A brief chronological Compendium of a Few Banned or Challenged Works, and Censorship and Anti-Censorship Efforts 01 Jul - 31 Dec 2002

It is not their right to act as a moral compass for the entire community. ... What one person finds objectionable another person might find enlightening. --Lisel Ulaszek, commenting on a banning of Forever, 13 Dec 2001

Join the Blue Ribbon Online Free Speech Campaign!

2002, July 01: The word oriental as an ethnic designation

By legislators in the State of Washington. State officials are now required by law to use the ethnic designator asian instead, in all bills, laws, regulations, statutes. The term oriental may still be used in relation to objects or places only, but not people. The law does not address the speech of private citizens, only of legislators, and only in connection to law-making. This law was first proposed by state Sen. Paull Shin, D-Edmonds. It was opposed by six senators from Eastern Washington. Senator Shin's idea was based on the Martin Luther King Jr's idea of outlawing negro because of that word's connection to slavery.

[Hmmmm. Slippery slope or what? I will concede that there is something to the idea of not using the word oriental at all in government and legal documents, but the senator's rationale for doing so is really stupid. He was reported to have said that term originally meant everything that is east of London, and later came to mean people with flat noses, small eyes, black hair and mysterious ways. He is quoted as saying in defense of that rationale, "We don't appreciate that. It's pejorative terminology. It's offensive."

It seems very clear to me that the senator is acting out of hypersensitive, knee-jerk reactionary political correctness. The term oriental should not be used because it does not, strictly speaking, designate any objective political, geographic, or cultural entity. Not because a bunch of knee-jerk reactionary, redneck hicks use the term as a denigration.

So why intimate that this might be the start of a slippery slope? U.S. Rep. Michael Honda, D-San Jose, Calif., reportedly told Shin that he might introduce a similar measure to congress. Is this an acceptable measure? I suppose so, if its use is restricted solely to the drafting of laws and legal documents from government, although I'd feel a lot more comfortable about it if they did it for the right reasons and not the wrong ones. --MN]

Between alleged child-molester priests and their superiours. Superior Court Judge Robert Krause ruled that the claim of the diocese of Providence, Rhode Island, that information about sex abuse of children, was not protected by "clergy/penitent" privilege. In his nine page ruling he wrote, "By no elastic stretch of the most fertile imagination can one rationally conclude that such information or any such communication deserves or merits confidentiality as expressions of religious freedom." The plaintiffs in this case want to know what diocese officials knew about the alleged child molesters and when they knew it. Attorney's for the diocese have ten days to turn over the material in question. The diocese had contended that the information was irrelevant. Judge Krause disagreed. The crux of his ruling is that when there is an overlap of secular functions and clergy/penitent privilege, "the balance must tip in favor of disclosure, not secrecy. It is simply wrong to conclude that the information and documentation that plaintiffs seek are privileged and should somehow be insulated from disclosure, when that information relates in any way to a pedophile priest who has engaged in criminal sexual assaults upon children."

By Mountain Citizen. They filed a counterclaim against Mark Triplett, alleging that he had acquired the corporate identity of the newspaper for the sole purpose of harassing and intimidating the journalists. The newspaper is seeking an order for Mr. Triplett to drop the name and to pay legal and financial compensation. In the meantime, they have refused to pay five hundred dollar fines for contempt of court for continuing to publish under the usurped name, and are fighting that judgement.
(see 13 Jun 2002; 19 Jun 2002)

By Erica Upshaw and Amy Johnston and Gregory Lagrosa; respectively. The ACLU filed two separate lawsuits on their behalf because the three of them had been arrested for using profanity in public.

East Hills, Pennsylvania, resident Erica Upshaw, 28, is a mother of three and was discharged honorably from the U.S. Army. At the time she was arrested she was also a school-bus driver and church-school counselor. On 15 July 2000 she was pulled over for allegely failing to come to a complete stop at a stop sign; this was in North Braddock. After a protracted detention, she was told that her license was suspended -- which later turned out to be false -- and that her car would have to impounded and towed. Ms. Upshaw replied, "Boy am I having a bullshit day," for which utterance she was arrested for disorderly conduct. All of the charges against here were later dismissed in court.

On 26 Nov 2000, Amy Johnston, 27, a Chatham University undergraduate student and part-time children's nanny, and Gregory Lagrosa, 29, a library assistant with the Carnegie Library and part-time graduate student at the University of Pittsburgh, had just left a convenience store when a police cruiser nearly hit them while they were in the crosswalk. In an apparent fit of pique, Ms. Johnston yelled at the driver, "It's a crosswalk, asshole." The officer chased them down, made some comments about being called an asshole in a fit of pique of his own, and then arrested the two of them.

ACLU volunteer Bruce Boni, who is handling the Upshaw case, was quoted as saying, "Not one of these three people did anything illegal. The police officers were offended by profanity, so they abused their authority and misused the public trust by arresting upstanding, law-abiding citizens."

[Especially in the Upshaw case, as Ms. Upshaw's comment was not directed at the officer the way Ms. Johnston's was. Plus, I'll bet you anything that cop didn't write himself up for careless driving. --MN]
(see 19 Aug 2002)

By Jack Brunton; a former officer of the Hawai'i County Police Department. The ACLU filed a First Amendment violation suit on his behalf. Is seems Big Island Chief of Police Wayne Carvalho had been implicated in a series of scandals and against whom then Officer Brunton spoke out publicly. As a result, Mr. Brunton was placed under surveillance by a police unit that answered solely to Chief Carvalho. The lawsuit alleges that Carvalho admitted to having placed Brunton under surveillance because Brunton had threatened to sue. He had been complaining for several months about the Chief's conduct in a promotions cheating scandal but the police commission had reportedly refused to act on his complaints.

By Becky Hall Fehsenfeld. Ms. Fehsenfeld was inspired to paint this portrait of Botswanan children blowning soap bubbles during a trip to that country. The portrait hung in the office of Mayor Bart Peterson of Indianapolis until several staff and visitors complained that it was too dark and gloomy. So it was replaced with a brighter creation of Ms. Fesenfeld's. Ms. Fesenfeld was not happy about that. She wrote in a letter to the Mayor and the city's Office of Corporation Counsel, "Censorship of art in and of itself is a difficult area for me, but one with the content of children. Wow." [...] I find it curious as to why the celebration of African children playing and discovering the joy of soap bubbles could remotely be offensive to a single soul."

[Yeah, I was kind of wondering about that. You can view a digitized copy of that work in a gallery at Ms. Fehsenfeld's web site. I recommend a screen resolution of 640 X 480 for maximum affect. --MN]

In New Paltz, New York. On 11 Sep 2001, Peter Savago hung a sign on his building that showed two American flags and bearing the caption, "Keep looking over your shoulder terrorists -- we're coming for you. God bless America." That sign was taken down in December, but in Jan 2002, the town council passed an amendment to its sign ordinance to require permits to erect or alter a sign, with certain exemptions. It was Mr. Savago's contention that this created a constitutionally impermissible requirement to petition the government to engage in speech. U.S. District Judge Norman Mordue agreed with him and struck down the ordinance. It seems that the amendment might have been made because several tourists complained about the sign. Attorneys for New Paltz argued that the ordinance does not restrict content, only size and duration.

By David Cobb. This former chairman of the English department at Phillips Academy, Andover, Massachussetts, is serving a prison term for attempted sexual assualt -- from trying to lure a 12 year old boy into a sexual encounter -- and 53 counts of displaying child pornography, and 267 counts of possession. The larger proportion of possession charges stem largely from cut and paste photographs in which Mr. Cobbs had removed heads from photographs of children in clothing catalogs, and pasted them onto photographs from such magazines as Playboy.

His conviction is now being appealed under the U.S. Supreme Court striking down virtual pornography as indictable. On this day, Mr. Cobb's attorney, Paul Haley, argued that the images were artistic, and therefore free speech.

