It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.

Please white-list or disable AboveTopSecret.com in your ad-blocking tool.

Thank you.

 

Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.

 

Students walk out in protest of teacher suspension

page: 11
1
<< 8  9  10    12  13  14 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Mar, 8 2006 @ 02:43 PM
link   

Originally posted by Benevolent Heretic
If he wants to share his views, he's free to, but he is under no obligation to do so for some radio host.


What would you say if the radio host was a parent of one of the students in the class? If that were the case (no I am not saying it is the case just posing it as a possibility) then as a parent who pays his salary the parent would have every right to ask him those very same questions wouldn't he?

I am willing to bet if the reporter had asked Bush the very same questions and he refused to answer, you would want Bush's head wouldn't you? :shk: Just what makes the teacher any different they are both public servants?




posted on Mar, 8 2006 @ 02:46 PM
link   

Originally posted by dgtempe
The kid will be going to a private school where the tuition will assure him equal treatment.
My guess is he's had a few threats.


HAHAHA That’s hilarious!
That'll teach that lousy stupid kid for exercising the rights you've been defending Bennish for having. Maybe he'll get killed and teach those neocons what it really means to speak out! Wouldn't that be great? Or even better, since those stupid neocons have those family values things, take out his family! YEAH! That would teach those stupid &%#$ers not to open their mouths about things they see as injustice! Only a liberal can decide what justice is, the stupid morons!

What an awful thing to say and laugh about :shk:


Originally posted by esdad71
If the kid is suddenly not answering certain questions it is probably because of legal advice.


So far as I've heard, the kid's not in any legal dealings over this. He's not being sued or prosecuted, and isn't suing or prosecuting Bennish. Where would this legal advice be coming from?


Originally posted by Benevolent Heretic
Bennish says he has "never had a situation like this take place before".

If he had, we'd all know his name already.


Originally posted by esdad71
So, he has free choice but his students do not since they HAVE to sit and listen? This doesn't sound to fair to me, and more like a communist classroom where the kids can't speak and have to listen to what ever the teacher states.


Haven't you gotten it yet? He has a free choice to voice his opinion because he agrees (or in some cases, his accuser disagrees) with his defenders' opinions and ideologies. Sean Allen has a free choice to walk out of the class and fail if he has a problem, or drop the class and take another year of high school. That's the way it should be, as long as the teacher doesn't say anything Christian or conservative. The victim is supposed to be punished, remember?



posted on Mar, 8 2006 @ 03:00 PM
link   
So, the kid should have to fail because he does not agree with his teacher political views? Are you serious?



posted on Mar, 8 2006 @ 03:10 PM
link   

Originally posted by esdad71
So, the kid should have to fail because he does not agree with his teacher political views? Are you serious?


Not at all, and I was kind of unfair explaining the thoughts of Bennish's defenders. I keep failing telepathy 101, but I'm learning to pretend


That is, however, what I'm reading in this argument that Bennish has every right to use his classroom as a pulpit to voice his ideology to a forced audience. The students have no rights without repercussions, but the teacher can say and do whatever he wants (as long as he doesn't say anything about religion) with no fallout or repercussions.



posted on Mar, 8 2006 @ 04:05 PM
link   

Originally posted by junglejake
The students have no rights without repercussions, but the teacher can say and do whatever he wants (as long as he doesn't say anything about religion) with no fallout or repercussions.


Well, if that's what you're reading in my arguments, then either I have failed miserably to explain my position, or else you stubbornly refuse to hear what I'm actually saying, which is that there is room for both parties to be partially at fault.

It doesn't have to be all one way or the other. I know that's simpler, being that it's black and white, but the truth is that this situation is chock full of gray.



posted on Mar, 8 2006 @ 04:57 PM
link   

Originally posted by Benevolent Heretic
Well, if that's what you're reading in my arguments, then either I have failed miserably to explain my position, or else you stubbornly refuse to hear what I'm actually saying, which is that there is room for both parties to be partially at fault.

I, for one, have not been convinced that the student did anything wrong at all. What has he done wrong? Gone to the media? That's not a crime. Even if I were to say that was fault on his part, it would not make him 50% at fault. The teacher would still be 99% at fault because of all he did that was unquestionably wrong.



posted on Mar, 8 2006 @ 05:10 PM
link   

Originally posted by jsobecky
I, for one, have not been convinced that the student did anything wrong at all. What has he done wrong? Gone to the media? That's not a crime.


So, in defense of the boy, he didn't commit a crime. What crime did Bennish commit?



