the moops
Footballguy
The misinformation is what you posted "It apparently was covered up by schools officials".
Then when called out on that, instead of doing research to find out what really happened, you tell us that you only read the headlines.
Fantasy Football - Footballguys Forums
Welcome to Our Forums. Once you've registered and logged in, you're primed to talk football, among other topics, with the sharpest and most experienced fantasy players on the internet.
Free speech chilled (2 Viewers)
- Thread starter Sam Quentin
- Start date
Then when called out on that, instead of doing research to find out what really happened, you tell us that you only read the headlines.
The misinformation is that the school board acted improperly by covering up the incident which they did not. It is misinformation as well that this had anything to do with the school sysytem allowing trans students use of preferred bathroom facilities as the student who is accused has not yet been shown to be transgender and the scool policy in question was not yet implemented when the first attack occured.
Basically what happened in Loudon County is activists and parents using their disdain for the trans policy as a rationale for making false accusations which they use to then vilify board members and officials in the hopes that they can have them removed from office, cancel culture at its most disgusting. Check out the facebook page and see the ptiuchforks and torches based on lies and misinformation.
The way you nuanced it, it maybe misinformation. But there is a lot about this which warrants concern. You can frame it as they did not act improperly, but that does not mean they did not cover it up. Hunter Biden's laptop was misinformation, but yet everything about the story was true.
dkp993
Footballguy
You’re not wrong and it’s most clearly evident in todays College’s. The shut down of speech at many of them is flat mind boggling.
KarmaPolice
Footballguy
Probably because it's not that surprising that individuals can be hypocritical or that they
might not all think alike on one side of the aisle. Also, it's not that compelling when you admitted you don't even watch the network, and none of us seem to know who this woman is. Also, you didn't bother to provide an example of what this "hate speech" was. 
Herb
Footballguy
I understand free speech, thank you. It is most certainly NOT "we can be free of fear and repercussions for simply having a thought that runs counter to someone else and that we can express it." Now you're trying to stifle free speech, because it guarantees the right of an individual to freely express their contempt for your expressed thought. You're saying "I should be able to say whatever I want, to whomever, whenever, and be free from repercussion for it." No sir, I am in vehement disagreement. Maybe I'm not communicating my thoughts properly on this, but the philosophy I believe in is "know when to keep your damn mouth shut" not "keep your damn mouth shut period."Shutout said:
I agree on your last point, but freedom of speech guarantees that we are free to fear monger with our words.
Herb
Footballguy
Fair question, and the answer is probably no, although I can think of some social movements I would prefer to never hear from again. I would also point out that I may have overlooked how this thread was specifically speaking to the workplace, not society in general, which is where I was directing my point.IvanKaramazov said:
Herb
Footballguy
You've got me thinking on this one. I'm not coming up with much, self reflection is hard.
Would this qualify? Up until a couple of years ago, I never would have considered the political climate in a state as being a disqualifier for living there. Now I do. 5 years ago I would have moved to Wisconsin (despite the GD Packer fans) or Iowa (despite the GD Bears and Hawkeye fans) in a heartbeat if the reasons for the move felt right. Now there is no way in hell I would move to a Republican-led state, situation be damned. I love Arizona and lived there twice over the years, now it's a non-starter. I can see how voicing those opinions publicly would be worthy of some derision.
Yenrub
Footballguy
I'm sure that I do have a belief or two that should be challenged but I can't think of them at this time.
KarmaPolice
Footballguy
All this talk of Chappelle - I watched the newest special today. 
I had tears in my eyes. The joke about the definition of feminism was great.
I had tears in my eyes. The joke about the definition of feminism was great.
I could list many opinions that conservatives widely hold but are reluctant to speak on.
1. We don't have enough evidence to blanketed make vaccine mandates. Saying this would tag you as an Anti-vaxer and would negatively impact your job.
2. Much of the racism experienced today is mostly in the minds of the victim. Saying this would get you the racist label and potentially canceled.
3. The Justice Department is over investigating and prosecuting Januarty 6th insurgents while under investigating and prosecuting BLM rioters. Saying this would label you a white supremist.
4. Blasey Ford was never raped and the party she imagined is false memory dreamed up because of her pro-abortion politics.
5. The media bias and lies surrounding police shootings have encouraged and promoted riots and violence including the ambushing of police officers.
All of these are rationale arguments and quite possibly true. But to say them could risk your job depending on your profession. I do not believe that any leftist opinion including much more irrational ones would have the same negative consequences.
1. We don't have enough evidence to blanketed make vaccine mandates. Saying this would tag you as an Anti-vaxer and would negatively impact your job.
