech without consequences. A boss has the right to fire you for any reason. JetBlue has the right to require any dress code they choose, if they breeched contract that is another issue. They even have the right to be racist, and you have the right not to give them your money and to tell everyone how racist they are.

It is useful to remember that all of the rights listed in the Bill of Rights spring forth from property rights and the principle of non-aggression.

Michael
  Reply With Quote
Old 10-25-2006, 06:13 AM   #14
Guilty Spark
 
Guilty Spark's Avatar
Location: Flordia
Join Date: May 2006
Posts: 300
United_States
Offline
Re: T-shirt Terrorism

Quote:
The T-shirt is doing exactly what its creators designed it to do.

Where's the problem?
James I couldn't agree more (so I won't!)
People wear stuff to be noticed. I wear for example my regiments T-shirt so people will know I belong to it. People wear aikido school T-shirts for the same reason.
Slogans on T-shirts? It's people wanting to say something.

While the security may have really dropped the ball and I won't defend them for that dumbness, someone wearing politically charged T shirts or whatever shouldn't be surprised when someone doesn't agree with whats being said.
If you can't handle someone confronting you over your T-shirt then don't wear it.
I hate to draw the similarity but it's like, to me, women wearing provocitive clothing.
Sure in a perfect world your just expressing your freedom of bla bla bla but DON'T act surprised when people DO judge you or guys act like dicks near you.

It's all common sense.

Quote:
It's made be very sensitive to the color thing.

I wear black.

My wife doesn't understand, but I wear black.
Hey Michael,
Good points. Again I think it's common sense. To me the whole your wearing the wrong colours thing here is stupid. But for the gang subculture it's a big thing. In a perfect world it wouldn't exist.
People can choose to excersise caution or wear what they want and expose themselves to the positive AND negitive reactions.

When I wear my Infidel Inside T-shirt I'm deffinatly making a statement and ready to accept the positive AND negitive reactions

If you're hungry, keep moving.
If you're tired, keep moving.
If you value you're life, keep moving.

You don't own what you can't defend
  Reply With Quote
Old 10-25-2006, 11:26 AM   #15
James Davis
 
James Davis's Avatar
Dojo: Ft. Myers School of Aikido
Location: Ft. Myers, FL.
Join Date: Apr 2005
Posts: 716
United_States
Offline
Re: pssst~ it's the racism, Jack

Quote:
Neil Mick wrote:
1. Sone guy wears "we will not be silenced" on board a plane.
I'm sure he did this after considering the ramifications.
Quote:
Neil Mick wrote:
2. Freaked-out passengers, hopped up on terror alerts, security checks, and racist stereotypes on TV and movies,
of which the eevil T-shirt wearer was also aware...
Quote:
Neil Mick wrote:
get uncomfortable and report their discomfort, to the authorities.
Instead of yelling "Let's roll!" and beating the hell out of the guy?

Good!

If they were uncomfortable, should they have just shut up about it? That's a matter of opinion. They had a right to report their discomfort, whether some parties want to hear about it or not.
Quote:
Neil Mick wrote:
3. The authorities grab the guy and try to make him remove the T shirt, or risk arrest.
They grabbed him?... Then he might have a case.

I don't remember seeing that in the story, though.
Quote:
Neil Mick wrote:
What does James get from this? Ooh! The guy was trying to be provocative, even tho he says in interviews and in his blog that he was not intending to offend someone, that
He wore the T-shirt for the same reason that Neil posted the article. He wanted to talk about something for which he had strong opinions. If he wanted to be left alone, he should have worn something else.


Quote:
Neil Mick wrote:
No, James: no racism or profiling, here. Just a yahoo who wants to provoke the authorities...move along, nothing to see.
Not necessarily a yahoo. An activist, perhaps? I don't think that he had mischief in mind; I think he wanted to attract attention to the cause he supported.



Quote:
Neil Mick wrote:
Ohhh...I get it. So, when they next institute separate entrances on the plane for the varied races: you'll justify that as keeping the Arab T-shirt-wearing extremists away from the knuckleheaded yahoo's who might take offence, right?
Separate entrances?

<sigh>

If they were engaging in racial profiling or just hassling some guy for fun, I WOULD NOT JUSTIFY IT. I do justify security guys keeping the peace by simply requesting that somebody change their T- shirt. They didn't throw him off the flight. They didn't beat him down right there on the tarmac. They made a reasonable request in an attempt to stop trouble before it started.

