[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]
Re: Statement from a Berkely Antifa FashBash participant
"Pre-crimes shall be punished with violence and, if the pre-crime
perpetrator does not cease and decist to continue thinking what they
think, pre-emptive death is the final solution," says Razer.
The question is, will Razer back down from this position, just like his
pathetic favourite film director Judd Apatow
or will more cars have to plow through Razer's Antifa mobs
to survive the knuckle dusting "encouragement against pre-crime",
destruction of personal property, and pre-emptive murder "final
"Hey, you KNEW you were thinking that unacceptable thought, so DON'T
blame ME for putting you into a coma you evil pre-crime thinker!"
With another bong, anything's possible in his mind.
With a bong, my thoughts are more equal than others',
indeed my thoughts are the ultimate truth to which all
other truths shall bow, by force.
On Thu, Feb 02, 2017 at 05:47:20PM -0800, Razer wrote:
> Milo Yiannopoulos planned to publicly name allegedly undocumented
> students at UC Berkeley, endangering them. Debate over. Shutting him
> down was legal and necessary and UC should have done it but they were
> probably unaware of his intent. So locals and students did it.
> Here's a good example of what happens if teaching staff does something
> stupid like that.
> > SAN JOSE — An Oak Grove High School PE teacher who allegedly told a
> > student that he might be deported once Donald Trump is president has
> > been placed on leave and is under investigation.
> > The teacher, who hasn’t been publicly identified, spoke to a student
> > who was refusing to stand as the national anthem played last week on
> > the campus, Superintendent Chris Funk said.
> > The teacher asked the student to stand. When the student refused, NBC
> > Bay Area reported, the teacher said, “Good luck with being deported
> > now that Donald Trump is president. … You guys had it better here than
> > you will over there.”
> > Other students witnessed the incident. One told NBC Bay Area, “We just
> > stayed seated, quietly, respecting everybody, not saying any rude
> > comments whatsoever.” The student added, “I was actually shocked and
> > angry because I never thought I’d hear this coming from a teacher.”
> > A student reported the incident to school officials, Funk said, and
> > the East Side Union High School District intervened by placing the
> > teacher on paid leave.
> > Funk said that the teacher has been in the district for some time.
> > Pending the outcome of the district’s investigation, the teacher could
> > receive a letter of reprimand or be suspended, he said.
> > In the aftermath of the election, the district has posted a letter on
> > its homepage, saying that students deserve a secure environment to
> > process the election results, and asking teachers to remain neutral,
> > share information, listen to both sides of any issue and create a safe
> > space in class and school for discussion.
> > “No question that some of our students who are undocumented are
> > concerned about deportation and what’s going to happen to their
> > families,” Funk said.
> On 02/02/2017 05:24 PM, Razer wrote:
> > On 02/02/2017 04:46 PM, jim bell wrote:
> >> No, they can't. And don't call me Shirley!!!
> >> Jim Bell
> > In the state of California anything that might be construed as
> > inculcating hate in students can be banned. Even the color or brand of
> > clothes allowed on school property (Red/Blue/Ben Davis et al) that
> > might cause hate between various sociocultural factions. (Blue-Norteno
> > family roots/Red-Sureno family roots)
> > Schools have pretty much free say over what is permissible within
> > their facilities and with their equipment and ALWAYS have. In the 60s
> > I can't even recount how many students were disciplined for publishing
> > non-hateful anti-war content in school newspapers, by rote... That
> > right has been consistently upheld by every court these cases appear in.
> > ANY potential disruptor to school business or safety (according to the
> > local board of edu) is simply and effectively banned. And considering
> > most neonazi organizations are considered hate groups, promoting it is
> > a no-no on school property. Promoting racism is certainly a no-no, and
> > whether the students Moron was going to "Document" are "Undocumented"
> > according to his wrong opinion, they ARE attending UCB LEGALLY and
> > have a right to be protected from his vilification on school grounds.
> > Rr
> >> From: Razer <g2s AT riseup.net>
> >> To: cypherpunks AT lists.cpunks.org
> >> Sent: Thursday, February 2, 2017 4:44 PM
> >> Subject: Re: Statement from a Berkely Antifa FashBash participant
> >> That's right. Schools have BROAD authority, and hate speech...
> ESPECIALLY the sort that might lead to BULLYING, surely can be limited.
> >> On 02/02/2017 04:32 PM, jim bell wrote:
> >>> I will add:
> >>> May schools limit the time, place, and manner of student expression?
> >>> Yes, as long as the time, place, and manner regulations are
> reasonable and nondiscriminatory.
> >>> The U.S. Supreme Court has said that "laws regulating the time,
> place or manner of speech stand on a different footing than laws
> prohibiting speech altogether."1First Amendment jurisprudence provides
> that time, place, and manner restrictions on speech are constitutional
> if (1) they are content neutral (i.e., they do not treat speech
> differently based on content); (2) they are narrowly tailored to serve a
> governmental interest; and (3) they leave open ample alternative means
> of expression.
> >>> Courts will generally grant even more deference to time, place, and
> manner restrictions in public schools because students do not possess
> the same level of rights as adults in a public forum. However, the time,
> place, and manner regulations must still be reasonable. This means that
> school officials could limit student distribution of material to certain
> locations and at certain times, but those regulations would need to be
> both reasonable and nondiscriminatory.
> >>> Notes
> >>> 1 Linmark Associates, Inc. v. Township of Willingboro, 431 U.S. 85