More bad news from Britain. And censorship in Iran, particularly over religious issues, is hardly a surprise.

(I originally read both pieces in the TOI, but that newspaper loves playing Pac Man with news items. Hence the Reuters links.)

—

The paper, as is its practice, quotes William James on “forgetting”-

In the practical use of our intellect, forgetting is as important as remembering.

and weaves a 26/11 editorial around it.

What really fits James’ truism, however, is Doyle’s classic, “A Study in Scarlet.” Holmes, Watson, Copernicus and the science of deduction.

(source, read the full story here)

More iconic images of human rights violations are here. Something about freedom of speech is here. And here is a case of quasi book burning. And here’s a nice cartoon to remind us that this isn’t something that only happened in a certain country at a certain time:

book burning in the USSR and Nazi Germany

(if you don’t recognize the figure on the left, it’s Nikita Khrushchev holding a paper about the Pasternak controversy, one of many instances of book banning in the USSR; of course, book banning isn’t quite the same as book burning, but in a sense it’s even worse)

Drenched from the rain, I showed up at the 40 WATT in ATHENS, GA to meet NO AGE before their show.

It was my first live interview, so I was nervous to be around a couple of musicians that I admire. Luckily Dean and Randy are some of the nicest guys in music. We had an excellent discussion about everything from personal politics to how to screenprint a skateboard. This interview also contains the best use of the word “shambolic.”

Full Transcript: (Audio)

Nichole Bennett: This is Nichole. I’m the music director for WSBF, and I’m here with No Age. Dean and Randy of No Age. So you guys just came in from Asheville?

Randy Randall: Yes

NB: Did you play the Orange Peel?

Dean Spunt: No

NB: The Grey Eagle.

Dean Spunt: It was awesome.

NB: Was that your first time in Asheville?

DS: We played one time before. We opened up for Liars, and we played the Orange Peel. One of our favorite restaurants is in Asheville. It’s called Rossetta’s Kitchen. It’s a vegetarian restaurant.

NB: Speaking of vegetarian restaurants, have you tried The Grit?

DS: We are going to go there after this.

NB: You guys are vegan—is that really hard on tour?

DS: Not really. We’re both vegan, so it’s one of the main agendas. We play, and then we gotta find food. We’re both pretty crafty.

RR: I eat more often on the road because there’s a schedule.

NB: Like a never-ending field trip. Everbody stay with your buddy!

RR: Yes. We are the field trip buddies.

NB: One of the questions that some of the people from the station wanted me to ask was about your appearance on CBS.

DS: BOOM. Rando.

NB: Yes, I wanted to talk about the shirt and the censorship.

RR: It was really nice that a show like Late Night with Craig Ferguson. Being before one of the most important political decisions in our country, that it would be apropos to voice my support for Barack Obama. So, I chose to wear a t-shirt. We go through rehearsals and everything. It’s a tiny little stage. You don’t meet anybody. We have five minutes to go one, and one of the people there are like “We’re so excited you are here. The only thing is you can’t wear your t-shirt.” It’s free time. Everyone who is a candidate for president has to be given equal time. That sounds fine—let’s make a John McCain t-shirt. And they were like, no it’s everybody who is running. And I thought this was even better.

NB: Make a list!

RR: We were going to be creative, but due to weird legal…

DS: They just didn’t want you to wear the shirt.

RR: There’s a lot of loopholes around it. I couldn’t really understand what their reasoning behind it was, but they were going to stick to it. We had to make a decision. I was ready to walk away and go home. I didn’t live too far from the place where we were filming. I was done. I didn’t care. It just felt like too big of a compromise.

DS: But, my grandfather was there.

RR: Yeah, Dean’s grandfather was there.

DS: He’s like 81. We should do it.

RR: So I thought we should take advantage of it. We can still do it. So we did it. I flipped the shirt inside-out and wrote “free health care,” which is an issue that I thought was more important even than a political figure. So I thought I would pick an issue and support that.

NB: Yeah, at that point I thought it was funny that equal time didn’t apply to issues.

RR: The reason I even like Barack Obama is that he stands for some of the issues I believe in.

DS: After that, Randy posted on our blog and the media go a hold of it.

[Interrupted by Soft Circle sound check]

NB: Now we are recording! Just a summary of what we just said.

RR: I believe that politics are personal, and its what you believe in. Us as a band…we don’t have a voice or any more of a right to speak than anyone else. No matter who you are, you can do what you believe in.

NB: We were talking about the skateboards earlier. Are you guys getting more into the visual side of things? For our listeners that don’t know, there are some No Age-designed skateboards, and they look pretty rad.

DS: We’ve been doing some stuff with a skateboard company. We curated some t-shirt designs for them, and we are going to make some more clothing designs for them. We never really made a skateboard before that, but it was a cool collaborative effort with AAM. We’ve always wanted to make skateboards

RR: Even before No Age was around, one of the things we wanted to do was create a skateboard company that was just for bands. It costs a little bit of money. More money than we had at the time.

DS: The main thing was that we wanted to screen it. My mom owns a silkscreen shop, so we wanted to screen them ourselves. Skateboard companies don’t easily give out information on how to do that. They are really secretive, and there are only a few companies. It’s weird. The screens have to be bent.

NB: Tell me about how this tour is going.

RR: This tour’s been awesome. We started out in England with Los Campesinos! and Times New Viking, who are really awesome. We then went on to play a few European show with a band from Belgium called White Circle Crime Club. We then started up in New York with Titus Andronicus and Soft Circle.

DS: Then after Titus, we meet up with a band from New York, friends of ours, called Silk Flowers.

NB: This is your first time in Athens, Georgia. What are your first impressions?

DS: It’s awesome. We just ate at…

RR: The Grit!