I'm going to issue a request, Neil. Please stop trying to imply that I justify profiling or separate entrances or racist policies of any kind. I'm not a racist. I think that a racist is one of the worst things that a person can be, and that being called a racist is one of the worst types of insult.
Quote:
Neil Mick wrote:
You have a point. The phrase IS ambiguous, in context. But, if ppl simply asked what the term meant, instead of complaining to the stewardess that the Asian T-shirt man might be a TERRORIST; then this whole thing just might have ended a footnote.
If everybody who reads this shirt stops him and asks what it means, he had better have some business cards ready with the website on them, otherwise he's gonna talk himself to death!

If somebody wants to raise awareness, they can hand out some fliers in the terminal explaining what he's about.

I honestly believe that his intentions were honorable, but that there are better ways to get your message out.

Quote:
Neil Mick wrote:

---In 2004 I went an Aikido-related trip to Turkey. In both directions, I encountered a man, dressed head to toe in flag-emblazoned Americana. He had a matching baseball cap and print shirt with big-tacky, American eagles; and F-16's. His manner was tense, haughty, arrogant: almost as if he were daring someone to ask about his clothes (who knows? Maybe he was playing at being an anti-terrorist, in reverse).
I'm going to go out on a limb and say that the guy was a clown-shoe. I wasn't there, and I don't know the guy, but I'm gonna go ahead and pass judgement and say that he wasn't normal.

Quote:
Neil Mick wrote:
Whatever his questionable reasons for dressing (that deserve an emergency visit from the fashion police ), he sure made ME uncomfortable. Did this guy get a stern warning from security? Did he get any problems passing thru Customs? Please: they were too busy, scoping out for any dangerous and suspicious perp's, who might be Guilty of Travelling While Asian.
So security personnel in this case were inept, or perhaps even afraid of the guy. Fire them.

If the guy was so obviously a potential problem, and he made you uncomfortable, why didn't you tell someone?
Quote:
Neil Mick wrote:
Too many people today in the US are afraid of the wrong things.
Yup. Fear the spinach.

"The only difference between Congress and drunken sailors is that drunken sailors spend their own money." -Tom Feeney, representative from Florida
  Reply With Quote
Old 10-25-2006, 12:39 PM   #16
Neil Mick
Dojo: Aikido of Santa Cruz
Location: Santa Cruz, CA
Join Date: Jun 2002
Posts: 225
Offline
Re: T-shirt Terrorism

Quote:
Grant Wagar wrote:
someone wearing politically charged T shirts or whatever shouldn't be surprised when someone doesn't agree with whats being said.
Disagreeing with what's being said, is one thing.

Taking some sort of action against it, is another.

Quote:
If you can't handle someone confronting you over your T-shirt then don't wear it.
Which is the same thing as saying, "If you feel bullied or pressured into not wearing something: then you should just go with the will of the mob.

Quote:
I hate to draw the similarity but it's like, to me, women wearing provocitive clothing.
A perfect metaphor: so, if a woman is wearing something provocative, then I suppose that she deserves what she gets, right?

I mean, look at the way she is dressed! She obviously wanted to be molested, right?

Quote:
Sure in a perfect world your just expressing your freedom of bla bla bla but DON'T act surprised when people DO judge you or guys act like dicks near you.

It's all common sense.
Sorry, but expecting others to act like idiots does not = common sense.


Quote:
But for the gang subculture it's a big thing. In a perfect world it wouldn't exist.
Ah, but it does. Wouldn't that be common sense, to accept what is reality?

Quote:
can choose to excersise caution or wear what they want and expose themselves to the positive AND negitive reactions.

When I wear my Infidel Inside T-shirt I'm deffinatly making a statement and ready to accept the positive AND negitive reactions
Positive/negative reactions are one thing: expecting to be treated like someone wearing a sign that says, "I'm a robber," at a bank, is another.

Worse, the incident was effectively REPEATED, at the ferry.
  Reply With Quote
Old 10-25-2006, 01:11 PM   #17
Neil Mick
Dojo: Aikido of Santa Cruz
Location: Santa Cruz, CA
Join Date: Jun 2002
Posts: 225
Offline
Re: pssst~ it's the racism, Jack

Quote:
James Davis, Jr. wrote:
I'm sure he did this after considering the ramifications.
And you know this, because of your vaunted (Republican) ability to read minds, right?