[For my money it should be argued that legislating virtual porn into criminality creates a class of thought crimes. Some of the photographs Cobb was caught with were real. The others, however, do not and cannot constitute child pornography. In my not so humble opinion, anyway. --MN]

By Robert Pelton. A number of news organizations filed amicus curiae briefs in an attempt by Mr. Pelton to quash a subpoena. Mr. Pelton had interviewed John Lindh, otherwise known at The American Taliban, in December 2001. Mr. Lindh's attorney contends that Mr. Pelton was acting as an agent of the United States government and violated his client's rights by failing to advise him of his Miranda rights. Mr. Pelton is a free lance journalist. The interview was conducted on behalf of CNN.

[Oh, this is a good one. He's not a real journalist because he was a government agent. Oh, yeah. Right. Jeezus! It's not bad enough when prosecutors pull this bullshit as they did with Vanessa Leggett, Michael Ravnitzky, and John DePetro, but now counsels for the defense are doing it too. What truly sucks in this case, as far as I am concerned, is that Lindh's lawyers are attempting to compromise other people's integrity to get their client out of a jam of his own making. Unfortunately, the prosecutors aren't any more credible in my perception in the way they are jumping all over suggestions that Pelton's integrity was not bought out by the government. I have no doubt that they would subpoena Pelton if they thought he had information they wanted.

Yeah, yeah, I know that's all part of the adversial process. Knowing that doesn't make me any less cynical, however. --MN]

By Mary Alice Gorman and Richard Goldman. This husband and wife team are owners of the Mystery Lovers Bookshop in Oakmont, Pennsylvania, and publishers of an electronic newsletter. One of the problems of distribution typical to e-mailed newsletters is bounced messages. Addresses changes, or contain typographical errors, and internet transmission is sometimes unreliable, and sometimes the ISP filter acts prudish. As was the case in this incident.

Sirius Systems Group, their Lawton, Oklahoma, based ISP, filtered out Mystery Lovers Bookshop's e-mails because the bookstore's domain name, mysterylovers.com. The word lover was listed as obscene. Ms. Gorman found out about it after voice-calling a client, Eve Sandstrom, with whom Mr. Goldman was attempting to converse via e-mail, but during which an inordinate number of messages were bounced as undeliverable.

When Ms. Sandstrom called the ISP to complain, a Sirius Systems Group representative explained to her that there was no problem at all. The Group blocked e-mail -- and access to the bookstore's web site -- deliberately because of the word lover.

All of this was done without the knowledge of Mystery Lovers Bookshop. They had never been told. Mr. Goldman reported in the 01 Jul issue of the newsletter that Sirius also had no intention of stopping the practice.

By Sari Locker. Ms Locker is the online advice columnist for Teen People. She fields questions covering the full range of adolescent concerns. Including, of course, questions dealing with sexuality. It was reported by Associated Press reporter Miranda Leitsinger that her book of compiled questions and answers was banned from the James Kennedy Public Library, Dyersville, Iowa.

Ms. Leitsinger reported that the book was banned after a second vote on the issue was held on this day. A previous vote in Jun 2002 had apparently failed due to two abstentions. This incident was triggered by Trustee Betty Anne Scherrman. She had looked through the book and asked Shirley Vonderhaar, the library director, to not put it on the shelves. That request was not honoured, so Ms. Scherrman raised the issue at the meeting in June.

[I tend to chalk this one up as a censorship incident because of a statement by Wayne Hermsen who is chairman of the library board. He was reported as saying that some of the contents of the book are too sexually explicit. When I researched Ms. Locker on the the internet and browsed her site, I found that she answered questions honestly and frankly.

The problem is, there is no indication of: what kind of a review process might be in place; whether or not this decision stems from a review of the book; or any samples of the material Mr. Hermsen considered too explicit. I am not at all happy with the journalistic coverage of this incident. There is a pretty fair chance, in my estimation, that this is a case of selection over censorship even though the story indicates that it is censorship. --MN]
(see 07 Aug 2002)

By corporate bullies. The ACLU and a coalition of civil liberty and privacy groups asked Internet Service Providers and online companies to adopt privacy policies that will protect the anonimity of web surfers.

By Sasha and Jaron Dean and Becky Swope. These students in Davenport[?], Iowa, filed a suit (against the district, perhaps, or against their school) because of a ban against religious literature. On 11 Jul 2002, the Iowa chapter of the ACLU filed an amicus curiae brief in support of the students. The Executive Director of the ICLU, Ben Stone, commented, "The school's policy against the distribution of religious literature outside of class is clearly wrong. Not only does the policy violate the students' right to freely exercise their religious beliefs, but it also infringes on their free speech rights."

By Kylie Minogue. It was reported that this is but one of 195 videos banned by Malaysia. Also named were the Queen Bee episode of Ally McBeal, and Friends' The Video Tape. The reason for the bannings is that the films will escalate the rising crime rate; especially that of rapes. Possession or selling or distribution of banned videotapes is punishable by fines of 850 to 5,000 pounds, three years imprisonment, or both.

By Daisy Mace. This twenty-two year old woman in Moscow, Idaho, came up with an idea to make a few extra dollars to cover the rent and expenses with a few of her boy- and girlfriends. Hold a car wash, but do it topless. Local businessmen are in a tizzy because they cannot compete and are trying to have these topless car washes shut down; these topless car washes operate without a business licence. Ms. Mace and company simply chooses a location and starts washing cars, asking for donations. Most customers give fifteen or twenty dollars.

The city council is now attempting to legislate how much of her breasts a woman can expose in public; with the vote for the latest proposal scheduled for this day. The current suggestion is a single, unbroken strip across the breasts covering the aureola. However, this municipal ordinance would violate state law. Idaho state law apparently mandates that there is no difference between a topless male and a topless female.

[A single strip; as in, for instance, a single piece of tape? What kind of tape? Medical tape of the sort used to hold bandages, or will transparent Scotch Tape® do? Aside from all the legalistic wrangling about how much of a breast can be exposed, this ordinance is going to have to apply equally to men or it will be discriminatory and unconstitutional. --MN]

By Public Broadcasting System and The Children's Television Workshop. This perennial children's educational show came under censorial scrutiny by Republican Party members. Five representatives on and the chairman of the House committee on energy and commerce wrote to Pat Mitchell, president and CEO of PBS, to tell her that a new muppet character, the formation of which had been announced on 11 Jul 2002, would not be welcome on American television. This new muppet, still in the planning stages, will be HIV positive. The character is being developed specifically for Sesame Street South Africa, called Takalani Sesame, because of the rate of incidence of one in nine HIV positive persons in the population. [11 percent overall, but some areas have an incidence rate of 40 percent among women of child-bearing age. --MN] The character will have a cheerful outlook on life despite her condition. The purpose of the character is reportedly to be a good role model for pre-school children and to destigmatize the disease. It was also announced that the character would be exported to some of the other nine countries which air Sesame Street.

PBS, which carries Sesame Street in the United States, is a network partially funded by the U.S. government. In their letter, the representatives gave Ms. Mitchell until Friday, 19 Jul, to answer certain questions -- essentially, to hold herself and PBS accountable to the U.S. government for programming content. The questions they demanded of PBS are: "[how much] money PBS dedicates to "Sesame Street," how much is being earmarked for the new Muppet, whether she will be introduced to the United States, and whether corporate underwriters might participate in the decision-making process."

The officials, all republicans, are:

• W.J. "Billy" Tauzin, Louisiana, committee chairman;
• Joe Barton, Texas;
• Richard Burr, North Carolina;
• Charles "Chip" Pickering, Mississippi;
• Cliff Stearns, Florida, and;
• Fred Upton, Michigan.

[Dear, Ms Mitchell. For my money the impertinence and arrogance of these elected parasites deserve the following answers: 1: None of your business; 2: None of your business; 3: None of your business; 4: None of your business. Alternatively, one could reply with total silence and simply ignore their demands; bar the fortress gates against these jackals and let them howl their frustration to the darkness.