2. Much of the racism experienced today is mostly in the minds of the victim. Saying this would get you the racist label and potentially canceled.
3. The Justice Department is over investigating and prosecuting Januarty 6th insurgents while under investigating and prosecuting BLM rioters. Saying this would label you a white supremist.
4. Blasey Ford was never raped and the party she imagined is false memory dreamed up because of her pro-abortion politics.
5. The media bias and lies surrounding police shootings have encouraged and promoted riots and violence including the ambushing of police officers.
All of these are rationale arguments and quite possibly true. But to say them could risk your job depending on your profession. I do not believe that any leftist opinion including much more irrational ones would have the same negative consequences.
Last edited by a moderator:
KarmaPolice
Footballguy
I could be wrong, or maybe I hope you are?, but I don't think some of those positions are "widely held" conservative positions.
dkp993
Footballguy
I’m also not sure how rational some of those are as they are framed. But I digress….
All of these points are interesting.
This one stood out as largely misinformed as to the role of the Justice Department. The federal Justice Department prosecutes federal crimes. All of the January 6 defendants are accused of breaking federal laws.
Which is not to say that the BLM protestors did not commit federal crimes, only that almost all crimes they are alleged to have committed are state crimes, and fall within the jurisdiction of state law enforcement agencies.
quick-hands
Footballguy
Much like the DOJ overreach to protect teachers unions.
School board meetings are a state issue.
Or spending three years digging into the George Zimmerman case.
In Portland where BLM did clash with federal officers on federal grounds there were 96 rioters charged with federal crimes including assaulting federal officers and civil disorder. Most of them just had the charges dropped. Here the feds are throwing the book at old ladies, nurses, beauticians whose only crime was entering the Capitol.
quick-hands
Footballguy
We don't care that the left did 1000 times more damage and killed alot more people, we need to fear the right.
I'll confess, I am a little out of the loop here - what is the DOJ doing with respect to School Board Meetings?
Mind Boggling?? It is the left's MO these days to shut down speech at all costs. Chappelle just had a venue cancel him. First it was the networks, now live venues are canceling him. Comedy is not even allowed
There have been angry parents around the US shouting at school board meetings about vaccine requirements and DOJ wants the FBI to investigate these for potential crimes.
A (very) quick google search suggests this assertion is not true.
It appears that the DOJ has been called in to investigate specific death threats, and other threats of violence against school board members in a few jurisdictions.
Garland announced that the FBI would work with U.S. attorneys and federal, state, local, territorial and tribal authorities in each school district to develop strategies against the threats. “The Department takes these incidents seriously and is committed to using its authority and resources to discourage these threats, identify them when they occur, and prosecute them when appropriate,” Garland wrote in a memorandum issued this week.
Read more at: https://www.newsobserver.com/news/politics-government/article254840647.html#storylink=cpy
Actual Memo from Garland:
In recent months, there has been a disturbing spike in harassment, intimidation, and threats of violence against school administrators, board members, teachers, and staff who participate in the vital work of running our nation's public schools. While spirited debate about policy matters is protected under our Constitution, that protection does not extend to threats of violence or efforts to intimidate individuals based on their views.
Threats against public servants are not only illegal, they run counter to our nation's core values. Those who dedicate their time and energy to ensuring that our children receive a proper education in a safe environment deserve to be able to do their work without fear for their safety.
The Department takes these incidents seriously and is committed to using its authority and resources to discourage these threats, identify them when they occur, and prosecute them when appropriate. In the coming days, the Department will announce a series of measures designed to address the rise in criminal conduct directed toward school personnel.
Coordination and partnership with local law enforcement is critical to implementing these measures for the benefit of our nation's nearly 14,000 public school districts. To this end, I am directing the Federal Bureau of Investigation, working with each United States Attorney, to convene meetings with federal, state, local, Tribal, and territorial leaders in each federal judicial district within 30 days ofthe issuance ofthis memorandum. These meetings will facilitate the discussion of strategies for addressing threats against school administrators, board members, teachers, and staff, and will open dedicated lines of communication for threat reporting, assessment, and response.
The Department is steadfast in its commitment to protect all people in the United States from violence, threats of violence, and other forms of intimidation arid harassment.
This does not appear to be any kind of "overreach" as was suggested by the OP.
But is the DOJ putting out statements threatening actions against the far-ledt bullies who have been harassing, threatenig, and shaming Senator Kyrsten Sienema? It seems they are hyper concerned about defending those who agree with their politics and not so much those who do not, even if they are in the same backyard and obviously within their jurisdiction.