Quote:
of which the eevil T-shirt wearer was also aware...
Of which you (really) have no idea, and are (at best) employing supposition...

Quote:
Instead of yelling "Let's roll!" and beating the hell out of the guy?

Good!
Hooray! They didn't beat the sh&* out of the guy! Is this a great country, or what, huh? We don't beat our Arab's on board planes when they wear ambiguous signage on their T-shirts!!

Let's give 'em all a Medal of Freedom,,,whattaya say?

Quote:
If they were uncomfortable, should they have just shut up about it? That's a matter of opinion. They had a right to report their discomfort, whether some parties want to hear about it or not.
Of course. They have every right to report their discomfort. Why, whenever I see a W '04 electoral pin, why I call the stewardess IMMEDIATELY, to express my discomfort.

James, I am running out of my allotted 6 rolleye-smiley-faces that I am allowed, per post. You'll just have to assume that every sentence here is punctuated with a rolleyes smiley.

Quote:
He wore the T-shirt for the same reason that Neil posted the article. He wanted to talk about something for which he had strong opinions. If he wanted to be left alone, he should have worn something else.
And, you KNOW my reasons for posting, because of those mind-reading abilities again, of course.

Quote:
Not necessarily a yahoo. An activist, perhaps? I don't think that he had mischief in mind; I think he wanted to attract attention to the cause he supported.
OK, NOW you're getting into the realm of rationalism. Good for you: I knew you'd make it.

Sure, I'd go so far as to say that he wanted to attract attention.

Look, I have done similar things...hardly a crime in it. I have a T-shirt that says "Muslim men! You are hereby ordered to report to the Office of Homeland Security, for identification and fingerprinting. YOU provide the ink!" I wore this T-shirt at the dojo, one night (not really thinking about the message. I was late, and I threw it on quickly); and I got something unexpected...instant discussion as I was trying to get out the door.

Sure, I thought that someday, I might spark a discussion with the message on the shirt. But, what I would NOT expect, would be a detainment and questioning by the authorities.

And, the fact that you place more emphasis on the guy's motives, than the incipient overreaction, is, IMO, a sad set of misplaced values, James.

We just signed away our Habeas Corpus, and ppl seem more worried about potential terrorists hiding inside T-shirts, than they are about their civil liberties.

IMO, your misguided concerns are symptomatic of a much deeper problem America faces, than terrorism.

Quote:
Separate entrances?

<sigh>

If they were engaging in racial profiling or just hassling some guy for fun, I WOULD NOT JUSTIFY IT.
Oh, but if they are harassing some guy for imagined fears, then it's all good, right?

Quote:
I do justify security guys keeping the peace by simply requesting that somebody change their T- shirt. They didn't throw him off the flight. They didn't beat him down right there on the tarmac. They made a reasonable request in an attempt to stop trouble before it started.
Racism can be quite subtle...even as subtle as asking someone to sit in the back of the bus, a plane, or even as simple as a request, to remove a T-shirt.

And, if there were no racism in this situation, then how come the girl on the ferry wasn't asked to put something on over her T-shirt? Perhaps her skin-color provided enough of a blinder, to assure the other ppl on the ferry that she was not a terrorist...?

Quote:
I'm going to issue a request, Neil. Please stop trying to imply that I justify profiling or separate entrances or racist policies of any kind. I'm not a racist. I think that a racist is one of the worst things that a person can be, and that being called a racist is one of the worst types of insult.
But, you're basically asking me to discontinue my line of argument.

I agree, racism IS pretty bad. It is also pervasive. But, I never meant to imply that you are a racist. You might have some racist preconceptions (I certainly do), as they are pervasive. Some of them are attitudes we received from our parents.

But, out of respect, I will try another line of argument, as I didn't mean to suggest that you are a racist. Apologies if I gave that impression (e.g., one can have racist preconceptions, and not be a racist).

Quote:
If everybody who reads this shirt stops him and asks what it means, he had better have some business cards ready with the website on them, otherwise he's gonna talk himself to death!

If somebody wants to raise awareness, they can hand out some fliers in the terminal explaining what he's about.

I honestly believe that his intentions were honorable, but that there are better ways to get your message out.
Maybe so, but it is one tool in the toolbox. A smart Progressive has many.

