Arrogant censorship (No Conservative Club at High School in MA)

townhall ^ | 02.11.05 | David Limbaugh

[Coleus]

Arrogant censorship
David Limbaugh (archive)

February 11, 2005 | Print | Send

An incident at Hudson High School in Massachusetts provides an object lesson in the occasional arrogance of liberal bias.

 A group of students decided to form a conservative club as "a counterweight" to the majority political viewpoint at the school. Student Chris Bowler put up posters to publicize the club's first meeting in December.

 Within hours, school administrators reportedly removed the posters because they contained a link to the Website of High School Conservative Clubs of America (HSCCA), a national organization for high school conservative clubs. HSCCA's Website included links to videos of beheadings by Iraqi insurgents, and the high school would not allow even an indirect reference to those links. It also blocked access to the HSCCA's Website on school computers.

 "The material was way beyond what I believe the school should be advertising," said Principal John Stapelfeld. What? Just because the school permits students to use its facilities to promote something doesn't mean the school itself is endorsing it. In fact, just because the local club listed the HSCCA's Web address doesn't mean it endorses everything HSCCA endorses.

 But for the sake of discussion, let's concede that the school's club was encouraging the viewing of those videos. What in the world is wrong with that, and what business was it of the principal's to censor the posters?

Principal Stapelfeld insists his political bias didn't enter into his decision. According to the Boston Globe, he was initially "thrilled" about the idea of a conservative club that would spark political discussions.

So, what's his beef with the video links? The Globe reports that he "said the brutal images implicitly condoned violence as a way of 'solving problems' and did not reflect 'mainstream conservatism'" -- as if this liberal were an authority on mainstream conservatism and as if it's fine to censor farther-right conservatism.

When I first read this I did a double take, thinking I'd misunderstood. How can links to videos of beheadings of innocent people by terrorists -- unless shown by terrorists to potential recruits -- be construed as condoning violence, much less as a means of solving problems?

It doesn't take a genius to understand that the HSCCA was linking to those horrendous videos to show how evil the terrorists are and how they use violence purely for the sake of violence and terror, without provocation and certainly not as a means of "solving problems."

Let's give Stapelfeld the benefit of the doubt and assume he got himself confused on that one. Perhaps his other statements express his concerns more clearly. According to the Globe, he felt that showcasing these violent acts "did not address the more central problem of growing anti-Americanism abroad." "Unfortunately, said Stapelfeld, "we really haven't dealt with the fact that we're not well received in the world anywhere."

In this revealing utterance, we have the principal's naked liberal mindset on full display. What he is really saying is that he -- like so many other liberals -- believes the Bush Administration has alienated the rest of the world because of its "unwarranted" military action against Iraq. And by promoting the viewing of these videos, his students would be engaging in offensive behavior that will further alienate other nations.

But on what remotely legitimate basis would other nations have to be offended by American students encouraging Americans and other peoples to view videos the terrorists themselves produced and distributed, advertising their own violence? How could genuinely civilized human beings of other nations take issue with civilized Americans for reminding the world, via unedited terrorist-produced videos, of the abject depravity and brutality of the terrorists?

Indeed, isn't it necessary for us to focus on their inhumanity from time to time to avoid becoming desensitized to it? Perhaps what really bothers the principal (and other liberals) deep down is that by showing the terrorists in their true element the videos demonstrate how utterly justified our cause in Iraq is -- a reality that liberals simply cannot abide. How dare we use the terrorists' own videos to turn people against them? I suppose that instead, we should be trying to negotiate with the sweethearts.

In short, the principal is betraying his own transparent political prejudices. But what alarms me significantly more than his bias or even the high-handed censorship it produced is his arrogant obliviousness to it.

This absence of individual and collective self-reflection is all too often the signature of today's liberal, who apparently believes his positions are so pure that his motives are beyond scrutiny.

 Memo to Principal Stapelfeld: Your wrongful removal of the posters is only exceeded by your refusal to own up to your reasons for doing it.