DS: We have a friend that has lived here for a while in a band called Dark Meat named Jim. He’s always wanted us to come here.

NB: If you could be any animal what would you be?

DS: A kitten. I just got a kitten, so I want to be that little kitten.  A different kitten. I would be it’s buddy. I think years ago when I didn’t have a cat I would be a different animal. Something like a giraffe. What would you be?

RR: I would be…

DS: a potato

RR: That’s not an animal. I was thinking of something along the lines of a mussel or a barnacle. I could just hang.

DS: You could be algae.

RR: No, not quite evolved enough.

NB: And you would get eaten a lot. Maybe a barnacle on a whale. You could get around.

DS: The whale…is America.

DS: I just want to say that No Age is the best band ever and you should buy all of our records. Not! But really, I think that if you are in a band, you should think you are the best ever or there is no point.

NB: What brought you guys in this direction? Your sound is a bit punk-y but experimental.

DS: I think it was just growing up being weird kids, listening to music, skateboarding a lot. Seeing things a little differently.

RR: Are you asking why we sound the way we do?

NB: Was it a choice or did it just naturally evolve?

DS: I think the only choice was that we wanted to make music that was the best music ever, for us. We like pop music, so we like hooks. Or not…sometimes just some noise. Music that we liked.

NB: Yeah No Age spans that barrier between poppy and noise.

RR: It just reflects our taste in music. I would be just as happy to go to noise show one night and a pop, sort of punk, show the other night. I get something out of both things. In one area you can push the boundaries of composition and sound and mind-blowing. And something else can be the perfect pop record.

DS: Yeah, crafting a song.

RR: Like a great hook, and this static sort of euphoria rushes over you, and you are like “I can’t believe they did that.” When a song explodes into complete chaos and is cathartic and it’s a release. You are like, ah, this is shambolic. It’s just as exciting as when a hook comes back around. It’s exciting when it works. It’s what I like in listening to music, so those are my priorities in making music…a crescendo of noise and pop aesthetics spilling over everywhere. That’s what I love to hear. I love listening to music loud. You take The Ramones or Paul McCartney and you turn it up and it all starts to distort. That’s exciting. That’s really fun. Or you hear it from the next room. You’re only catching every other note and the bass is all washing everything out together, and you hear a few ghosting kind of melodies. And then you pull it open and it’s a Brittany Spears song, but from three houses down it sounded like this wave of bass. Sometimes it’s the quality of the sounds you hear that makes the moment. It’s the time and the place.

DS: And I think it is the person too. I think there are lot of people that play pop music who are just crappy people. Or just going to make money. Usually people we like are people that seem to have a different attitude towards it and are writing music for different reasons. Not for money and not for fame.

RR: It’s always clear why this person is here. They are here to have a good time and share an experience with the audience, or they are just there to make a dollar.

DS: And goodnight.

Crossed into Hong Kong this morning.  China has been a whirlwind of ups and downs, and I’ve got a month’s worth of rants and rambles stored up to share.  Bear with me as I copy/paste the entries over to the blog.

In the meantime, it is GOOD to be back in the land of free speech and press and unlimited internet access.  Censorship is a bitch.

Google say they won’t remove a racist image of Michelle Obama from their search engines, because it’s a slippery slope to impinge on free speech…. should this standard not apply across the world?

http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/world/americas/8377922.stm

ERIC Identifier: ED319067
Publication Date: 1990-06-00
Author: Gottlieb, Stephen S.
Source: ERIC Clearinghouse on Reading and Communication Skills Bloomington IN.

The Right To Read: Censorship in the School Library. ERIC Digest.
The school library has become a place of conflict, pitting students’ desire to investigate literature against the desire of some administrators to control educational materials and the desire of some outside the schools to monitor what happens in the classroom and what appears on the library shelves. The desire to censor public school libraries arises from many factors, including the increase in reading by Americans in recent decades, the greater numbers of students in school, and changes in the manner in which literature is taught. These influences have created a climate in which parents, other citizens and special interest groups have become only too willing to look over the shoulders of school librarians and literature teachers (Burress 1989). In some situations, the censorship battle has ended up in court, with inconclusive results.

PICO AND THE RIGHT TO RECEIVE INFORMATION
In 1982 the United States Supreme Court handed down its decision in Island Trees Union Free School District No. 26 versus Pico, a case in which students and parents challenged a school board’s removal of certain books from a school library. The board withdrew novels and texts which members considered to be “anti-American, anti-Christian, anti-Semitic, and just plain filthy.” A plurality of the Court set limits on a school board’s ability to remove books from school libraries. To the plurality, removal was only permissible if books were determined to be “educationally unsuitable.” The justices said book elimination would be invalid if partisan political motivation were a decisive factor in the action. (Terry 1986).
Justice Brennan’s plurality opinion in the Pico case took its inspiration for the notion of a right to receive information from the case of Right to Read Defense Committee versus School Committee, a 1978 decision from the Boston federal district court. In his opinion in the Right to Read case, Judge Joseph Tauro described the school library as a place in which the student could discover and explore ideas. “What is at stake here,” Tauro wrote, “is the right to read and to be exposed to controversial thoughts and language…” (Marek 1987).

The right to receive information can apparently only be exercised by parents for their own children. In McKamey versus Mt. Diablo Unified School District (1983), a California Superior Court judge refused to allow a group of local residents who objected to the presence of Ms. magazine in the school library to block other students’ access to the periodical. Judge David A. Dolgin held that while a parent could bar his or her own child from reading the magazine, that parent could not exercise such a right on behalf of all students (NCAC 1985).