Quote:
I'm going to go out on a limb and say that the guy was a clown-shoe. I wasn't there, and I don't know the guy, but I'm gonna go ahead and pass judgement and say that he wasn't normal.


So security personnel in this case were inept, or perhaps even afraid of the guy. Fire them.

If the guy was so obviously a potential problem, and he made you uncomfortable, why didn't you tell someone?
Like what? Issue an immediate order for the book "Dress for Calming People on Airlines," on Amazon, to the guy in 15B? He wasn't being loud or violent: and I would hardly categorize him as a "potential problem."

I just did what every other passenger on board that JetBlue flight should have done...gone back to my reading, rolled my eyes at the questionable tastes of my fellow humans, and forgot the the whole thing, entirely...instead of give into my paranoid fantasies about Arab passengers.

Last edited by Neil Mick : 10-25-2006 at 01:13 PM.
  Reply With Quote
Old 10-25-2006, 05:25 PM   #18
Gernot Hassenpflug
Dojo: Aunkai, Tokyo
Join Date: Jun 2005
Posts: 319
Japan
Offline
Re: T-shirt Terrorism

Informer theory in a society that supports such cretins, says that if you don't like someone or their actions, and are afraid of the consequences of expressing your dislike, then an excellent course of action is to tell an authority figure about that person using the great tactic of fear-mongering with the phrase-du-jour. It's fool-proof because it's one-way. The authorities HAVE to investigate, and the informer has NO responsibility. Imagine how cool it would be if the authorities came back to an informer and threw him in jail because in their opinion the person informed against was "clearly not a XYZ". How quickly would people talk to the authorities before doing at least some research themselves, i.e., taking responsibility.
  Reply With Quote
Old 10-25-2006, 05:28 PM   #19
James Davis
 
James Davis's Avatar
Dojo: Ft. Myers School of Aikido
Location: Ft. Myers, FL.
Join Date: Apr 2005
Posts: 716
United_States
Offline
Re: pssst~ it's the racism, Jack

Quote:
Neil Mick wrote:
And you know this, because of your vaunted (Republican) ability to read minds, right?
Is that something like your ability to read the minds of the security officers and know their reasons for speaking with the man?



Quote:
Neil Mick wrote:
James, I am running out of my allotted 6 rolleye-smiley-faces that I am allowed, per post. You'll just have to assume that every sentence here is punctuated with a rolleyes smiley.
Ok.
Quote:
Neil Mick wrote:
And, you KNOW my reasons for posting, because of those mind-reading abilities again, of course.
Oh, then you didn''t want to discuss it? My mistake.


Quote:
Neil Mick wrote:
OK, NOW you're getting into the realm of rationalism. Good for you: I knew you'd make it.
I'll wait for the requisite patronizing pat on my head to come in the mail.
Quote:
Neil Mick wrote:
Sure, I'd go so far as to say that he wanted to attract attention.
Yay.
Quote:
Neil Mick wrote:
Look, I have done similar things...hardly a crime in it. I have a T-shirt that says "Muslim men! You are hereby ordered to report to the Office of Homeland Security, for identification and fingerprinting. YOU provide the ink!" I wore this T-shirt at the dojo, one night (not really thinking about the message. I was late, and I threw it on quickly); and I got something unexpected...instant discussion as I was trying to get out the door.
That T-shirt is pretty clear about what the wearer's beef is. I'd just be afraid to wear it for fear of running into someone who thought that it was really funny.
Quote:
Neil Mick wrote:
Sure, I thought that someday, I might spark a discussion with the message on the shirt. But, what I would NOT expect, would be a detainment and questioning by the authorities.
Your T-shirt was not vague.
Quote:
Neil Mick wrote:
And, the fact that you place more emphasis on the guy's motives, than the incipient overreaction, is, IMO, a sad set of misplaced values, James.
Misplaced values? I'm giving the guy the benefit of the doubt! I said that I thought his intentions were honorable. I also said that I thought security's intentions were honorable. I tend to try to see the best in people instead of jumping to the conclusion that they're malcontents or racists. If that's a "sad set of misplaced values", then it's a set that I'm comfortable with.
Quote:
Neil Mick wrote:
We just signed away our Habeas Corpus, and ppl seem more worried about potential terrorists hiding inside T-shirts, than they are about their civil liberties.
People try to effect the things that are closest to them. I don't think that they're really "more worried" about T-shirts, it's just easier to complain to security than it is to contact one's congressman.
Quote:
Neil Mick wrote:
IMO, your misguided concerns are symptomatic of a much deeper problem America faces, than terrorism.
My concerns are that people get their message out without being hassled. If people are too dumb or uninformed to understand the message on a T-shirt, try changing the slogan to something more straightforward or explaining yourself more clearly. Neither of these people explained the movement associated with their shirt to security personnel. The only thing they said was, "It's my right." They weren't trying to educate anyone at the time of the confrontation. Security probably didn't know about the movement until some newspaper was calling them racists.