Even if I were to say that was fault on his part, it would not make him 50% at fault. The teacher would still be 99% at fault because of all he did that was unquestionably wrong.


It's your opinion that what Bennish did is "unquestionable wrong". I assure you there are plenty of people who think he did absolutely nothing wrong.

And I said nothing about percentages of guilt or wrongdoing. I don't even know the whole story, so wouldn't presume to guess.

I find myself in the unusual and uncomfortable position of being accused of saying things I didn't say because of people's perception and assumptions about how I feel. Interesting that I should feel somewhat sympathetic to Mr. Bennish, huh?



posted on Mar, 8 2006 @ 05:14 PM
link   
I liked imao.us... 's parody of Bennish running into a school's mock war crimes trial for Bush:


Bennish ran into the room. "You may have thought that Nazi youth’s tactics to destroy me by letting people hear what I say would have worked, but I'm still here!" He then pointed at Bush and looked to the students around him. "Have you all seen what he does? He uses words and things to influence you... just like Hitler!"


BH, I'm with jso on on this. I don't see what Sean Allen did wrong. I can see what Bennish, if these accusations turn out to be true, did do wrong.

As someone pointed out, what do you think the reaction would have been had a 20-minute recording of a teacher ranting about how black slaves didn't have it so bad was presented to the media?
What would the reaction have been if a 20-minute recording of a teacher denying the holocaust were presented to the media?
What would the reaction have been if a 20-minute recording of a teacher decrying voting rights for women were presented to the media?
What would the reaction have been if a 20-minute recording of a teacher saying the terrorists were justified in blowing up the World Trade Center? Oh, wait, strike that one, we now have 2 examples.
What would the reaction have been if a 20-minute recording of a teacher suggesting men are better at the sciences and math than women are were presented to the media? Whoops, did it again. Let me try once more.
What would the reaction have been if a 20-minute recording of a teacher suggesting every Muslim is a terrorist and all of them must be eradicated?

The defense I've seen is that Bennish is allowed to free speech in the classroom, and the world outside of his classroom has no right to know what his political inclinations are. I would suggest that his political leanings are relevant. If his diatribe was perfectly in line with what he believes, and he wasn't just stirring up controversy and thought but presenting his point of view, there would be no reason for me to believe this isn't a typical class. By not knowing his political and ideological beliefs, it makes it easier for his defenders to say that this isn't the norm.



posted on Mar, 8 2006 @ 05:38 PM
link   

Originally posted by junglejake
The defense I've seen is that Bennish is allowed to free speech in the classroom,


You've seen Bennish or his lawyer say that this is a matter of free speech? Or are you just taking the word of the sensationalistic media?

Because this is NOT a matter of free speech. A teacher agrees to a certain decorum in a classroom. He cannot talk about just anything. I'm waiting to see if his school decides whether his lecture falls within those limits. I know you all have already decided that he should be fired based on a 20 minute tape you heard, but I'm not so anxious for blood.



and the world outside of his classroom has no right to know what his political inclinations are.


Since when does being a teacher cancel one's right to privacy?



If his diatribe was perfectly in line with what he believes, and he wasn't just stirring up controversy and thought but presenting his point of view, there would be no reason for me to believe this isn't a typical class.


No, because that's what you want to believe. I personally believe that what he said IS in line with his personal beliefs. But I don't believe this was a typical class or that the other 30 minutes of that very class wasn't balanced by other views, as Bennish claims it was. What happened? Did the tape run out?



By not knowing his political and ideological beliefs, it makes it easier for his defenders to say that this isn't the norm.


And acknowledging that they ARE his political beliefs makes it easier for the witch-hunters to burn him at the stake.

What you are suggesting here goes directly against a basic freedom we have. And that's the right to privacy. We are under no obligation to reveal our personal beliefs. And I'm apalled that you all have this guy as guilty based on such little evidence. It's disgusting.

Edit: Jake, can you tell me SPECIFICALLY what this teacher did wrong. Or anyone for that matter. What specific action did he take or words did he speak that you consider so undeniably 'wrong'?

[edit on 8-3-2006 by Benevolent Heretic]



posted on Mar, 8 2006 @ 06:46 PM
link   

Originally posted by Benevolent Heretic
Edit: Jake, can you tell me SPECIFICALLY what this teacher did wrong. Or anyone for that matter. What specific action did he take or words did he speak that you consider so undeniably 'wrong'?


Well I am not Jake but I can tell you for a fact some of what he stated was down right wrong.