CENSORSHIP OR CURRICULUM MODIFICATION?
Traditionally, the schools’ efforts to control the content of their libraries has reflected a desire to keep certain information away from students until they are deemed mature enough to deal with it. For instance, sixth graders may not have access to materials which are readily available to tenth graders. Library selections for children reflect this pattern. Child psychologists have long recommended that appropriate literature for young children should be focused on simple concepts portrayed in an idealized manner. Even books for adolescents are on a sophistication level below that of adult fare.
In the wake of the Pico decision, school boards should develop policy statements on book procurement. One such statement should prescribe a set of administrative procedures, each appropriate to the grade levels of the school buildings in which that policy is to be implemented. Another policy should accommodate objections from the community, spanning the range of possibilities from a citizen’s statement that he or she does not like a certain book to a set of reasons why certain books should be removed from student access. In addition, the policy should provide for a neutral review committee which would examine, discuss, and make recommendations regarding library selections (O’Reilly 1984).

WHO ARE THE CENSORS AND WHO ARE THEIR OPPONENTS?
Those who lead library censorship campaigns come from both right- and left-wing organizations. Fundamentalists may dislike the open discussion of such issues as abortion in news magazines, feminists may challenge outdated female stereotypes found in certain books, and African-American groups may object to the portrayal of members of their race in such works as Huckleberry Finn or the Black Sambo stories.
Censors tend to fall into three groups: (1) parents who hear about or see material that troubles them; (2) community members or parents who react to a book without having read it; and (3) local, state or national organizations, some of which have specific lists of titles which they consider objectionable.

On the other side are such groups as the American Library Association (ALA) and the National Council of Teachers of English (NCTE). Both groups publish materials which are designed to help teachers and school librarians resist efforts to keep particular literary works out of the hands of students. These sources suggest that steps to protect such materials should be taken before the works are challenged, and that schools should have written book selection and grievance policies (Marek 1987).

The library censorship cases of tomorrow are affected by political choices being made today. Those now being nominated to serve on the nation’s courts will be shaping the future meaning of the right to read and the right to receive information. Because of modern communication technologies, censorship cases are increasingly coming into public view. People interested in maintaining the freedom to read are showing their support for the librarians, publishers, and authors who have always been on the defensive against censorship (Abbott 1987). Moreover, recent bibliographic works cite long lists of books and articles that highlight the censorship issue, particularly as the issue is played out in schools and school libraries (Hoffman 1989).

NEW TEACHERS AND CENSORSHIP
New teachers, who have probably not been specifically schooled in the issue of censorship, may feel that they do not know how to cope with the issue. When they begin their careers, teachers may face pressure from colleagues to avoid controversial text selections, and this pressure may give rise to self-censorship. Teachers must learn to distinguish among wise advice (i.e., that a certain book is inappropriate for learning disabled ninth graders), advice that encourages self-censorship (that a certain book should be avoided because parents will not approve) and ambiguous advice which lies somewhere between self-censorship and recognition of community standards (Small 1987).
A good source of information on censorship questions is the school librarian, who knows more than anyone about what students read and like and what parents would not wish or will not allow their children to read. The librarian is likely to be aware of review sources and rationales which endorse the selection and use of frequently attacked literature.

Language arts teachers and school librarians can work together to make literature more fully available to students. Each can offer guidance and support for the other’s attempts to broaden student access to ideas through reading (Small 1987). From online Eric at http://www.ericdigests.org/pre-9215/library.htm

First off, let me apologize for not posting recently.  I’ll try and make up for it.  Now that we are done with that, important stuff.

This post deals with this: http://mashable.com/2009/11/24/michelle-obama-image/

In summary, a site published a picture of Michelle Obama, modified in a negative way, which people found offensive.  They wanted Google to remove it from the search.  Google didn’t.  It apologized, but it didn’t remove it.

In this, I applaud Google.

Google’s job is not to analyze and classify all of the internet.  It’s job is to give people what they ask for.  People don’t realize what that means though.

For example, if I type in “teabag” wanting a picture of a teabag, and instead get the sexual act, should I complain to Google to remove those images since they were not what I wanted and they offended me?  No.  Now, granted, in that case I can prevent it by use of the SafeSearch filter.  This image obviously could not, since the filters aren’t set up that way.

So should Google try and create filters to block out other types of content?  Maybe filters to block out racist content, or filters to block out anything anti-semitic?  I think people wouldn’t have an issue with that.  Maybe they could expand it too.  Maybe make it so you can block out things you don’t like, such as homosexuals, certain ethnic groups, or even fat people!

No.  I don’ t want my internet filtered.  When I use Google, I use it at a source of information.  I expect to be told about what I search for and learn things.  In real life, I can’t hide what I don’t like . When I drive home from college, and I pass by a sign in one city that always has some new anti-Obama statement, I can’t raise a fuss to get it removed.  So why should the internet be any different?

Thank you Google.  Because of you, I get to see different people’s viewpoints.  I get to see how people act, and learn how they react.  I get to see what I may not be comfortable with, and have to learn to deal with it.  I learn to support other’s right to free speech.

And to the people who complain: deal with it.  The world is not made to make you happy.  Maybe the people who posted the image are offended by all the images that show Michelle Obama in a good light.  Yet I haven’t heard of any mass complaint by them about those images.

I oppose censorship on the internet.  It is one of the few places censorship exists, and sometimes the least biased place of all.  So keep it up Google.  Show people what they asked for, not what they want.

You may recall I pointed out a while ago that just because we have a National Classification Code doesn’t mean that has to be the last word on the issue of R18. It’s just an agreement between State AGs. There’s nothing stopping the Victorian AG, say, announcing that Victoria would rate R18 games refused classification by the national board. It’s state legislation that implements the code, and it’s state legislation that enforces it.