Quote:
Neil Mick wrote:
Oh, but if they are harassing some guy for imagined fears, then it's all good, right?
No.

Did I say that?

Quote:
Neil Mick wrote:
But, you're basically asking me to discontinue my line of argument.
I'm asking you to treat me with respect.

There are racists in the U.S., but you are assuming that my thought processes are the same as theirs.

Who's reading minds now?
Quote:
Neil Mick wrote:
I agree, racism IS pretty bad. It is also pervasive. But, I never meant to imply that you are a racist. You might have some racist preconceptions (I certainly do), as they are pervasive. Some of them are attitudes we received from our parents.
My father was raised in rural Tennessee in a family with some racist attitudes. In Vietnam, he learned that there is good and bad in everyone, regardless of color. When he was in a foxhole wondering if he would see morning, the black guy watching his back was like family.

My sensei is black, and I love him like a second dad. He and my father, both being former Marines who raise horses, talked like old friends when they met at my wedding. He lives in Georgia now, and left his school in my care. He doesn't give a damn what color I am.

My sempai, from whom I received my very first aikido instruction, is Jamaican. He lives over in Ft. Lauderdale now, but if he called and said he needed me I would probably get a speeding ticket on my way over there.

Quote:
Neil Mick wrote:
But, out of respect, I will try another line of argument, as I didn't mean to suggest that you are a racist. Apologies if I gave that impression (e.g., one can have racist preconceptions, and not be a racist).
Nice use of the caveat at the end, there. Should I look for that smiley?

One can have racist preconceptions, and choose to toss them aside when they learn from experience. We can set an example for others and change things for the better...

but we might still be called racists by people who don't know us.

"The only difference between Congress and drunken sailors is that drunken sailors spend their own money." -Tom Feeney, representative from Florida
  Reply With Quote
Old 10-25-2006, 11:26 PM   #20
Guilty Spark
 
Guilty Spark's Avatar
Location: Flordia
Join Date: May 2006
Posts: 300
United_States
Offline
Re: T-shirt Terrorism

Quote:
Disagreeing with what's being said, is one thing.

Taking some sort of action against it, is another.
Agreed. I won't take action against it, maybe you won't. Thats not to say many other people won't.

Quote:
Which is the same thing as saying, "If you feel bullied or pressured into not wearing something: then you should just go with the will of the mob.
Not at all. It's common sense. Are you going to go to Iraq and walk around down town bagdad trying to find an AIkido dojo, alone, wearing a KILL EVIL DOERS, Infidel inside or I Love Bush T-Shirt?
Probably not. Why? Becase it's common sense. Arguments about freedom of speach and expression aside.

Quote:
A perfect metaphor: so, if a woman is wearing something provocative, then I suppose that she deserves what she gets, right?

I mean, look at the way she is dressed! She obviously wanted to be molested, right?
Come on Neil, this is ME your talking to! You're better than that my friend. You know full well my intention wasn't to even remotely suggest "she deserves what she gets". Thats like suggesting someone SHOULD be beaten up shot or killed for wearing the "wrong" colours in a neighbourhood. Dumb dumb dumb.
I'm saying there ARE stupid people out there and precaution on someones behalf can and will save them heartache (or a trip to the hospital).
No requirement to try and twist my words around like that mate.

Quote:
Sorry, but expecting others to act like idiots does not = common sense.
I couldn't disagree more. EXPECTING people to act like idiots, to very big extent IS common sense. Situational awareness. Murpheys law if you will
I hope for the best in people. While I don't expect the worst I'm certianly aware that people are quite capable of doing very dumb things.

[quote]Positive/negative reactions are one thing: expecting to be treated like someone wearing a sign that says, "I'm a robber," at a bank, is another.