I will not ask why it is these bumptious oafs who should be concerned with the billions lost through fraud by their pet corporation, Enron, are trying to implement nickel and dime censorship against Sesame Street. I ain't a gonna do it; I ain't a gonna do it. . . . Like Hell I ain't. --MN]

By Warren Christopher and William Webster. Former Secretary of State and former chief of the FBI and CIA; respectively. They spoke out against the Bush administration policies for handling purported terrorism suspects. Mr. Christopher in particular likened the situation to the disappeared of Argentina, commenting, "When I was in the Carter administration, I was in Argentina and I saw mothers in the streets protesting, asking for the names of those being held, those who had disappeared. We must be very careful in this country of not holding people without revealing their names. It leads to the 'disappeared.'"

Assistant Attorney General Viet Dinh, an adiminstration spokesman, replied that detainees are been fully informed of all their rights and full access to counsel. He commented on his own father's arrest in Viet Nam when he was but seven years old, and the pain and fear his family went through, and how, "That is why each and every person taken into custody since 9-11 is given the full panoply of rights including the right to go to the press."

Nadine Strossen, president of the ACLU, said to that, however, that anecdotal evidence does not support Mr. Dinh's assertions.

[I have to take that report that foreign internees are given access to the press with a healthy dose of skepticism myself. I don't remember seeing any news reports about the prison where they are being held, never mind hearing of any reports about the inside or of interviews with any detainees. --MN]

By Hartford Courant. Or is it?

This newspaper asked for ownership of a copy of a database of 815,000 files on criminal convictions in Connecticut State. Which files are public records. The Department of Public Safety had told them it would cost twenty-five dollars a file in accordance with a state statute, for a total of 20 million dollars, and the paper sued under the FOI Act. This decision was allowed to stand by the Freedom of Information Commission first, and then by a Superior Court judge. It was overturned, however, by a higher court.

One of the issues at stake was the inclusion of confidential vital statistics in the files, such as dates of birth and addresses. The Department of Public Safety had balked at the idea of hiring a firm to remove such data for the creation of a new database. The Courant, however, has said that it will pay for the creation of an application to filter out such information. The records of juvenile offenders will also have to be removed.

[My first reaction on reading this was, "Why does a newspaper need its own copy of such a database? If a cop walked into a newspaper office and asked for the database of subscribers the paper would be screaming blue murder about a fishing expedition, . . . but it's okay when a newspaper does it?" The issue is a tad more complex, however, and the newspaper never asked for confidential statistics. Even the Public Safety lawyers say that they're losing the case was a good thing. --MN]
(see the article at Freedom Forum Online)

By Steve Earle. He was excoriated by the New York Post for daring to write a ballad about The American Taliban, John Walker Lindh, that does not blindly condemn Lindh.

[Critics: Earle is unpatriotic and the song glorifies Lindh; defenders: Earle is being deliberately provocative as an artist. My kind of guy; . . . speaking as one who has himself been accused of being deliberately provocative. And by a keypal no less. Go figure. --MN]

By Michael Sells; translator. The book was assigned for summer reading to the starting class at the University of North Carolina. Those students are expected to attend discussions of the work scheduled for 19 Aug. Three of them are suing for a religious rights violation of the First Amendment. The unidentified students (known only as John Doe # 1 and # 2, and Jane Doe), are supported by Family Policy Network, a religious organization based in Virginia. The president of FPN, Jan Glover, said that the aim of the lawsuit was to stop the program for the time being. The university says that the program is meant to foster understanding of other faiths. The difficulty stems from the work contains approximately a third of the suras in the Koran. Steve Crampton, who is the chief counsel for the American Family Association Center for Law & Policy says that the book is a work of revisionism, being slanted in favour of Islam.

[I've got five bucks that say both those groups of self-righteous hypocrites would do everything they could to force students to pray to their god their way regardless of what faith those students practiced. As for the students, if they don't like the curriculum they can refuse to attend those schools. Of course, they won't do that because it would inconvenience them instead of the school. --MN]
(see 07 Aug 2002; 15 Aug 2002; 19 Aug 2002; 22 Aug 2002)

By Denver Police Department. Illegal police department files of 3,277 protesters and 208 activist groups were accumulated during police surveillance of protests. The ACLU found out about the files in March and sued the police department to preserve the files until the department was held accountable for them. It was decided in June that the persons and groups named in the files would be allowed a window of sixty days to examine them and the files would then be destroyed on the recommendation of an independent panel. Denver Mayor Wellington Webb put the kibosh to that plan when he said that he would ignore the recommendation of the independent panel. He agreed that the files must be removed from the police computer system, but that they must be preserved so the people mentioned in them can review them.

Colorado ACLU executive director Mark Silverstein said of the files, "They definitely document police misconduct. We need to know why police regarded peaceful political protests as crime scenes." One of the groups on whom a file was kept is American Friends Service Committee; a Nobel Peace Prize winning, Quaker group.

[Kudos to Mayor Webb for rejecting the creeping-police-state and anti-accountability mentality all too prevalent since 11 Sep 2001. --MN]
(See 10 Apr 2003; 17 Jun 2004; 14 Jun 2005)

By U.S. District Judge Ann D. Montgomery. Her honor issued a temporary restraining order against William S. Purdy Sr. This anti-abortion rights advocate had opened a number of web sites using the names of transnational corporations; who subsequently sued. The suit was filed by McDonald's Corp., PepsiCo Inc., Coca-Cola Co., The Washington Post Co. and Washingtonpost.newsweekInteractive Co. The order requires that he shut down the sites immediately and transfer the domain names he registered, such as mypepsico.com, to the companies owning the trademarks. He is also constrained from practicing cybersquatting using a ny other names. Patrick Carome, who represented the plaintiffs commented, "You can't cure infringement by using a disclaimer." Mr. Purdy, who represented himself, reportedly contended that you can't criticize a company without using its name.

[Say what? Since when is misrepresenting yourself a valid mode of criticising a company? Seems to me that Purdy has proved the old adage that a man who represents himself in court has a fool for a client. --MN]

[Addendum (01 Aug 2002): In a 19 Jul article at Wired.com, byline Julia Scheeres, those redirects seem to be attributed to John Barry. As near as I can tell that attribution is an error. --MN]
(see 30 Jun 2002)

By David Corn. He wrote an excellent assessment of the controversy over John Walker's Blues. One paragraph in particular stands out:

During wartime -- and, officially, it's still wartime -- the super-patriots are ever more watchful for acts of cultural treason. And the latest victim of the red-white-and-blue lynch mob is musician Steve Earle, whose offense is writing and recording a song entitled "John Walker's Blues." Before the tune was released, the cowpies were being hurled. First, Steve Gill, a conservative talk-show gabber in Nashville, denounced the song. Then Fox News Channel and The New York Post picked up the story. The website of the latter headlined its dispatch, "Twisted Ballad Honors Tali-Rat" and claimed "American Taliban fighter John Walker Lindh is glorified and called Jesus-like in a country-rock song...by maverick singer-songwriter Steve Earle." Another Nashville DJ, Phil Valentine, called the song "politically insane." Gill declared, "This puts [Earle] in the same category as Jane Fonda and John Walker and all those people who hate America."
--David Corn, Cultural Treason?--The Right Targets Musician Steve Earle, The Nation, 24 Jul 2002

You can read the entire article, including the lyrics to the song, at The Nation web site.

By Friends of Lynn Street Park Art Tile Project. Seattle's Parks and Recreation Department ordered some eight of the 160 tiles at theLynn Street Park in the Eastlake neighborhood removed because of depictions of wine, then decided that four of those could stay. The targetted tiles had been produced specifically to honor the memory of Tom Stockley, who was a local wine columnist with Seattle Times, and his wife.

Parks Department spokeswoman Dewey Potter explained the department's rationale by saying, "We're a public agency, and many, many of our programs are directed toward children. And to that end, alcohol is not allowed in parks; it hasn't been for many years. And it's simply not an image we find appropriate or consistent with parks policy."

To which Paige Stockley replied, "It's so absurd. It's so provincial. The idea that a bum is going to take inspiration from a tile and go get a bottle of booze is ridiculous." Ms. Stockley's sister designed one of the questioned tiles.

[Addendum (30 Jul 2002): The day after the above story broke at Seattletimes.com it was reported that the Parks Department had reversed the decision. Ostenibly because removing some tiles might have damaged the others in the display and that children don't often visit the park. According to them. However, Seattletimes also quoted spokeswoman Marianne Bichsel from the office of Mayor Greg Nickels as saying, "The mayor said, 'Put a cork in it.'"