And whilst Australians outside South Australia can’t vote against Michael Atkinson or his government, we can vote against our own state AGs if they fail to follow through on the issue.

I’m aware this suggestion wasn’t immediately popular.

Nonetheless, I think it’s one worth exploring.

Kate Jones – a politician with a clue.

So, apparently, does a Labor MP from a different state, Kate Jones. She’s proposed the following formal petition to the Queensland Parliament:

TO: The Honourable the Speaker and Members of the Legislative Assembly of Queensland

Queensland residents draws to the attention of the House that the Classification of Computer Games and Images Act 1995 is currently out of step with the wishes of the electorate.

Your petitioners, therefore, request the House that it be amended to permit computer games to receive the R18+ classification when they have been refused classification under the Commonwealth Act.

I think that’s a positive first step. An R18 rating is important to protect children and vulnerable teenagers. It’s also important to the Australian videogame industry.

Federation was never about the entire country being held hostage to the outdated views of one crank in one state. If you’re a Queenslander, I suggest you sign the e-petition. If you’re not, I suggest you contact your AG.

Southern Weekly did an exclusive interview with US president Barack Obama during his visit in China last week.

The newspaper editor-in-chief and one of its senior journalists conducted the interview and the 6 questions they asked are:

• Favorite part about visiting China
• Whether have spare time to play basketball
• China-America cooperation in Asia-pacific region
• Timetable to acknowledge China’s market economic status
• US restrictions on high-tech export to China
• Policy on not restraining China’s rise

Sensitive issues such as China’s human rights, freedom of speech, internet blockage, etc. were not raised, or at least, not published.

According to Xing Lieshan, one of the newspaper’s senior editors, the Publicity Department of the Communist Party of China was angry about the interview and instructed that no other media or websites should republish the interview.

One reason is that the department was not informed before the interview, the other reason is that the department was not happy about certain issues talked about in the interview.

Mr. Xing explained that interviews with visiting leaders were usually conducted by Xinhua News Agency or CCTV (China Central TV), the two most loyal mouthpieces of the Communist Party, but this time, Mr. Obama handpicked Southern Weekly, probably because of its reputation for speaking for the people and exposing government scandals.

He said the Publicity Dept. is an organization of the Party, and it’s inappropriate for the US side to raise interview request with them; instead, the US delivered request to the Ministry of Foreign Affairs. It was not the newspaper’s fault that the communication between the ministry and the department broke up.

As for those sensitive topics, the newspaper was left with no choice but cutting them out before publishing. Everything happened at such a short notice that they had to leave half of the paper in blank.

However, the newspaper is very clever. They put two lines  in the centre of the blank implying China’s censorship. It says:

No everyone can become a big shot, but all can understand China right here.

PS: This is a revised version of the last post. I tried to apply general writing rules and also online writing rules. Which one do you think is better?

You might not know it, but I’m a regular on Sean Hannity’s radio show. Don’t believe me? I don’t really care. The point is, this is personal in a way. Hannity is honest, devoted, and loves his country. He doesn’t lie; and if he ever makes a mistake (HA) what does he do? He corrects it. He a man of good character. So, why does the BHussein Admin want to silence him? Because he’s great at exposing them for what they are. Scum.

Cass Sunstein: Censor Hannity, right-wing rumors
Cites websites for ‘absurd’ reports of Obama’s ties to Ayers
Article: World Net Daily

Websites should be obliged to remove “false rumors” while libel laws should be altered to make it easier to sue for spreading such “rumors,” argued Cass Sunstein, Obama’s regulatory czar.

In his recently released book, “On Rumors,” Sunstein specifically cited as a primary example of “absurd” and “hateful” remarks, reports by “right-wing websites” alleging an association between President Obama and Weatherman terrorist Bill Ayers.

First of all, Cass… Can I ask what a “false rumor” is? No, really. Is that like… True Truths? Also; check this: First Amendment of the United Stated Constitution. Don’t feel like it? Here, let me educate you: FREEDOM OF SPEECH. OOOOOHHHH SNAP. Whatcha gonna do sissy boy? Also; It’s NOOOOOOO secret that BHussein is butt buddies with Bill Ayers. Why try to cover it now? It’s been common knowledge for almost three years on a national scale now, so what’s your fucking problem? Also, how is it hateful to state something that is completely true? Sorry, carry on:

He also singled out radio talker Sean Hannity for “attacking” Obama regarding the president’s “alleged associations.”

Ayers became a name in last year’s presidential campaign when it was disclosed the radical worked closely with Obama for years. Obama also was said to have launched his political career at a 1995 fundraiser in Ayers’ apartment.

As WND reported, Obama and Ayers sat together on the board of a Chicago nonprofit, the Woods Fund. Ayers also was a founder of the Chicago Annenberg Challenge, where Obama was appointed as its first chairman in 1995.

Ayers reportedly was involved in hiring Obama for the CAC – a job the future president later touted as qualifying him to run for public office.

WND columnist Jack Cashill has produced a series of persuasive arguments that it was Ayers who ghostwrote Obama’s award-winning autobiography “Dreams from My Father.”

However, such reports were characterized by Sunstein as “absurd” charges for which corrective measures can be taken.

Sunstein’s book – reviewed by WND – was released in September, after he was already installed as the administrator of the White House Office of Information and Regulatory Affairs.

“In the era of the Internet, it has become easy to spread false or misleading rumors about almost anyone,” Sunstein writes.

“Some right-wing websites liked to make absurd and hateful remarks about the alleged relationship between Barack Obama and the former radical Bill Ayers; one of the websites’ goals was undoubtedly to attract more viewers,” he writes.