Worse, the incident was effectively REPEATED, at the ferry.[/quoe]
What do you expect to happenwhen someone wears a im a bank robber shirt into a bank? 9 times out of 10 they will be joking (or dumb) but SHOULD they be surprised when their treated with suspicion regardles? No way.

Those people wore those T shirts for the same reason you post these messages Neil. To be noticed. To get support from "your side" and to ilict an arguent or debate from people who disagree.
Nothing wrong with that mind you, call a spade a spade though.

If you're hungry, keep moving.
If you're tired, keep moving.
If you value you're life, keep moving.

You don't own what you can't defend
  Reply With Quote
Old 10-26-2006, 04:24 AM   #21
Taliesin
Join Date: Nov 2003
Posts: 82
Offline
Re: T-shirt Terrorism

I've been following this thread for a while but nobody has seemed to explain why the same individual is apparantly regarded as a threat because he wears a T-Shirt with one message, but no threat when he wears a T-Shirt with another message. I though that the people who were a threat were the ones who were carrying explosives and perhaps guns.

As as 'common sense' behaviour goes - most civil liberties were won by people who protested vocally when the 'common sense' thing to do was keep quiet - Think Ghandi, Think Marin Luther King.

The fact that it may not have been a 'common sense' for of protest does not mean it is not a legitimate or lawful form of protest. On the other hand an official requiring him to remove the T-Shirt simply because they don't like it may very well be an offence under your constitution (I do stand to be corrected on this point)
  Reply With Quote
Old 10-26-2006, 12:31 PM   #22
Neil Mick
Dojo: Aikido of Santa Cruz
Location: Santa Cruz, CA
Join Date: Jun 2002
Posts: 225
Offline
Re: pssst~ it's the racism, Jack

Quote:
James Davis, Jr. wrote:
Nice use of the caveat at the end, there. Should I look for that smiley?

One can have racist preconceptions, and choose to toss them aside when they learn from experience. We can set an example for others and change things for the better...

but we might still be called racists by people who don't know us.
(Hey! There are no rolleye-smiley icons for the whole post!! There should be...)

OK, let's try this one. more. time....typing verrry slowwwwllllyyyy.

1. I never called you a racist. I challenge you to find a statement where I did.
2. No smiley's on that caveat: the apology was honest. I'm annoyed that you don't even have the grace to accept an honest apology; but I'll chalk it up to the misunderstandings of internet posting, and how hard it is, sometimes: to convey emotions, online.
3. The racism I was directly and indirectly referring to was the pervasive racism within our culture. Our culture was founded on an ethic of racism. Slaves built this nation; and slavery is based upon an idea that one's personhood is dependent upon their skin-color.
4. The ideas that built this nation exist within our culture, today. It's very pervasive, and interesting topic...one which I won't delve into too deeply, here. Too off-topic (but I will, on request).
5. The reason for the strong reaction of the people involved is tied to their fear, and their racist preconceptions of the T-shirt wearer (which, you don't bother to consider in your posts for one second. Very telling, IMO. See #6)
6. Some of your reactions to the T-shirt wearer seem, to me, to have some hints of the racist pervasiveness of our culture.
7. Does this make you a racist? Only if I am, as well.
7a. Racists = Actively embracing racist preconceptions
7b. Americans= sometimes express these racist preconceptions, as we are all products of our culture, and society.
7c. There is no 7c (sorry, I've always wanted to type that )
8. If you divine from my formulae above that I am calling you a racist: then poor you...as I have just called MYSELF a racist, as well.

Last edited by Neil Mick : 10-26-2006 at 12:33 PM.
  Reply With Quote
Old 10-26-2006, 12:46 PM   #23
Neil Mick
Dojo: Aikido of Santa Cruz
Location: Santa Cruz, CA
Join Date: Jun 2002
Posts: 225
Offline
Re: T-shirt Terrorism

Quote:
David Chalk wrote:
I've been following this thread for a while but nobody has seemed to explain why the same individual is apparantly regarded as a threat because he wears a T-Shirt with one message, but no threat when he wears a T-Shirt with another message. I though that the people who were a threat were the ones who were carrying explosives and perhaps guns.

As as 'common sense' behaviour goes - most civil liberties were won by people who protested vocally when the 'common sense' thing to do was keep quiet - Think Ghandi, Think Marin Luther King.