Spokeswoman Potter reacted with typical censorial anal retention. "This was a new situation for us. No one's ever proposed a project like this before. Alcohol is not allowed in any park, and we were just being consistent with our policy."

Pictures of wine bottles are alcohol, now? --MN]

Of Lale Mansur. This Turkish ballerina and actress was at the Edinburgh Festival Fringe when she told The Scotsman that she faces a fifteen year prison sentence for violating her country's censorship laws. She was apparently being tried in absentia at the time for having published books by banned writers immediately after a previous conviction.

In Kingston, Ontario. Chief of Police William Gloss has been looking into regulations of the tattoo and piercing industry in that city. This move stems from an incident in which a 13 year old had her genitals pierced after having an older male companion misrepresent himself as her father.

[Hey, Chief! -- here's a clue! Instead of bringing down all kinds of bullshit health and safety regulations, why not just have the tattoo parlours demand proof of identity of those people presented as parents? --MN]

Towards openness. The ten federal judges in South Carolina have agreed to stop sealing any records of court sanctioned settlements. The ban is likely to shock the legal community; it was hoped that only public safety cases -- such as the Firestone Tire affair, child molestation by priests, or medical malpractice cases -- would be exempted from being sealed. Opponents of the anti-sealing movement claim that such a move will hamper the quick, out of court settlements of potentially long and complicated cases. Proponents hope that it will increase public awareness and safety.

[Hmmmm. When do the needs of the few outweigh the needs of the many? It was recognized that this move will change the dynamics of settlements. I wonder in what way. --MN]
(see 13 Dec 2001; 20 Aug 2003; 21 Aug 2003; 02 Oct 2004)

By Siva Vaidhyanathan. His op/ed piece, published in The Chronicle of Higher Education, takes a look at how the DMCA is more likely to stifle free speech through the suppression of fair use. He writes in part:

When Congress brought copyright law into the digital era, in 1998, some in academe were initially heartened by what they saw as compromises that, they hoped, would protect fair use for digital materials. Unfortunately, they were wrong. Recent actions by Congress and the federal courts -- and many more all-too-common acts of cowardice by publishers, colleges, developers of search engines, and other concerned parties -- have demonstrated that fair use, while not quite dead, is dying.

[For an example of fair use, simply see the paragraph quoted above. Or any quoted material on this site. Now think of a world in which you were absolutely forbidden to quote anything at all. Pushed to its logical extreme, the DMCA allows for such a world. Furthermore, it could also be used to outlaw any effort to produce a derivative work such as a satire. Don't believe that? Under the DMCA a news service site can forbid you to put a link on your site to a news story they have on theirs. The Church of Scientology challenged Google under the DMCA to have that search service remove such links. --MN]

By U.S. District Court Judge Walter Rice. Judge Rice ruled that the law was unconstitutional in that it could also be applied against publishers and booksellers, and other who disseminate material to juveniles. This is the seventh state statute attempting to restrict material "harmful to minors" that has been struck down.

[No such law can be constitutionally permissible in the first place because there is no scientific and objective criteria by which allegedly harmful material can be judged. --MN]
(see 13 Feb 2002)

By U.S. District Judge Gladys Kessler. She ruled that the government had not proven the necessity of a blanket secrecy policy for the detention of some 1,000 persons after and since the WTC tragedy. The U.S. assistant attorney general for civil rights, Robert McCallum, commented on the ruling that it, "impedes one of the most important federal law enforcement investigations in history, harms our efforts to bring to justice those responsible for the heinous attacks of Sept. 11, and increases the risk of future terrorist threats to our nation."

[What a crock of shit. --MN]
(see 23 Jan 2002; 06 Mar 2002; 08 Aug 2002; 16 Aug 2002)

By Mighty Movers and the general public. The Washington State Court of Appeals ruled that utility poles, lampposts, and traffic light standards are a public forum by long tradition and Seattle's ordinance against putting posters and handbills on such poles was unconstitutional. This ordinance was passed in 1994; in 1999 the city sued Mighty Movers for the cost of cleaning posters off the poles, amounting to 7,870 dollars, due to the company's advertising campaign.

By Sari Locker. In the third vote concerning this book at the James Kennedy Library, the board of trustees rejected this book again. This vote followed a town meeting where some of approximately thirty community members debated the issue with the board for more than an hour. The Board, and Ms. Betty Anne Scherrman, who launched the initial challenge, insisted that this is not a matter of censorship, but of selection.

[Well, it sure looks as if it is censorship to me. For one thing, the Associated Press story at Freedom Forum Online reported board member Kori Mahoney as having said that some of the board members had not read the book at the time of the earlier vote and that there was some confusion as to the status of the book; whatever that means.

Aside from this, Ms. Mahoney was quoted as saying, "I believe by rescinding our decision and moving this book to our newly appointed review committee we will be able to alleviate any question regarding the process taken in the reconsideration of the book Sari Says."

Okay, so they created a review process after having reconsidering the work instead of to reconsider the work being challenged? Plus, it was also reported that the work had been considered by the librarian in charge of works targetting children and young adults, and subsequently approved by the library director.

Lastly, they apparently did not reconsider all sexuality-based health books already on the shelves; targetting only Sari Says: for rejection. One community member had done her research and presented three of the titles in the library to the board, which books, she said, were worse than Sari Locker's: What's Going on Down There, Dr. Ruth Talks to Kids, and Teenage Sexuality.

Of minor note is that the article by AP stated the decision to reject the book was made at the first vote on 26 Jun 2002. According to what I saw in the original, non-wire service article, that first vote failed due to two abstentions. --MN]

[Addendum (22 Aug 2002): On 09 Aug this incident was reported at the National Coalition Against Censorship web site. That report stated that the second vote was to amend the language of the rejection from "removed" to "return". As in "removed from the shelves" to "returned to the vendor", I assume. The report states this was done to circumvent charges of censorship. It was also revealed that only one chapter of the book deals with questions about sexuality. Conclusion: definitely a case of censorship. --MN]
(see 10 Jul 2002)

By Michael Sells; translator. A committee of the state legislature of North Carolina voted to bar the use of public funds for summer reading assignments. The vote was taken while the House Appropriations Committee was putting together the 14.3 billion dollar state budget. Some of the committe members attacked the school officials for attempting to push Islam on American students after the WTC tragedy. Some other legislators, however, replied to the charges with cooler heads.
(see 22 Jul 2002; 15 Aug 2002; 19 Aug 2002; 22 Aug 2002)

The Bush administration filed an appeal on the grounds that Judge Kessler had missed the point of keeping the names secret. It also asked for a temporary injunction that would allow them to continue withholding the names of the detainees until after the appeal.

[Officials continue to insist that the measure is necessary to protect the civil and human rights of America from terrorist activities.

'You ask me -- okay, even if you don't -- Judge Kessler did not miss the point of such secrecy at all and that is why she told the government to cough up the names in the first place. The government insists that it has the right to illegally detain these allegedly illegal immigrants because they knew of terrorist activities. Over 1,000 "suspects" (or 1,200 depending who is reporting) are in custody; incognito, incommunicado, without representation, isolated from family and the public, and denied due process. Isn't that what the Gestapo did with the Jews throughout Europe and the U.S. and Canada did with the WW II internment camps for the Japanese? So why do we pretend to have learned anything and to have advanced as a society? --MN]
(see 23 Jan 2002; 06 Mar 2002; 02 Aug 2002; 16 Aug 2002)

By W.R. "Bud" Harper and the Arkansas Homeland Security Council. Governor Mike Huckabee, Arkansas, is against efforts by the AHSC to broaden exemptions to the open records law. On this day, after meeting with Harper and some twenty state and federal officials, aide Mike Harris fired off a rather pointed message to Mr. Harper. This message read, in part, "I was shocked to see your presentation today on amending the Freedom of Information Act. I had told you earlier to drop that idea. Since you did not, let me be clear on this: Your efforts to amend the FOI are NOT authorized by the governor."