I am quite certain that any threats made against a US Senator are taken very seriously.
For example:
Department of Justice
U.S. Attorney’s Office
District of Alaska
FOR IMMEDIATE RELEASE
Wednesday, October 6, 2021
Alaska Man Arrested on Federal Charges for Threatening U.S. Senators
FAIRBANKS – A Delta Junction, Alaska, man was arrested Monday in Fairbanks on criminal charges related to his alleged threats against U.S. Senators. The charging documents were filed on October 1, 2021, and have now been unsealed.
According to the affidavit filed in support of the criminal complaint, Jay Allen Johnson, 65, left a voicemail message on September 2, 2021, at the Washington D.C. office of a U.S. Senator containing several threats, including a threat to “burn” the Senator’s properties. The investigation revealed that the call originated in Delta Junction from a cellular telephone number linked to Johnson. On September 29, Johnson left another voicemail threatening to hire an assassin to kill the U.S. Senator. Johnson also left threatening voicemail messages for a second U.S. Senator between April 2021 and September 2021.
Sure they take it seriously. But the DOJ acts swiftly and very publicly to make it known that they are watching what is going on concerning these school board meetings and will take action. It has been silence on Sienema event hough she has publicly asked for DOJ support. Has the FBI arrested or questioned any of these people for harassing and following her into the bathroom and taking pictures?
NorvilleBarnes
Footballguy
Of course that was a far-right kook who was upset about Trump's impeachment. Certainly the FBI and DOJ will take actual specific death threats seriously no matter the politics. My issue is the bar for action are different and the DOJ and FBI are much more proactive on getting involved depending on the politics. They are OK with Sienema being harassed, but jump to action to protect from harassment their beloved vacinne mandate policy.
Last edited by a moderator:
You keep repeating it - but its simply not true. This is how misinformation spreads.
DOJ is not involved with parents being idiots. The FBI is involved with local law enforcement to go after people making threats against school board officials.
If someone makes a threat against Senator Sinema - I am confident it will be taken seriously by the FBI/DOJ. If people are being idiots around her - well, I am not sure what you want the DOJ to investigate.
But the DOJ is very involved. They directed the FBI to investigate. They established an open line specifically for this issue. They put out a public statement. Yes, some of the stories have stretched the truth (you can say that about most mainstream reporting storied too), but that does not make the essence of the story 'misinformation'. That is just a label used to dismiss the whole story.
What is "misinformation" is your continued insistence that the FBI is investigating parents for holding certain beliefs, and for sharing those beliefs at local school board meetings.
There is no law against parents getting up and ranting and raving about things they know nothing about. The FBI is not investigating parents (people) for being idiots.
The FBI has gotten involved to help local officials (and sometimes maybe even launch their own investigations) into actual threats against school board members and/or school officials.
At this point, it is willfully persisting with misinformation to suggest the FBI is investigating parents for protesting. You are better than that.
I never said they were investigating parents for holding particular beliefs. They may or may not be targeting them, but we don't know. What we do know is that the DOJ and FBI are letting the public know that they are taking these school board disruptions very seriously, so they are putting them on notice to watch what they say or face consequences. Which is exactly what this topic is about, the intimidation tactics on free speech that in the vast majority of instances is driven by modern liberalism.
Last edited by a moderator:
STOP! Seriously.
That is NOT what is going on.
What the FBI is taking seriously is death threats, and threats of violence. Full stop.
Here is the first paragraph of the DOJ memo:
"Citing an increase in harassment, intimidation and threats of violence against school board members, teachers and workers in our nation’s public schools, today Attorney General Merrick B. Garland directed the FBI and U.S. Attorneys’ Offices to meet in the next 30 days with federal, state, Tribal, territorial and local law enforcement leaders to discuss strategies for addressing this disturbing trend. These sessions will open dedicated lines of communication for threat reporting, assessment and response by law enforcement."
They are going beyond just threats of vience, and also includes things like harassment and intimidation. Nothing in the letter mentions any concern for the parents rights to speak out. They are setting up special phone lines for teachers and board members, providing training for identifying what is criminal and educating them on properly capturing criminal activity. The memo is written in an entirely anti-parent and pro-teacher perspective. The DOJ is preemptively taking sides and politicizing it. Had these been against policies they support such as violence directed at oil pipelines, the DOJ would be silent. You can rationalize their action, but it is the politically selective nature of actions that the DOJ consistently does which is disturbing. It is a pre-emptive strike which serves as federal government intimidation against free speech on political topics.