Oh? So you don’t like it when “right-wing” websites make hateful remarks about BHussein and his relationship with Bill Ayers? Well how’s THIS one, CASSIEPOO? Barack Hussein Obama admires Bill Ayers because HE is a homegrown unrepentant terrorist who carried out acts of terrorism AGAINST the government. BHussein Obama LOVES and admires terrorists; although Ayers isn’t BHussein’s favourite “flavour” of terrorist. It’s no secret that BHussein favours the radical Islamist and Muslim terrorists; but he’ll take what he can get. Don’t like it? Suck a fat one, queerboy. I hear BHussein likes to get blowjobs if you give him a line of coke. THAT’S RIGHT, I SAID IT.

Sunstein continues: “On the Internet as well as on talk radio, altruistic propagators are easy to find; they play an especially large role in the political domain. When Sean Hannity, the television talk show host, attacked Barack Obama because of his alleged associations, one of his goals might have been to promote values and causes that he cherishes.”

Sunstein presents multiple new measures he argues can be used to stop the spread of “rumors.”

He contends “freedom usually works, but in some contexts, it is an incomplete corrective.”

Wrong you fuckface sack of shitballs. FREEDOM ALWAYS WORKS.

Sunstein proposes the imposition of a “chilling effect” on “damaging rumors” – or the use of strong “corrective” measures to deter future rumormongers.

For websites, Sunstein suggests a “right to notice and take down” in which “those who run websites would be obliged to take down falsehoods upon notice.”

WROOOOOOOOOOOONG. You want to have ME delete ANYTHING from my site; you’ll have to do it over my dead body. And based on the rising Obama Body count; I don’t think he’d have a problem with it. Besides, how “damaging” were these rumors statements? BHussein got his foot in the door. He’s living in the White House. No, he’s not acting like a PRESIDENT, but he’s living in the White House. So, damaging? PLZ ‘SPLAIN.

Sunstein also argues for the “right to demand a retraction after a clear demonstration that a statement is both false and damaging.” But he does not explain which agency would determine whether any statement is false and damaging.

Sunstein further pushes for “deterrence” through making libel lawsuits easier to bring.

Bring your goddamned lawsuits. You don’t own me. You can’t control me. I’m not scared of ANY of you. Not even close. Most of us patriots will continue to spread the truth; because the mainstream media has failed us. They turned their backs on their duties and they decided to follow along mindlessly slobbing any Obama knob they can. That’s right.

Sunstein drafted ‘New Deal Fairness Doctrine’

Sunstein’s proposals outlined in his book “On Rumors” were not the first of his writings to recommend regulating talk radio or the news media.

WND previously reported Sunstein drew up a “First Amendment New Deal” – a new “Fairness Doctrine” that would include the establishment of a panel of “nonpartisan experts” to ensure “diversity of view” on the airwaves.

Then it has to be enforced across the board. I want MSNBC and CNN… Larry King, Chris Matthews, KEITH OLBERMANN, Katie Couric to get off their high horses and treat OUR side with some goddamned respect. Did Sarah Palin get the same respect? No. Were her children needlessly attacked? Absolutely. Was President Bush given any respect from these doucheass low-rating shitstains? Nope. Why? To brighten the tarnished image that IS Barack Hussein Obama. Also, you have no right to change ANYTHING about the United Stated Constitution in order to make Barack Hussein look like a savory character. That’s not how it works. It’s up to HIM and HIM ALONE to make his image. Not you. Not me. Not the media.

Sunstein compared the need for the government to regulate broadcasting to the moral obligation of the U.S. to impose new rules that outlawed segregation.

Sunstein’s radical proposal, set forth in his 1993 book “The Partial Constitution,” received no news media attention and scant scrutiny until the WND report.

In the book, Sunstein outwardly favors and promotes the “Fairness Doctrine,” the abolished FCC policy that required holders of broadcast licenses to present controversial issues of public importance in a manner the government deemed “equitable and balanced.”

Sunstein introduces what he terms his “First Amendment New Deal” to regulate broadcasting in the U.S.

His proposal, which focuses largely on television, includes a government requirement that “purely commercial stations provide financial subsidies to public television or to commercial stations that agree to provide less profitable but high-quality programming.”

Sunstein wrote it is “worthwhile to consider more dramatic approaches as well.”

He proposes “compulsory public-affairs programming, right of reply, content review by nonpartisan experts or guidelines to encourage attention to public issues and diversity of view.”

The Obama czar argues his regulation proposals for broadcasting are actually presented within the spirit of the Constitution.

“It seems quite possible that a law that contained regulatory remedies would promote rather than undermine the ‘freedom of speech,’” he writes.

Sunstein compares the need for the government to regulate broadcasting to the moral obligation of the government stepping in to end segregation.

Writes Sunstein: “The idea that government should be neutral among all forms of speech seems right in the abstract, but as frequently applied it is no more plausible than the idea that it should be neutral between the associational interests of blacks and those of whites under conditions of segregation.“

Sunstein contends the landmark case that brought about the Fairness Doctrine, Red Lion Broadcasting Co. v. Federal Communications Commission, “stresses not the autonomy of broadcasters (made possible only by current ownership rights), but instead the need to promote democratic self-government by ensuring that people are presented with a broad range of views about public issues.“

He continues: “In a market system, this goal may be compromised. It is hardly clear that ‘the freedom of speech’ is promoted by a regime in which people are permitted to speak only if other people are willing to pay enough to allow them to be heard.“

In his book, Sunstein slams the U.S. courts’ unwillingness to “require something like a Fairness Doctrine” to be a result of “the judiciary’s lack of democratic pedigree, lack of fact-finding powers and limited remedial authority.”

He clarifies he is not arguing the government should be free to regulate broadcasting however it chooses.