[These exemptions will ostentibly be to protect the state from terrorist groups finding out about and exploiting weaknesses in the infrastructure. As I point out in a previous entry, it will likely also create an atmosphere of unaccountability. The elected parasites will be able to conceal the erosions of services and security at such institutions as hospitals, schools, public utilities, airports, and government buildings. --MN]

By Anita Roddick. Founder of the Body Shop and social responsibilty and human rights activist, Ms. Roddick posted a brief article that the U.S. government is attempting to quash a lawsuit by Indonesian citizens against U.S.-based ExxonMobil. The stated reason is that the lawsuit poses a threat to the U.S. War On Terror. This despite allegations by the villagers that they are themselves victims of terrorism; terrorism promulgated on behalf of ExxonMobil.

By consenting adults in Cinncinati. Hotels in the Tristate area have been threatened with criminal prosecution for making triple X rated videos available for viewing with in-room VCRs. The Comfort Suites hotels were targetted by the Citizens for Community Values group which made complaints to the police. Campbell County Prosecutor Justin Verst and police detectives subsequently rented rooms in the hotels and then adult videos; which they taped. After which the hotels were advised by letter by Mr. Verst that he believed the pornographic tapes were in violation of a Kentucky law against the distribution of obscene material. The movies were removed from the hotels on this day.

[Geez, I really hope somebody, somewhere, is going to stand up to these snivelling twits and challenge that law. --MN]

By Michael Sells; translator. U.S. District Judge Carlton Tilley Jr. did not grant the restraining order requested to stop the University of North Carolina from holding a reading of this work to be followed by discussion groups by incoming freshmen. An appeal on the decision was filed by the Family Policy Network within minutes of the court being recessed. Both sides are claiming a victory, however.
(see 22 Jul 2002; 07 Aug 2002; 19 Aug 2002; 22 Aug 2002)

By order of Judge Gladys Kessler. Judge Kessler stayed her own order to the federal government in which she gave it two weeks to publish the names of the suspects that had been arrested as a result of the WTC-tragedy. Freedom Forum Online reported that number at 1,200 and stated that most had already been deported. The stay was allowed to give the government more time to appeal.
(see 06 Mar 2002; 23 Jan 2002; 02 Aug 2002; 08 Aug 2002)

By Sen. Bruce McPherson, D-Santa Cruz. He is sponsoring this law after the previous California Son of Sam law was ruled unconstitutional by the California Supreme Court. This law, SB1887, reportedly does no more than extend the statutes of limitations permitting civil suits against felons.
(see 21 Feb 2002)

By Michael Sells; translator. The challenge to this work failed when the 4th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals rejected the motion of the appellants on the grounds that they "failed to satisfy the requirements for such relief."

[Wot a load o' phetted dingos' kidneys, mate. In the report at Freedom Forum Online, it said that the rate of attendance at the workshops discussing the reading assignments usually ran 50 to 60 percent. What is it about these arrogant, self-righteous slobs that they are too stupid to turn their backs and just not show up? This lawsuit, IMNSHO, is a frivolity that should not have happened in the first place. Those idiots should be enjoined from participation at UNC. --MN]
(see 22 Jul 2002; 07 Aug 2002; 15 Aug 2002; 22 Aug 2002)

By Amy Johnston. Homestead Borough Police Department settled for five thousand dollars each to Ms. Johnston and her companion in false arrest, Gregory Lagrosa. They were arrested in Nov 2001 when a police cruiser entered a crosswalk, almost hitting Ms. Johnston; who responded by addressing the officer driving with an expletive. Approximately six people a year are arrested for using uncivil language under a Pennsylvania law specifically banning "obscene language or gestures."
(see 02 Jul 2002)

By N.O.R.E., Styles, and Khia. These three rap groups had their appearance at a concert at Sandcastle Stadium, Atlantic City, New Jersey, summarily cancelled. The city and the minor league team Atlantic City Surf, which leases the stadium for their baseball games, had concerns about potential violence because of alleged ties N.O.R.E. had with local gangs. N.O.R.E., also known as Noriega, produces raps about the hard life he led and that had landed him in prison for attempted murder during his teen years.

On 23 Aug 2002, U.S. District Judge Joseph E. Irenas criticized the city and the team in court, saying, "I felt that the activities -- first of the city, then of the Surf -- were not based on security. They were based on disliking the message." Judge Irenas allowed the concert to go ahead after the city and concert promoters struck a deal involving increased security.

The city had cancelled the acts because the police had issued a memo stating that N.O.R.E., "has an established history of violence and gang affiliation with the Bloods." Judge Irenas criticized the department for this action, commenting, "I would figure in a 440-person police department, you would assume someone's heard of the First Amendment."

By Carlos Vives. This 65 year old New York City citizen was arrested and held for nine hours on 06 Apr 2002 for mailing religious and political material to a former public official. On this day, the New York Civil Liberties Union filed a lawsuit on his behalf in federal court, alleging that the police were making unjust arrests to enforce an unconstitutional law that prohibits the mailing of annoying or alarming material.

Christopher Dunn, the NYCLU advocate handling the case commented, "A central purpose of the First Amendment is to protect our right to send controversial religious or political messages to public officials and members of the public, even if those messages are annoying or alarming. So long as the messages are not threatening, they are fully protected."

Special Assistant Gail Donoghue, of the New York City Law Department, commented that, "this important and constitutional section of the Penal Law intended to prevent substantial privacy interests from being violated or threatened." the Law Department is strongly supporting the actions of the police.

It appears that Mr. Vives is in the habit of mailing such material to public officials without including commentary or prompting activism related to the subjects covered in the newspaper clippings. Because of this, one candidate to whom Mr. Vives sent the material misconstrued it as a threat and alerted the police.
(See 24 Nov 2003)

Superior Court Judge William Mudd banned a press photographer from court for taking a picture of the parents of a seven-year old murdered child. The photograph was taken just after the defendant was found guilty, and was to capture their reaction to the verdict. There is a California court rule prohibiting the photography of spectators in a trial. The picture was taken by Dan Trevan, the only photographer to attend the trial, but who acted as a pool photographer. It is the contention of the newspaper that the Van Dams, whose daughter, Danielle, was the victim, were more than simply spectators.

[However, that determination was made unilaterally. Unlike the Las Vegas Review-Journal case, this one deals strictly with matters of press freedom. The boundary layer generating the friction is courtroom comportment. Whereas the Van Dams are victims of the crime committed, as much as their daughter, are they "spectators" in the normal sense of the word? They were not plaintiffs, nor were they on the witness stand at the time; hence, not participants in the normal sense of that word, either.

The way I see it, the sole issue at stake is whether or not the inside of the courtroom, while the trial is still in progress (the judge had not yet adjourned or recessed the court), is an appropriate milieu for photography, or if the ban is a reasonable time, manner, and place restriction. --MN]
(see 27 Aug 2002; 31 Aug 2002; 03 Nov 2003; 13 Sep 2004)

By Planned Parenthood clients. In a case of selection vs: censorship the privacy rights of private citizens was protected. The Uncle Ed Show, hosted by David Leach and which airs on Des Moines cable, began collecting videotaped material to promote anti-sexual rights activism. Jonathan O'Toole of Kansas City, Mo., an anti-abortion activist, began collecting material by taping at a Planned Parenthood clinic. The producers of the show were flatly told by Mediacom that the footage would not be allowed to air if the faces of the clients entering were not obscured. Debora Blume, spokeswoman for the company, said, "I have told him if he presents a tape to us tomorrow of faces visible we will not show his tape because it's a third party invasion of privacy."

By the Natural Law Party. The ACLU filed a lawsuit on behalf of the Natural Law Party in Topeka, Kansas, challenging a century old law that requires political parties to have only one word in its title followed by the word Party. This law was passed in 1900, possibly as an attempt by the republican party in office to circumvent a political challenge by a coalition of the Democratic and Populist parties, which identified itself as Peoples-Democratic Party. As a result of this law, the Natural Law Party is forbidden to place its name on the ballots; it must gather numerous signatures to have the names of its candidates placed on the ballots as independents.