ETA: I find the whole full stop non-sense particularly odd. I have said nothing that is offensive and have zero reason to stop. It is a political discussion.
Last edited by a moderator:
timschochet
Footballguy
Texas school administrator instructs teachers to be sure, if they have books on the Holocaust, to present “opposing views” as well:
https://www.google.com/amp/s/www.nbcnews.com/news/amp/rcna2965
https://www.google.com/amp/s/www.nbcnews.com/news/amp/rcna2965
And, had you continued reading you would have discovered that he (Garland) was instructing DOJ to meet with local officials about how to address that trend - not one mention of "Investigating" by the DOJ, or anyone else.
What you have alleged is that "DOJ wants the FBI to investigate these for potential crimes." (your words, not mine)
That is NOT what has happened, or is happening. It is misinformation that you presumably picked up somewhere else, and continue to spread. It hurts the overall dialogue when you make these kind of blanket accusations that are false.
That is just a single administrator trying to instruct teachers on what he/she thinks the law means. I have no idea how the law is written , but the administrator seems to be taking a bizarre interpretation to be in compliance. He/she could be reading too many kookie websites or maybe the law is that poorly written. What some administer thinks the law means and is secretly recorded saying is really not news. What would be news is finding out what the law actually says and how to educate administrasters who are perhaps confused.
Last edited by a moderator:
There is a holine for reporting crimes which will lead to what? An investigation.
I picked this up from reading the DOJ memo.
Last edited by a moderator:
Right - reporting "crimes"
Being loud and ignorant is not a crime. Going to a school board meeting and voicing your concerns over covid, masks, critical race theory, or whatever - is not a crime, and is not going to be investigated.
Threatening to harm or kill a school board member is a crime, and will be investigated. This is not hard. I think you are simply trolling at this point.
IvanKaramazov
Footballguy
On one hand, Hitler was bad. But on the other hand, who would we compare politicians who we kinda sorta dislike to if not Hitler?
IvanKaramazov
Footballguy
In conclusion, Nazi Germany was a land of contradictions.
Give me a break....trolling? are you kidding me. I sincerely find the federal government getting involved in school board debates to be a disturbing assault on free speech. Intimidating a public official can be very broad and now we are going to get hundreds of reports of such intimidation and alleged threats, so these ordinary citizens will be subjected to FBI questioning because some school board official is uncomfortable with what someone said. I see the left taking first amendment and flushing it down the toilet.
I believe you think this - and hold that sincere belief.
But, its been pointed out to you several times now - that is not what is going on. The federal government is not getting involved in school board debates - unless those debate include threats of violence against school board members.
In that later case, the FBI is working with local authorities to deal with those threats.
Everyone is free to voice their opinion at school board meetings, so long as they do not commit crimes while doing so. I think you know this.
timschochet
Footballguy
Yes it’s one administrator. But wasn’t this entirely predictable? Isn’t that what happens when a large government entity attempts to dictate what will be taught?
it seems to me that the principles you’ve been arguing about regarding big government in local issues apply here as well. Or don’t they?
I did not say I favored the law. I just think this is not really news. It is interesting to point out this is happening, but have a legal expert explain if this administrator is misinterpreting the law or if this is a real consequence of the law.
Isn't one of the consequences of the law that you have a school administrator telling teachers to have an opposing point of view to the holocaust?
SOUTHLAKE, Texas — A top administrator with the Carroll Independent School District in Southlake advised teachers last week that if they have a book about the Holocaust in their classroom, they should also offer students access to a book from an “opposing” perspective, according to an audio recording obtained by NBC News.
Gina Peddy, the Carroll school district’s executive director of curriculum and instruction, made the comment Friday afternoon during a training session on which books teachers can have in classroom libraries. The training came four days after the Carroll school board, responding to a parent’s complaint, voted to reprimand a fourth grade teacher who had kept an anti-racism book in her classroom.
Are you suggesting teachers can ignore school administrators here?
There is a real intimidation factor going on. It is a powerful tool being given to teachers and board members to harass people who speak out against vacinnes. To have a special hotline to trigger an FBI investigation is a powerful tool. I would feel very reluctant to speak out against vacinne mandates based on this. Whether or not you committed a crime has nothing to do with it. Your life can be made hell based on some flimsy accusation.
Given the amount of school board meetings in the news recently - I'd say nobody is being intimidated....other than the school board members.
IvanKaramazov
Footballguy
The public school system is a government entity. Governments at all levels set various standards for what will be taught.
The US is a big country, and if you go looking for a ####### doing some ####### thing somewhere in a large industry, you'll be able to find one. That's what this story is.
Similar threads