“Regulation designed to eliminate a particular viewpoint would of course be out of bounds. All viewpoint discrimination would be banned,” Sunstein writes.

But, he says, “at the very least, regulative ‘fairness doctrines’ would raise no real doubts” constitutionally.

Fuck you, Cass Sunstein. You’re a fucking faggot. That’s fucking right. Am I offending you? DRY YOUR GODDAMNED VAGINA AND GET THE FUCK OVER IT.

When I guest-blogged on Boing Boing a couple of weeks ago a lot of frustrated would-be posters wrongly assumed that it was me that was preventing them from being heard. It wasn’t. Boing Boing reserves the right to delete or “disemvowel” comments at will and without explanation–it employs moderators to make sure that racist, sexist, homophobic, and gratuitously ad hominem language is suppressed, that posters aren’t flamed, and that a reasonably civil tone is maintained. Links to relatively innocuous You Tube videos, for example, were taken down if they were hosted on sites that also sell The Protocols of the Learned Elders of Zion. The first amendment doesn’t compel third parties to provide a free forum for protected speech–it only prevents the government from banning it. Telling someone to peddle their filth elsewhere or quietly suppressing their remarks isn’t remotely the same thing as censorship. Organizing a boycott of Rush Limbaugh’s or Glenn Beck’s sponsors isn’t an assault on free speech either; it’s free enterprise.

That said, when I started this blog, I decided that I would have an open door policy for posts, so long as they didn’t specifically libel or defame any private citizens. I don’t have a brand to protect, I don’t carry advertisements, I’m not afraid of controversy, and the only agenda I have is the promotion of critical thinking. If I post something about, say, the irrationality of 9/11 denial and a 9/11 Denialist responds by posting something irrational, then the poster has helped me prove my point. If on the other hand the Denialist catches me repeating someone’s falsehood or saying something that’s otherwise in error, it’s still a win for both of us, because the truth is served. The other day I wrote something snarky about the Anti-Defamation League, prompting two anti-Semites to post some really scurrilous commentary. Their words were vile and hurtful, but–and I’m sure this wasn’t their intention–they also provided eloquent testimony as to the continuing importance and relevance of the ADL’s mission. A third post appeared this morning, which pissed me off royally and made me realize that even my tolerance has its limits.

Since I started writing this, I noticed that Green Left Weekly just announced that it’s dis-allowing posts about 9/11 Truth conspiracies on its message board, citing me as one of their reasons (“Boingboing had as their guest blogger a week or two ago Arthur Goldwag who has written a great deal on what’s wrong with conspiracy theorists in general and why its impossible to seriously discuss them”). It’s ironic, but not at all unreasonable, considering Green Left Weekly’s explicitly activist agenda. I’m going to keep my own door open for now. But if enough haters abuse my hospitality, I’ll have to make some changes as well.

After Adam Lambert’s pornographic performance at the American Music Awards, this seems the least ABC can do.

First on TVNewser: American Idol runner-up Adam Lambert won’t be appearing on “Good Morning America” tomorrow.

TVNewser has learned ABC News canceled the concert after Lambert’s sexually charged performance at the American Music Awards Sunday night. Lambert led men on leashes, dragged a woman by her foot, and smashed a man’s head into his crotch, all while singing his new single “For Your Entertainment.”

They ended up cutting the simulated oral sex when the show aired on delay on the west coast, which makes one wonder why they allowed the performance to go on the air at all.

ABC, which aired the awards show, received about 1,500 phone calls from people complaining about the performance, a number ABC calls “moderate.”

Lambert had promoted the appearance promising that he’d be offering up a shocker, and don’t they do these things on a 10 second delay since the Wardrobe Malfunction at the Super Bowl a couple of years back?

An ABC News spokesperson tells TVNewser, “given his controversial live performance on the AMAs we were concerned about airing a similar concert so early in the morning.”

Lambert performed as part of GMA’s summer concert series in August, and it was in a “20/20″ interview that Lambert came out, telling Chris Connelly, “I am gay, and I’m very comfortable with it.”

World Bloggers: Support detained and imprisoned bloggers throughout the world!

Bucharest, 17th of November 2009 – World Bloggers outspeak their support to two imprisoned video blogging youth activists in Azerbaijan as well as all persecuted, detained and imprisoned bloggers throughout the world. Continue to read.

and other issues in CyberWorld

Internet blocking balancing cybercrime responses in democratic societies

Prepared by
Cormac Callanan (Ireland)
Marco Gercke (Germany)
Estelle De Marco (France)
Hein Dries-Ziekenheiner (Netherlands)

Google Chrome OS To Launch Within A Week

Google’s Chrome OS project, first announced in July, will become available for download within a week, we’ve heard from a reliable source. Google previously said to expect an early version of the OS in the fall.

What can we expect? Driver support will likely be a weak point. We’ve heard at various times that Google has a legion of engineers working on the not so glamorous task of building hardware drivers. And we’ve also heard conflicting rumors that Google is mostly relying on hardware manufacturers to create those drivers. Whatever the truth, and it’s likely in between, having a robust set of functioning drivers is extremely important to Chrome OS’s success. People will want to download this to whatever computer they use and have it just work.

Britain’s new internet law,

The government has revealed details of its Digital Economy Bill, trailed in the Queen’s Speech. One proposal which has already attracted a great deal of attention is the introduction of new penalties for those suspected of internet piracy, from disconnection to hefty fines. Laws which allow the swift termination of pirates’ internet connections (often on a ‘three strikes and you’re out’ basis) have been spreading across the world recently, from France to South Korea.