By Moisés Kaufman. This play about the murder of Mathew Shepard, killed because he was homosexual, was assigned to the freshman class at the University of Maryland. UM came under the same kind of attack UNC had for selecting Revelations of the Q'ran, and by the same people. Their objection in this case is that the subject matter is homosexuality and the play does not blindly condemn homosexuality as "morally disordered and intrinsically evil", but teaches tolerance instead.
(see 22 Jul 2002; 07 Aug 2002; 15 Aug 2002; 19 Aug 2002; 23 Sep 2002)

By the private owners of those properties. The ACLU filed a first amendment suit against the town of Pewaukee, Wisconsin. The city had passed a law banning political signs on private property. The suit was filed on behalf of Walter Fiedorowicz, who had wanted to erect sign reading, "Let Us Vote", on the issue of calling for a referendum about the amalgamation of the city of Pewaukee and the village of Pewaukee.

[Mayor Jeffrey Nowak reportedly offered the specious argument that the ordinance is to prevent an overload of signs erected by special interests. Private citizens are not special interest groups, moron! He was quoted as having said, "In many ways I want them to be able to have their signs, but we have already received dozens of calls from other groups to say that if you let them have their signs, I want a sign on this subject, like build more schools, let school start early, build less roads, or a free dog license. Where does this thing stop? That's really the issue." This rationale is typical of the censor; "Gee, I'm all in favour of free speech, but we really have to keep it under control." Their control, of course. --MN]

After only ten days of offering the service. See the appendix on vanity plates.

By Wan Yanhai. This AIDS activist was disappeared in Beijing after being detained by the police. His crime was to publish information about HIV infection in China that the government of China did not want made public. In particular, about a public health blood-selling scandal in Henan province in which thousands received and were infected by tainted blood which publicised in July 2001. Wan Yanhai had subjected to previous suppression. In 1994 China banned his Aizhi Action project; which was started to promote AIDS awareness.

Two days before his disappearance, he had criticized the government of China, accusing it of preferring to spend money on the suppression of AIDS activist such as himself rather than spending it on AIDS awareness programs and treatment. As of 13 Sep, the Beijing police would not comment on his disappearance.

On the boob tube. An onscreen kiss between two male homosexual characters on the British ITV1 program The Bill has generated more than three hundred complaints from outraged viewers. The kiss took place in the episode aired 22 Aug. between two police officers, one who is openly gay and the other who is struggling with his sexual identity. Both were in uniform in the scene.

Over the last six months, The Bill has been trending towards greater verisimilitude. Paul Marquess, executive producer, commented, "The Bill has always been famous for its realism. There are gay police officers and we are reflecting that." In March of this year a new lesbian character was introduced to the show as well.

In South Carolina. Chateau Adult Theatre, in North Charleston, has had its request for a review by the U.S. Supreme Court turned down. The court accepts approximately two percent of appeals. The business, which sells pornographic videos, magazines, and sex toys, is in an industrial zone as is required by local ordinances, however, it must also be 1,000 feet from churches or homes. The city council, however, allowed the construction of a residential area and a church only nine hundred fifty feet from the business, and is now insisting that the business must be moved. The owner is resisting, basing his lawsuit on the rationale that he was there first.

[Damn straight. This is a nice oblique method of suppressing sex-themed businesses. Tell them they aren't allowed within a certain distance of mainstream society and then built homes, schools, and churches on their doorsteps. In my not so humble opinion, it isn't the business that is in violation of the ordinances, it's the city council. In the article on this incident at Freedom Forum Online, city attorney Brady Hair is quoted as saying, "The city has had a long battle with sexually oriented businesses, including the Chateau, over the last 10 years. We are hopeful that this is one of the final steps in the long process." I interpret this statement as meaning that the city has been attempting to close down these businesses or run them out of town for ten years and this is simply the latest effort to do so; which constitutes a clear and present civil rights violation vis a vis the loophole outlined above. --MN]

See the appendix on Robie Harris.

By Coalition for a Just Cincinnati. This activism group had contacted several entertainers scheduled to perform in Cincinatti and asked them not to. When a number of the entertainers cancelled, Cincinnati Arts Association sued; asking for $86,850 in compensatory damages and $500,000 in punitive damages. Judge Thomas Nurre in Hamilton County Common Pleas Court ruled, however, that the calls to boycott constituted protected political speech under the First Amendment.

Coalition for a Just Cincinnati was formed after the fatal shooting of an unarmed black suspect who was attemtping to flee the police. The officer who fired the shot was caucasian. The Coalition's purpose is to to pressure the city to stop alleged police harassment of blacks and to ensure more economic opportunities for blacks. Entertainers who cancelled appearances are Bill Cosby, Wynton Marsalis, the Temptations, and the O'Jays, among others. The not-for-profit Cincinnati Arts Association operates major performing arts locations in Cincinnati, including Music Hall, Memorial Hall and the Aronoff Center for the Arts. Some of the funds raised by the Association go to education and the community at large.

Judge Nurre wrote in his decision, "A truly innocent party has been injured and there is nothing that the court can do to remedy the situation. The defendants need to realize that they are wielding a powerful weapon that can most certainly cause substantial -- perhaps irreparable -- harm to those who seek to actually heal the city."

By motorcycle gangs. In particular, by the Carson City, Nevada chapter of the Branded Few gang. The gang logo includes a swastika, and when two gang members, Scot Banks and Steve Dominguez, showed up at a courthouse for traffic citations in March 2001, they refused to remove their jackets when asked to do so because of the logos. They were futher cited for that, and when ten other gang members showed up for that case, they too were arrested. The 9th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals ruled that such a ban is a violation of free expression rights. Circuit Judge William Fletcher ruled that the ban constitued an unreasonable time, manner, or place restriction, writing nothing was shown that "can plausibly be justified by the need to protect the courtroom environment itself." He also wrote that there was no evidence, "clothing indicating affiliation with biker organizations is particularly likely to be disruptive or intimidating."

By Katherine Paterson and Elizabeth George Speare, respectively. These books are the focus of an attack against any study or mention of witchcraft. The complaint was initiated by Bridget Flanagan, age 61, who currenty has no children in the school system, and Andrea Eigner, who does. They had petitioned to have the books removed from the Cromwell, Conneticut[?], middle school curriculum. The petition reportedly ask the school board to, "... eliminate the study of materials containing information about witchcraft, magic, evil spells or related material, now and forever. ... We believe this material is satanic, a danger to our children, is being studied excessively and has no place in our schools."

The books are not the sole subject to this challenge. Apparently Ms. Flanagan and Eigner also seek the expunging of certain field trips -- specifically to the Salem Witch Museum and to a historic meetinghouse in Wethersfield and to an assembly which purportedly promoted the Harry Potter series -- worksheets, and other study material guides.

This was reported in the online version of Hartford Courant. In a similar article at MiddletownPress.com, it was reported that the challenge had generated stiff opposition from community members, that hundreds of messages had been posted to The Press web site, where the story had first been reported, but that there had been not one message posted in support of the move.

[Addendum (28 Aug 2002): Either I got that date wrong or the meeting was rescheduled for 26 Aug. At any rate, there was a meeting on that Monday to discuss the challenge and the whole thing fizzled. A number of parents got up to speak about the books, both pro and con, but no action at all was taken because the challengers had failed to file their challenge under procedure guidelines, and the names on the petitions had not been validated by the town clerk. Bridget Flanagan, who launched the complaint, said she would continue her efforts. Complainants have the option of filing their complaint and asking in writing for a review, and such a request will be addressed at another meeting of Cromwell Board of Education's Program Committee. --MN]

Las Vegas Review-Journal attorney Steve Morris filed a motion to have a gag order lifted that is preventing newspapers from identifying and reporting on rape victims. The newspaper feels that protecting the right to privacy of crime victims constitutes censorship in that it is prior restraint and unfairly treats the press as different from the public.