1. He stated NC was the largest grower of tabacco in the world. Buzz wrong answer, Russia grows more tabacco.

Source

2. He stated that us forces have been fighting in Columbia for 30 years. Buzz wrong answer again. The US has only been in Columbia for roughy 20 years.

Source

Those are just two errors, we can thank a blog in Isreal for those tid bits and there are more, check out the link


www.israpundit.com...

The guy should not even be teaching school, it is clear he does not know what he is talking about.




[edit on 3/8/2006 by shots]



posted on Mar, 8 2006 @ 06:50 PM
link   
Not the teacher, no. I don't really see the problem in what he said, even if it was a daily occurance, as long as he taught the kids World Geography well enough to where they could pass a standardized test for their grade level (ACT, SAT, etc.). If he wants to tell them what he believes, he can. If he wants to present it as fact, he can. It will lead to thought, as you said, and probably dinner table discussions with the parents, who may refute the "facts" presented, and may not. If not, the kids were going to hear the same thing at home. If so, the kids will be exposed to two sides of an issue and hopefully realize there's always more to the story than what is presented to you and you must research into it yourself to find what really is.

Just let me profess my faith in Jesus Christ in the same forum, in this case the classroom.

(sorry about any misspellings, gmail's down and I don't have Word on this compy)



posted on Mar, 8 2006 @ 07:30 PM
link   

Originally posted by Benevolent Heretic
So, in defense of the boy, he didn't commit a crime. What crime did Bennish commit?

Neither side commited a crime. But the teacher broke school regulations by not providing an alternate point of view.



And I said nothing about percentages of guilt or wrongdoing. I don't even know the whole story, so wouldn't presume to guess.

No, the percentages were my response to your statement that "there is room for both parties to be partially at fault." I was stipulating that premise for the sake of discussion.

What did the student do to be at fault?


I find myself in the unusual and uncomfortable position of being accused of saying things I didn't say because of people's perception and assumptions about how I feel. Interesting that I should feel somewhat sympathetic to Mr. Bennish, huh?

Except that we have the teachers exact words on tape. He did go on a liberal, left-wing rant. He had no guest speaker in the classroom to refute what he was saying. You cannot count the students as the alternative voice; they are there to learn. And it does no good to bring in an opposing viewpoint the day or week after. It's only fair that s/he be there to counter Bennish's arguments as they are made.

And I don't know who is accusing you of saying things you didn't say. If I did, it was inadvertant, and I apologize.



posted on Mar, 8 2006 @ 08:45 PM
link   
JJ, you know better than to accuse me of something sadistic as that.
Those were your words, not mine.

:shk:



posted on Mar, 8 2006 @ 09:21 PM
link   
This could be a very good explanation for why Allen appeared nervous on his latest TV Appearance.




Bennish May-or May Not-Sue Student Who Taped Him

Appearing on Sean Hannity’s Radio program Monday, David Lane indicated if he and his client decide to pursue a lawsuit against Allen, he will depose other students from Bennish’s class. Sean Allen, the 16-year old who taped Bennish’s anti-US and anti-President Bush statements, was also on the program debating Lane.

Allen advised that he would, also, call and depose students who heard the statements already memorialized on audio tape. Lane advised, on the program, that it was not illegal for Allen to have taped Bennish. He, also, did not say what the charges--if any--against Allen would be, should Bennish opt to file charges against the student.



Please visit the link provided for the complete story.



posted on Mar, 9 2006 @ 08:36 AM
link   

Originally posted by jsobecky
The teacher would still be 99% at fault because of all he did that was unquestionably wrong.


I don’t want to put words in your mouth, so could you tell me what specifically you think was unquestionable wrong that Bennish did? What specific action did he take or words did he speak that you consider so unquestionably wrong?



posted on Mar, 9 2006 @ 09:13 AM
link   
Told you the kid was lawyering up.

There is no room in the classroom for right or left wing rants. This would be like a biology or anatomy teacher going on a rant about Pro-Life/Pro-Choice issues, or trying to bring God into talk about evolution. There is no difference.

There are guidlines provided by each school district, this guy did not follow them, therefore he is guilty of not following the prescribed, district curriculum that was provided. Case closed. It does not matter what the teacher was talking about, the forum used to relay his beliefs was incorrect.



posted on Mar, 9 2006 @ 09:37 AM
link   

Originally posted by dgtempe
JJ, you know better than to accuse me of something sadistic as that.
Those were your words, not mine.