David Limbaugh is a syndicated columnist who blogs at DavidLimbaugh.com

 

Hudson Public Schools  Hudson High School, 69 Brigham Street, Hudson, MA 01749
978-567-6250

stapelfeldj@hudson.k12.ma.us, mcanespield@hudson.k12.ma.us, bermans@hudson.k12.ma.us

[HAL9000]

 But for the sake of discussion, let's concede that the school's club was encouraging the viewing of those videos. What in the world is wrong with that, and what business was it of the principal's to censor the posters?

Those videos are obscene terrorist propaganda! That's what's wrong with it.

Where is David Limbaugh's common sense?

[BenLurkin]

And by promoting the viewing of these videos, his students would be engaging in offensive behavior that will further alienate other nations.

WRONG.

The lefties hide these images from the kids because they know that seeing them would make the blood boil in any normal American. The lefties don't want Americans to feel the righteous anger and thirst for justice that we felt after Pearl Harbor.

The left hates America. They wish for it to be neither avenged nor victorious.

[WindOracle]

Personally I think a warning should be given so people can scoot little kids out of the room or change a channel, but I think the videos should be shown on TELEVISION... over and over. People may not be so open-minded about the enemies side of things if they saw such videos.. including the ones with people leaping to their deaths from the Trade Towers.

It does nothing but good to remind the people, in a way they understand, exactly what sort of bastards we are fighting. The horror of that day is PRECISELY why it should be shown. If I were one of the victims, or even one of their family members, I damn sure would want the world to see what the terrorist did. Wouldn't you?

[newsgatherer]

bump

[TWohlford]

Not sure of your definitions here. Propaganda, yes. Obscene? I'm not quite sure of your "community definition" here.

The sure-fire antidote to the antiwar protesters is to show these videos. Let people hear a man screaming, then gurgling, then his captors shouting "Allah Akbar!". Tell those who see the video that this was taped in order to recruit more to their cause, and in fact, such has been taped by Spanish police.

I once helped to found a before-school student prayer group at a school. We had 2 principals tell us that we couldn't have such a group due to "Supreme Court Rulings" before a third okayed the project (we had hundreds of signatures on a student petition). I'm thinking these conservative students face the same problems, and would encourage them to start passing around the petitions.

[WindOracle]

You hit the nail right on the head, same principle applies to why the lefties hate anyone seeing a video of a partial-birth abortion. Because they know no human being could see it and not be enraged and sickened.

[boofus]

Where is the ACLU? *snicker*

[WindOracle]

Ya know, your post reminds me of a little irony.

Years ago, my brother showed me an article, in a Hustler magazine of all places (did not know he actually read articles there). It was an editorial by Larry Flynt. This was during the period when the govt was going after him for obscenity, back in the early 70's (showing my age a bit).
Anyway, the gist of his editorial was that the govt was after him over the obscene photos, so he ran some of a different sort, photos which he said WERE obscene... but that it was ok to run them because they are what the govt would consider news items... photos of dead and mutilated civilians and soldiers in Vietnam.
Now back then, the left applauded his comparison and running of the photos from Nam to make their point, a claim that our govt were the real perpetrators of obscenity.

OK, his point is made, though I, and I am sure many others would disagree with his interpretation of it. However, if the LEFT is able to run photos, and they were GORY ones, to make their political point, then why cannot the Right run videos and such which demonstrate OUR point about the terrorists? The Left applauded such activity THEN.

[LibFreeOrDie]

The administrators of the Hudson Public Schools don't want any competition, period - inside or outside their school buildings. In addition to the cr*p reported in this article, the administration is fighting a new charter charter school in the area.

Here's the Hudson Public School site:

http://www.hudson.k12.ma.us/

Here's the charter school site:

http://www.amsacs.org/index.htm

[26lemoncharlie]

Those videos are obscene terrorist propaganda! That's what's wrong with it.