[Review-Journal Editor Thomas Mitchell was quoted in the Freedom Forum Online article: "We are challenging this gag order on a fundamental principle. If a judge can dictate what the press may publish about factual matters in open court, that is censorship, pure and simple." What this guy seems to be too knee-jerk reactionary to understand is that, 1: all of the amendments in the U.S. Bill of Rights have equal import and weight and the rights of a free press do not supercede the right to privacy; 2: the victims are not perpetrators and do not, in my not so humble opinion, necessarily become public figures as a result of being victims; 3: even a suspect still has certain rights and one of those is the right to a fair trial, which can be compromised by the untimely reporting on certain pieces of evidence; 4: given that the judge must have heard arguments about whether or not to impose the gag order, the issue has almost certainly undergone a proper review process and the decision to impose the gag order stems from selection rather than from censorship; 5: even the First Amendment can be subject to reasonable time, manner, and place restrictions; 6: rape is a crime of violence and perforce a traumatic event, even moreso apparently than being mugged or assaulted, and the victims (even prostitutes) have a further right to heal from this violent attack on their psyches, which process will almost certainly be complicated or degraded by the victim having an awareness of the public's knowledge of their victimization. {Everybody is looking at me. . . They know! They know!}

There is apparently nothing in the gag order that prevents the newspaper from identifying and reporting on the perpetrator; hence, I can only chalk up this motion by the Review-Journal to petulant, politically correct whining. --MN]
(see
(see 21 Aug 2002; 31 Aug 2002; 03 Nov 2003; 13 Sep 2004)

By city employees of McMinnville, Tennessee. Herb Llewellyn, city administrator, told public employees in a memo that they were forbidden to write letters to the editor or to call radio phone-in shows without his permission. He wrote the memo after two city workers wrote letters in response to a criticism of food at the city ball fields. The local newspaper, The Southern Standard, reported that the memo read, in part, "There are two rules in life that you all should know and follow: do not pick a fight with someone who buys ink by the barrel and today's newspaper can be found tomorrow in the trash can.

"That said, employees will not respond to media stories or editorials. You will not write letters to the editor or telephone radio stations without my approval."

It was reported in the article at Freedom Forum Online that Mr. Llewellyn had said that it was the mayor's place to be spokesman for the city, and that employees violating this new policy would be subject to disciplinary action. It was also reported that he didn't think the policy constitutes an infringement of employee's free speech.

[D-U-U-U-U-U-U-U-U-U-U-U-U-U-H-H-H-H-H-H!
M-O-O-O-O-O-O-O-R-R-O-O-O-O-O-O-N-N-N!]

Martin Duffy, of Seaton Delaval, and president of the Newcastle Magic Circle, does magic shows in libraries. Some two years ago from this date, Newcastle City Council told him that his making a white rabbit appear violated city policy concerning performing animals. Newcastle finally apologised, saying that the letter banning Sapphire the rabbit was sent in mistake. However, the article covering this incident also reported that Newcastle City Council had apologised the previous week for banning a Punch and Judy show in case it was seen to promote domestic violence.

[Two years. Talk about government inaction. Your tax dollars at work, Newcastle. Bloody slack and idle work. --MN]

Misha Osinovskiy, Chico State University journalism student, was arrested for photographing a California state department of Alcoholic Beverage Control undercover officer. Repeatedly. After being told to stop.

The officer, who is not identified in the article I read, reported that he was issuing a citation when Mr. Osinovskiy photographed him at least five times, using an electronic flash which blinded the officer with each flash. The officer contended that a large crowd which was gathering around and an increasing agitation in the person he was writing up, created a tense atmposphere. He also reported that Mr. Osinovskiy had been warned repeatedly to not photograph him. The department also alleges that the officer's undercover status was compromised.

The Orion has protested the arrest, claiming that it is unfair, and plans to contest the legality of the arrest.

[Book 'im, Dano. Book 'im most good and proper. And then book 'im again for good measure. As with freedom of speech, freedom of the press can be subject to reasonable restrictions, and it is not unreasonable to protect the identity of undercover officers. No more than it is unreasonable to protect a confidential source. If I have a right to know one I have a right to know the other. Moreso for the source. An undercover cop who has been compromised can be fairly certain that he'll be blown away the first time he walks into a crack house. --MN]
(see 21 Aug 2002; 27 Aug 2002; 03 Nov 2003; 13 Sep 2004)

By Yvonne Mann. This landlady of the Adelphi pub, Newcastle-upon-Tyne, England, was fined £580 for a public order offence. The offence was to have a scarf or banner up over the front of her pub that reads Sunderland are Shite (sic). The Newcastle and Sunderland football (rugby to us North Americans) teams are bitter rivals. The scarf had been mounted before a game between the two teams in February. It was spotted in March by a police department licensing inspector who was there to check the pub permits and who confiscated the scarf. The pub is a frequent hangout for Newcastly football fans. Ms. Mann's lawyer decried the fine as "political correctness gone mad".

Any and all electronic games in any way, shape, or form. A law was passed at the end of July 2002 making it illegal to even carry cellphones and Gameboys. The reason for the total ban? The government found that it could not differentiate between innocuous video games and machines specifically for gambling, so they outlawed everything. The ban is so complete that it is even illegal to play computer chess in an internet café. Penalties are either a heavy fine or a prison term, and a café in which internet gaming is found in progress can be shut down. A test case was underway as of this report.
(See 28 Nov 2003)

By State of Virginia; for the third straight year. In 2000, it was a mandatory minute of silence, in 2001, the required recitation of the Pledge of Allegiance with the phrase "Under God", and this year it is a legislation-mandated "In God We Trust" poster. The General Assembly passed a law requiring public school districts to put up, "in a conspicuous place in each of their schools for all students to read", a poster with the national motto.

Bill sponsor Del. Robert G. Marshall, R-Prince William, during the legislative debates, stressed that the courts had ruled on the constitutionality of the phrase on pieces of currency. The American Civil Liberties Union Virginia Chapter state director, however, said on this day that he had received scores of letters and e-mailed complaints from students and parents. The ACLU is considering the situation -- in light of the constitutional challenge to the Pledge of Allegiance by the 9th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals, and they want to gauge the reaction of students to the signs -- before responding.

By the NAACP and EURO. The rights of both these organizations will remain unfettered in South Carolina. What is important about this case is the allegations of political motivation for the attempt to curtail free speech.

South Carolina allows the flying of the flag of the Confederate States; a symbol that "minority" civil rights groups say glorifies racism and slavery. Because of the public display of that flag, the National Association for the Advancement of Colored People organized efforts to effect a boycott of South Carolina, encouraging touring motorists to not stop and patronize businesses in the state, but to simply pass on through. In response, the European-American Unity Rights Organization, a white supremacist group, organized counter-protests.

As a result, Attorney General Charlie Condon filed a lawsuit in March 2002 to control activities at rest stops, or interstate welcome centers as they called. Alleging concern about the possibility of a threat to public safety and to the economy. Mr. Condon announced on this day that the lawsuit would be dropped, saying, "There have been no acts of violence or disorder associated with the NAACP's border patrol, and time has proven that the boycott has been ineffective in achieving its goal of damaging our state's economy."

The political factor is that Condon was apparently running for the office of Governor at the time. Lonnie Randolph, president of Columbia's NAACP branch, commented on the announcement, "His bid for the governor's office is over. I felt all along this was a campaign issue. We were confident the lawsuit would not go anywhere."

[Perhaps it is only the reporting on this case, but it seems kind of telling to me that Condon singled out the NAACP while not commenting on EURO. Of course, EURO was attempting to lure people into stopping and spending money. However, without more material on Condon, I feel Randolph's statement is a piece of knee-jerk cynicism. --MN]

At Park High School, Livingston, Montana. In an interview in The Livingston Enterprise, School Principal Woody Jundt said he intends to ask the library committee to ban the magazine from the library at the committee's scheduled meeting on 12 Sep. Mr. Jundt objects to the magazine because, "It promotes phone sex, drug use, promiscuity and heavy violence. I object to the majority of the content. The entire classified section is for phone sex. The 'Letters to the Editor' use an extreme amount of profanity."

The irony of this situation is that Mr. Jundt had approved the application -- without having ever read the magazine. He read it over the course of the summer after complaints by a school employee.