And what, do you suppose, were those threats that you found so hilarious?



posted on Mar, 9 2006 @ 11:58 AM
link   
TOBACCO:



Bennish Transcript
What part of our country grows all our tobacco? Anyone know what states in particular? Mostly what's called North Carolina.



North Carolina
The Tarheel state continues to rank number one in the production of tobacco


COLOMBIA:



Bennish Transcript
Why do we have troops in Colombia fighting in their civil war for over 30 years. Most Americans don't even know this.



US involvement in Plan LASO – 1964

The Plan LASO (Latin American Security Operation) was a wide 1960s U.S. initiative against real and potential leftist rebels in Latin America, including Colombia.



US involvement in Plan LAZO – 1962
1962 US develops the low intensity war strategy Plan Lazo modeled after the Phoenix Program in Vietnam. One of its components is that uses five assassination teams of 12 soldiers each to assassinate remaining communist subversives. In general it uses aid and community divisions to create conflict and facilitate intelligence gathering. It then uses military forces to destroy cells or regions not under gov't control.




Originally posted by junglejake
I don't really see the problem in what he said, even if it was a daily occurance, as long as he taught the kids World Geography well enough to where they could pass a standardized test for their grade level (ACT, SAT, etc.).


So, you don't think the teacher necessarily did anything wrong. Then what did you mean here?


Originally posted by junglejake
I can see what Bennish, if these accusations turn out to be true, did do wrong.



Originally posted by junglejake
Just let me profess my faith in Jesus Christ in the same forum, in this case the classroom.


If it were up to me, you could. As long as you allowed for and encouraged other religious viewpoints to be discussed. Is it right to punish Bennish because of a totally unrelated issue? You do realize that by supporting silencing Bennish, you're supporting the silencing of your views...


Originally posted by jsobecky
And it does no good to bring in an opposing viewpoint the day or week after. It's only fair that s/he be there to counter Bennish's arguments as they are made.


Why? Who made the rule that the opposing voice cannot present the next day or the day before? Where do you get these strict guidelines?

And how do you (or anyone) know that Bennish or someone else didn't present an opposing voice on the very same day? This has not been discussed, except that Bennish says he did. During the other 30 minutes that mysteriously weren't taped, he says there was plenty of opposing discussion.

How can you judge this man's entire career on the basis of a 20 minute selective tape? That's not critical thinking. That's bandwagon mentality.


Originally posted by esdad71
There are guidlines provided by each school district, this guy did not follow them, therefore he is guilty of not following the prescribed, district curriculum that was provided. Case closed.


So…
We have Jake, unable or unwilling to say what specifically Bennish did wrong.
We have Shots, mistakenly accusing Bennish of errors in his lecture and that’s what HE thinks Bennish did wrong - Make mistakes - and therefore shouldn't be teaching.
We have Jsobecky, who made up some arbitrary rules that Bennish didn’t follow and (as far as I know) that’s what she thinks Bennish did that was unquestionably wrong.
And we have esdad71, playing judge, jury and school board, claiming a guilty verdict without ever having been in contact with anyone in the case, but by hearing one 20-minute tape of one 50-minute class and apparently soaking up FOX news' reporting of the story.

And you guys are all eligible for jury duty in this country?


[edit on 9-3-2006 by Benevolent Heretic]



posted on Mar, 9 2006 @ 12:04 PM
link   
As long as I can't talk about my faith in Christ in a classroom as a teacher, Bennish should not be able to do the same with his ideology. If we make it a fair playing ground, Bennish, in my mind, did no wrong.

As long as the playing ground is unequal, though, I do believe what he was doing, preaching from his position of authority should be considered legally wrong.

Hence the way I can see what he did was wrong, yet at the same time fully support his right to say it. Again, it's the hypocrisy that I find completely wrong. Let him preach. Let me preach. Let all teachers preach, as long as they get their job done. If you censor one, though, to keep from being a hypocrite, you must censor all.



posted on Mar, 9 2006 @ 12:38 PM
link   
Folks , this is all inflated blather that the Neocon's want you affixed to. These are like the oldtime flashbulbs which leave all parties attempting to focus waiting for the blue hue to dissipate. Then there's another flash and another and the reality is that you're blinded by the incidental. Neocon's love the bells and buzzers and flashing lights, anything to keep the public from focusing on the real issues.

Kinda reminds me of that old Dave Mason song.!



new topics

top topics



 
1
<< 8  9  10    12  13  14 >>

log in

join