Featured Author: Filip Stojanovski

Filip Stojanovski is a Global Voices author and translator based in Skopje, Macedonia. He is the Program Coordinator of Metamorphosis, a think tank which seeks the development of democracy and prosperity by promoting knowledge-based economy and information society. He has been blogging in both English and Macedonian since 2003 and has written a number of essays and research papers. His essay “Some Sources Of Bias In Reporting About Macedonia” is especially relevant to those interested in global perceptions of Macedonia.

Featured Author: Diego Casaes

This past week at the Brazilian Digital Culture Forum [pt] I had a chance to meet up with Diego Casaes, a dedicated Global Voices author and translator from Salvador, Brazil. Much of Diego’s writing on Global Voices has spread awareness about legislative threats to online freedom in Brazil, such as the infamous “Azeredo Bill“. He has also profiled cyber-activists like João Carlos Caribé and Daniel Pádua (who just lost his life to cancer) and their attempts to protect the individual freedoms and social bonds enabled by the Internet.

DOWNLOAD/VIEW FULL FILE FROM

fastest (Sweden), slow (US)

Figures. Obama Commie Czar Wants Hannity & Rightwing Websites Censured
November 24, 2009 by Gateway Pundit

One of the communist-supporters and kooks working with Obama in the White House wants Sean Hannity and rightwing websites muzzled.
Regulatory Czar Cass Sunstein wrote this in his latest book.
World Net Daily and FOX Nation reported:

Websites should be obliged to remove “false rumors” while libel laws should be altered to make it easier to sue for spreading such “rumors,” argued Cass Sunstein, Obama’s regulatory czar.

In his recently released book, “On Rumors,” Sunstein specifically cited as a primary example of “absurd” and “hateful” remarks, reports by “right-wing websites” alleging an association between President Obama and Weatherman terrorist Bill Ayers.

He also singled out radio talker Sean Hannity for “attacking” Obama regarding the president’s “alleged associations.”

Ayers became a name in last year’s presidential campaign when it was disclosed the radical worked closely with Obama for years. Obama also was said to have launched his political career at a 1995 fundraiser in Ayers’ apartment.

Has anyone asked Mr. Sunstein what would have happened to Dan Rather during the scandal about Bush’s National Guard records had these proposed laws been in effect?

Democrats, bias, bigotry, censorship, discrimination, elitism, free speech, government, hate speech, hypocrisy, intolerance, left wing, liberalism, marxism, nanny state, oppression, pandering, philosophy, political correctness, politics, propaganda, scandal, socialism

I’ve got ten minutes to lunch and so thought I’d post a couple items.

• It’s the 150th anniversary of the publication of Darwin’s “On the Origin of Species”. An auction house in London is putting up a rare first printing found in a bathroom bookshelf.
• Salty Ink has a brief article on a new anthology of Atlantic Canadian short fiction. Some great authors in this one.
• First ever graphic novel to be published in Egypt has been yanked on claims of indecency. There are fines and everything. Censorship likes to love up on you it seems.

Cass Sunstein: Progressive Idiot

The battle to censor anyone who disagrees with Obama continues. First it was Anita “Mao” Dunn attacking Fox News because they actually report the news that Obama doesn’t want people to hear. In particular ACORN, SEIU and green jobs commie, Van Jones. Obama and “Mao” Dunn did not want the alphabet-media to take a page from Fox News and actually start investigating the words Obama was saying or his associations with these corrupt communist/socialists he has appointed to his administration.

 Now that Anita “Mao” Dunn is gone, Obama’s regulations czar is taking up the same talking points. This Progressive czar believes that websites should be required to remove “false rumors” he deems to be untrue and he wants to alter libel laws so it would be easier to sue for spreading such “rumors.”

WND reports:

In his recently released book, “On Rumors,” Sunstein specifically cited as a primary example of “absurd” and “hateful” remarks, reports by “right-wing websites” alleging an association between President Obama and Weatherman terrorist Bill Ayers.

He also singled out radio talker Sean Hannity for “attacking” Obama regarding the president’s “alleged associations.”

In the era of the Internet , it has become easy to spread false or misleading rumors about almost anyone,” Sunstein writes.

 ”Some right-wing websites liked to make absurd and hateful remarks about the alleged relationship between Barack Obama and the former radical Bill Ayers; one of the websites’ goals was undoubtedly to attract more viewers,” he writes.

Sunstein continues: “On the Internet as well as on talk radio, altruistic propagators are easy to find; they play an especially large role in the political domain. When Sean Hannity, the television talk show host, attacked Barack Obama because of his alleged associations, one of his goals might have been to promote values and causes that he cherishes.”

We have progressive with positions inside Obama’s administration that believe in censorship and have the power to change the rules to fit their socialist agendas. Cass Sunstein is one and FCC Diversity Czar, Mark Lloyd is another. Both of these progressives have admitted their love for socialism and Marxism.

Cass Sunstein also has some bat-shit crazy beliefs like that trees can sue people. He also wants to ban hunting and repeal the 2nd amendment. The sad fact is that this libtard made it through congressional confirmation, despite his radical beliefs. However, Obama has shown his desire to be surrounded by radicals.

My flight to China was easier than anticipated.  To fill you in on the backstory: I received an email three weeks ago saying my flight was canceled due to the typhoon.  Yes, the typhoon.  That wimpy ridiculous drizzle that somehow made international news.  The one that “hit” Taiwan and Japan and didn’t so much as sneeze near Korea or China.  THREE WEEKS AGO.  Somehow this affected my flight on Sunday.  What do these people do when there is ACTUALLY a typhoon??  They said they put me on their “partner airline” of the Korean persuasion, but didn’t tell me which airline, what airport, what flight number, things of this sort.  Crucial information.  Nor could I get my hands on a confirmation number.  I HIGHLY expected to lose an argument at the ticket counter and be forced to buy another ticket.  For some reason or another the travel gods decided to kick me a bone.  I had to stand around for fifteen minutes or so while they sorted out their paperwork, but otherwise was given a seat on Korean Airlines hassle free.