Where is David Limbaugh's common sense?
____________________________________
Where is your commom sense? These photos were being used on AL jazeera TV to recruit Terrorists!! Why should they not be seen by an American. THe reason we are fighting is right in your face, it's here wetheryou like it or not. You may be able to ignore this for now but will not be able to ignore it for long.

I would suggest you pull your Liberal head out of the sand and face what the Socialist Policies of the Clinton Era has brought us.

[HAL9000]

According to your logic, everyone should be forced to watch kiddie porn to see how bad it is.

This garbage must be stopped. People who spread terrorist beheading propaganda videos are giving aid and comfort the enemy.

[GeronL]

It IS censorship when government does it, and a government school is government.

[stevebowl]

Actually, all the club wanted to do was display the website address. There was no intent to actually show the videos in club meetings and the school in fact blocked the website on their computers. Pulling the posters down was just a way of trying to control the club. Thousands of emails and phone calls, a half dozen news articles and one potential lawsuit later, they've clearly failed. The point was to test the school's stated support of the First Amendment. Think they passed?

[stevebowl]

Well the school is allowed to show their propaganda in the classroom such as dead Iraqi civilians in Michael Moore's film. And a teacher showed film of atrocities from communist Romania just last week. They show film from concentration camps too in order to illustrate the monstrous actions during the holocaust. So why can't a club list a web site address on a poster? Maybe because the teachers weren't in control? Or maybe because of the anti teachers union, anti gay indoctrination, pro military, pro life information on the same website?

[GladesGuru]

Sez the principal, "we're not well received in the world anywhere."

Sez I, where else are foreigners risking everything they have to move to another country? America would seem to be the first choice of most of the rest of the world - except "intellectuals".

Could it be that the 'great unwashed' actually know something the "intellectuals" don't?

Just wondering

[stevebowl]

The guy you're calling an intellectual also said this in another article:

"If I changed school policy every time a letter came in asking me to change school policy, we would be making curriculum and policy based on every letter that came in."

[WindOracle]

It is only propaganda when it is able to spread a message. I do not, nor do I suspect most Americans do, speak Arabic, so the "propaganda" value of the terrorists films being seen here is very dubious.
I have watched the films, most anyway, such as Daniel Pearl, and I am quite confident that any American would not likely be inspired to join the terrorist cause. If it made me want to kill anyone, it was terrorists. But then, as most here recognize, that is PRECISELY why liberal types do not want us to see it. Any btw, footages of the people jumping from the Twin Towers was not terrorist propaganda footage, so what would be your objections to showing THAT?

[WindOracle]

Btw, are you worried some American, even if they COULD understand what the terrorists are saying, is gonna be convinced to join them? I have read the translation of one of those little films, and if you think you would buy into what they are saying, then you must have believed Baghdad Bob when he said our troops were committing suicide at the gates of Baghdad. The speeches they give before committing their little murders are STUPID.

[HAL9000]

"It is only propaganda when it is able to spread a message. I do not, nor do I suspect most Americans do, speak Arabic, so the "propaganda" value of the terrorists films being seen here is very dubious."

The videos are produced in the international language of terrorism, and everyone understands the message. The victim is an innocent human being who is slaughtered in front of the camera. The man who commits the murder is a terrorist. The person running the camera is a terrorist. The person who releases the video is a terrorist.

The terrorists produce the videos for two reason: #1: to recruit more terrorists, and #2: to terrorize us. Broadcasting beheading videos will result in more terrorists and more beheadings, because that is their purpose.

Anyone involved in spreading these videos is a acting as a useful idiot for the terrorists at best, or a willing accomplice at worst.

"Any btw, footages of the people jumping from the Twin Towers was not terrorist propaganda footage, so what would be your objections to showing THAT?"

There are huge differences between legitimate photojournalism and terrorist propaganda. The news should be reported, but obscene enemy propaganda should not be propagated.

A few weeks ago, a rock band in Japan was using beheading videos on stage during their performance. They have become a sick form of entertainment for some people.