The fact that it may not have been a 'common sense' for of protest does not mean it is not a legitimate or lawful form of protest. On the other hand an official requiring him to remove the T-Shirt simply because they don't like it may very well be an offence under your constitution (I do stand to be corrected on this point)
No, you are absolutely right: it IS an offence under the Consititution. And, you've hit the nail on the head, David: so far, all we're hearing is posts on the possible motives of Raed Jarrar...what about questioning the motives of the other passengers? Heck, James is even in support of calling the authorities on the T-shirt wearer!

I'm guessing that if the message were written in Hebrew: nothing would have happened. The passengers would have barely registered the T-shirt, in their minds. But look at what we, as a society, are reduced to...pressing the panic-button to summon a stewardess, the first sign of ANYTHING remotely Arabic.

What a shabby state of affairs, we've sunk to...and how deeply symbolic. Torture effectively legalized, Habeas Corpus dead, due process a joke: and American passengers on planes jump through the roof, when a guy wears a T-shirt. How far along the path of fear we've been led, and gone; and how far back we have to go, before our society becomes a democracy, again.

If it weren't so pathetic, it would be downright funny.
  Reply With Quote
Old 10-26-2006, 12:49 PM   #24
Neil Mick
Dojo: Aikido of Santa Cruz
Location: Santa Cruz, CA
Join Date: Jun 2002
Posts: 225
Offline
Re: T-shirt Terrorism

Quote:
Grant Wagar wrote:
Those people wore those T shirts for the same reason you post these messages Neil. To be noticed. To get support from "your side" and to ilict an arguent or debate from people who disagree.
Nothing wrong with that mind you, call a spade a spade though.
"Getting noticed" does not = "Expecting to be detained, and put in the back of the plane"

I have a T-shirt much more controversial than the one I mentioned. It's my "protest" shirt. When I put it on, I often expect some response. But, I do NOT expect to be detained, physically restrained, or otherwise bothered, simply for what I am wearing.

My basic expectation of American society is that my first amendment rights will be respected, that no authority-figure will come along and tell me to remove it.

Perhaps, after reading these posts: I should lower my expectations.

Last edited by Neil Mick : 10-26-2006 at 12:59 PM.
  Reply With Quote
Old 10-26-2006, 01:08 PM   #25
Neil Mick
Dojo: Aikido of Santa Cruz
Location: Santa Cruz, CA
Join Date: Jun 2002
Posts: 225
Offline
Re: T-shirt Terrorism

Quote:
Gernot Hassenpflug wrote:
Informer theory in a society that supports such cretins, says that if you don't like someone or their actions, and are afraid of the consequences of expressing your dislike, then an excellent course of action is to tell an authority figure about that person using the great tactic of fear-mongering with the phrase-du-jour. It's fool-proof because it's one-way. The authorities HAVE to investigate, and the informer has NO responsibility. Imagine how cool it would be if the authorities came back to an informer and threw him in jail because in their opinion the person informed against was "clearly not a XYZ". How quickly would people talk to the authorities before doing at least some research themselves, i.e., taking responsibility.
And what kind of wuss calls a stewardess over something on a T-shirt, fer pete's sake??? (OK...I could see calling a steward over a T-shirt that says "I love American's: they explode well and make good fuel for the upcoming Jihad"...but even then...)

Good post (even if the idea has some flaws).

Last edited by Neil Mick : 10-26-2006 at 01:12 PM.
  Reply With Quote

Please visit our sponsor:

AikiWeb Sponsored Links - Place your Aikido link here for only $10!



Reply


Currently Active Users Viewing This Thread: 1 (0 members and 1 guests)
 
Thread Tools

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

vB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off

Similar Threads
Thread Thread Starter Forum Replies Last Post
AikiWeb T-shirt Giveaway! akiy Announcements & Feedback 120 09-29-2002 10:13 PM
T shirt Kashan Curry Announcements & Feedback 0 09-27-2002 01:51 PM
Martial Artists Against Terrorism keith g General 0 09-16-2001 12:40 PM


All times are GMT -6. The time now is 12:00 AM.



vBulletin Copyright © 2000-2017 Jelsoft Enterprises Limited
----------
Copyright 1997-2017 AikiWeb and its Authors, All Rights Reserved.
----------
For questions and comments about this website:
Send E-mail
plainlaid-picaresque outchasing-protistan explicantia-altarage seaford-stellionate