Better still, the flight was nowhere near full, and the airbus was a massive (standard international-sized) one, and I had a segment against the windows all to myself.  Nice.  As with every flight I’ve taken thus far (except the one from Busan to Jejudo that involved an older Korean woman elbowing me like it was her life’s mission), it was all too short.  Yes, too short.  Yes, even the long haul to Tokyo.  ESPECIALLY the long haul to Tokyo.  DAYS too short.  Hey, if you were being waited on hand and foot, you wouldn’t want it to end in a mere thirteen hours either.  I now have a new found appreciation for Bose noise canceling headphones — those things WORK.  We’re talking perfect silence.  And they pass them out with a smile and a “Can I bring you anything else, Miss Smith? Perhaps some Belgian chocolate? A three course snackeroo?  A pony?”  Anyway, I digress.

I was hoping to be fed, but considering the flight was a quick up down in under two hours, I figured I’d be tossed a glass of orange juice and kicked out the door.  (My choices on Korean flights thus far have been orange juice and orange juice.  No other “choice” to be had.  Glass given to you half empty, which is a cruel tease as far as my American stomach is concerned.)  Much to my surprise and delight, we were fed.  And a decent meal at that: curried shrimp and veggies with rice, a roll, a small side salad (I haven’t seen a salad since my first week in Japan — I attacked that thing like it was the fountain of youth), and two perfectly soft fresh and tender mochi.  Two!  Proper silverware and dishes and everything.  And to top it all off, I was offered a beer.  A FULL beer.  An ENTIRE can of beverage!  Korean Air, you’ve got to show your domestic competitors how to run their businesses.  And then they came around and offered tea.  It was NICE.  They probably thought I was some ill-mannered American who shoveled food into her face at an alarming speed, but I’m pretty sure I’ve left that impression on everyone I’ve come across thus far.  At least I’m consistent.

I wasn’t worried about immigration in China, but I was expecting some sort of cross examination or another.  I mean, everything you hear it’s like don’t so much as scratch your nose or you’re pounced on.  They’ve definitely got the eerie thing down pat.  It’s your standard row of airport border patrol stalls and it’s DEAD quiet.  Can you say palpable unease?  But then they stamp your passport and wave you on your way without so much as glancing in your direction.  Thirty seconds tops.  The Japanese finger-printed me.  The Chinese couldn’t be bothered to so much as utter a syllable.  And customs doesn’t even exist.  All those signs saying no fruit or exotic animals or narcotics from abroad?  Bring whatever you like kiddos, they couldn’t be bothered to search your bags even if you begged them to.  Not exaggerating, there literally was no customs check whatsoever.  Not a single official to be found.  Stamp the passport, grab your luggage, walk through the door.  Done.

I then walked to the Maglev terminal, which is the world’s first train propelled by magnets.  Yes, magnets.  I don’t understand it either.  It’s also the world’s fastest train.  Apparently it’s the fastest ANYTHING you can go on the ground.  (Except you’re actually hovering above the ground because again, magnets; there is no actual contact to create friction.)  435 kilometers per hour.  FOUR HUNDRED AND THIRTY FIVE!  The shinkansen clock in at just under three.  Yee-ow!  That being said, my heart (and admiration) firmly belongs to the shinkansen.  The Maglev may move fast, but it’s bumpy and noisy.  How it can be so bumpy when there is no contact and no friction and you’re supposedly just hovering over the earth at rocket speed, I’m not sure.  But the whole time you’re being jostled in your seat.  The ride is just under twenty minutes; according to the guidebook the first eight are spent accelerating (with a speedometer helpfully clocking away in each cabin), and as soon as it hits top speed it immediately deaccelerates.  Immediately.  C’mon guys.  With that kind of advertising I want to be wowed for longer than I can count to five.

Aside from not being able to get my hands on a map of Shanghai (disconcerting much?) and the total and utter unwillingness to offer assistance from those who are EMPLOYED TO DO SO (i.e. ticket window attendants and similar), China’s been great thus far.  The directions to the hostel were simple and straightforward, the subway system is a dream, and the city is laid out on typical grid that makes the no map thing possible (if I were in Korea there’d be NO WAY I could get anywhere without a map — that country is ANYTHING but intuitive and straightforward and grid-like).  Even better, EVERY single street I’ve passed is CLEARLY marked with great big legible signs.  Every single one.  Wow.  Thank you, Shanghai.

The big doozie for me at the moment is the censorship thing.  I can’t access basic sites like Twitter and Facebook and YouTube and WordPress.  (The others I get.  WordPress throws me.)  Sites that allow and foster and encourage dialogue and communication and community-building.  What’s that?  You want to connect with a friend outside the country?  Sorry pal, ain’t gonna happen.  I’ve been given a list of sites for proxy servers that are supposed to be encrypted to allow you to bypass the firewalls, but China being big and smart and oh, CHINA, is one step ahead and has blocked all those too.  So I turned to Google and even that has been of no help thus far (although I’m sure Google’s got something up its sleeve I’m just not aware of).  There’s a service you can purchase for access, and I will probably do as much in the next day or two.  In the meantime I’m holding out to be sure I’ve exhausted all the other options.  If anyone knows of any proxy sites they recommend, please send them my way!  Hugely appreciated.  Also, Bill Clinton, I hope you’re reading this.  When it’s my turn to be bailed out in a few weeks I’ll be calling you directly.  Thanks Pumpkin.

Internet censorship aside, the easing into China is going quite well.  (Now that I’ve said that I’m sure I’ll be kicked in the face.)