[Which employee was not indentified beyond that in the article at Freedom Forum Online. Another piece of information missing from the article, and a key piece at that, is what review process the magazine was subject to before the subscription application was submitted for approval, and what process is in place to handle these complaints. My guess is none at all. The biggest bee up Jundt's butt is the usual misinterpretation of the content promoting sex, drugs, and rock and roll. The discriminating reader will likely have noted Jundt's use of the vague and emotionally laden buzz phrase "extreme amount of profanity". I wonder what criterion he used to differentiate extreme from moderate, and which words he considered profane. --MN]
(see 12 Sep 2002; 12 Sep 2002)

See the entry in the Appendix G

By C.C.H. A young offender who cannot be identified, this eighth-grade student from Winner, South Dakota, was subjected to the full force of post-Columbine hysteria. On 13 Feb 2001, he admitted to a teacher that he hated a classmate and wanted to kill the other student. A statement he repeated to the teacher the next day. He was subsequently arrested, charged for simple assault and two counts of disorderly conduct, illegally held for 66 days until his trial, and whereas two of those charges were dismissed, he was then convicted on matters for which he had not been charged.

On this day the South Dakota Supreme Court ruled that he had been improperly convicted and making the statements he had made were perfectly within his free speech rights. Justice Robert A. Amundson wrote in his decision, "Hostility and competition among our youth is natural. It happens in competitive sports; it happens in adolescent love affairs; it happens among siblings; it is an inevitable part of growing up.

"Many of the unkind words that stem from this hostility and competition may cause others uneasiness, but most of the words are protected by the First Amendment."

[Once again a person is prosecuted by The Almighty System for having admitted his feelings. Also kindly take note that there is no mention of the second party in that schoolyard conflict having been sanctioned or censured by the school. --MN]

By Jeff Tritel. There was an article at Ananova.com that his application for a trademarked logo for some scrotum-shaped sculptures had been rejected on the grounds that the logo was determined to "comprise immoral or scandalous matter". Mr. Tritel says of the sculptures that they are patriotic, not pornographic, in that they reflect an inherent American attitude.

By Abdul Hafiz and Afzal Khan (actually the financial backers), and director Shashilal Nair. This Indian remake of Summer of '42 was originally attacked by the leading actress, Manisha Koirala, who claimed that audiences would mistake the body double used in some partial-nude scenes for her. She was also reported to have found the sexual tension in the scenes "horrifying". When her court bid to have the scenes cut failed, the judge having ruled in Nair's favour, she appealed, but also went to the Shiv Sena for backing. This is a Hindu nationalist group. It was reported on 01 Aug 2002 that Mr. Nair had already agreed to reshoot the film with a different actress, but dozens of copies of the film with Ms. Koirala were already in circulation. It was reported on 09 Sep that the Shiv Sena extremists had attacked cinemas showing Ek Choti Si Love Story, smashing doors and ripping down posters.

This was the second censorship incident involving this group this summer, who seem to be giving up rationality in favour of extremism. On 30 Aug it was reported that Shiv Sena had threatened to release venomous snakes into theaters showing another film, Kaante (The Thorns), alleging that it had the backing of underworld criminals. Nanak Ram Thavani, Shiv Sena spokesman, had sent a memo to the governor of the state asking for the film to be banned, threatening that the group would release the snakes because peaceful demonstrations and armband protests were no longer appealing. A government spokesman commented that the situation was being monitored and law and order would be maintained.

By Gary Cohn, Highland Park, Illinois. His web site ridicules Jerry Falwell, who is suing for possession of the two domain names used by Mr. Cohn. Mr. Cohn started his web site in Sep 2001 after Mr. Falwell stated that the WTC strikes were the fault of feminists, homosexuals and abortionists; alleging that they had provoked God to lift his divine protection from the U.S. Mr. Falwell's lawyers base their suit on the contention that the site is libelous and infringes on a trademark. The ACLU of Virginia, and Public Citizen of Washington D.C., a consumer advocacy group, both of which are representing Mr. Cohn, are basing their defence on the idea that the site is similar to cartoon editorials in newspapers.

Complicating the issue is the fact that Mr. Falwell had never trademarked his name. His lawyers contend that he has a common-law protection of his name as a trademark. However, in Jun 2002 the World Intellectual Property Organization rejected a similar complaint based on that fact.

Another complication is the issue of venue. Paul Alan Levy, Public Citizen attorney, commented, "The only reason Falwell filed suit in Virginia is because he lives there. Yet Falwell is hauling Cohn to a court hundreds of miles from Cohn's home.

"If the court were to hear this case, it would set a dangerous precedent. People who type their thoughts about public figures on a computer would think twice if they knew they would have to defend themselves at any spot on the globe where the figure happened to be."

By ten year olds. On 10 Sep 2002, it was reported at Ananova.com that North Tyneside Council advised not holding a competitive contest with ten year old and younger students because some of them would lose. North Shields Chamber of Trade and Commerce president and contest organizer Maggie Richardson had asked the council for assistance in recruiting schools for the contest, which is used as a fundraiser for charity. She was reportedly told by an education officer that the contest was too competitive. On this day, Ananova.com reported that the council was backpedaling and that the reason they had qualms about the event was the likelyhood of cold weather and the inconvenience of the business of the season.

The director of education and cultural services, Anne Marie Carrie, was quoted in the Newcastle Evening Chronicle as saying, "North Tyneside schools enter many competitions and I'm delighted to say we win more than our fair share.

"I met one of the organisers of the Christmas market last Monday and told her the council encouraged and supported sporting and artistic competitions, but that on this occasion it wasn't felt to be the best way of encouraging participation.

"An outdoor, day-long competition in December would involve children, their families and teachers hanging around in potentially cold weather on a busy family weekend. We're continuing to support the event. It's up to the organisers whether they choose to take our advice."

However, in the article dateline 10 Sep, Ananova reported a North Tyneside Council spokesman as saying, "The chamber of trade asked for advice on the best way to proceed with the event.

"We did advise that it might be more acceptable to schools if the event was not held in the form of a competition but the decision rests with the chamber of trade. We are certainly not telling them what they can or cannot do."

To which Ms. Richardson had replied, "Obviously I'm not taking their advice about this. It's political correctness gone too far."

[Well, on the face of it, Ms. Carrie might have reasonable objections, but they strike me as pretty superficial and specious. For one thing, children have been playing in the cold and surviving it for time immemorial. For another thing, there's no guarantee that the weather will be stormy, but accommadations can be made for that, and I don't think people of North Tyneside are so stupid they don't know enough to go in out of the rain. As for the business of the season, people are going to be busy doing any number of things. They will simply arrange their schedules according to their own convenience and will decide for themselves whether that convenience will include a caroling contest or wassailing at the local pub. --MN]

Perpetrated by the War On Drugs. During the first week of September, the Psychologist, a magazine by the British Psychological Society, printed an article by Dr. Charles Grob and two co-authors. The crux of the article is that many drugs can have therapeutic value and should be used in clinical environments; with a focus in particular on the drug MDMA, street name: Ecstasy.

Anti-drug proponents went ballistic.

The first salvo in this lynching was fired by the British Press, who broke the story using such alleged headlines as: "Ecstasy Not Dangerous, Say Scientists." Dr. Grob and his co-authors demanded a retraction from at least one newspaper, The Guardian, which complied.

That this is a literary lynching can be clearly seen in this interview by Sheerly Avni of Salon.com, which was reprinted at Alternet.org.

[As usual, those howling the loudest had not read the material they were criticising. This is especially troubling in this case given that the lynching is by so-called journalists. You'd think people who call themselves writers would know enough to read up on their subjects. This incident, however, is part and parcel of the long running knee-jerk, reactionary program of suppression of drug-related information. Similar to the suppression of sexual-health information. --MN]
(see 04 Feb 2002)

At Park High School, Livingston, Montana. In a challenge initiated by the school principal, the library committee decided to continue the subscription on a trial basis, but to implement censorship by requiring students to present a parental permission slip that had been validated by the school administration.

[The entire point behind free speech is that all people are free to choose for themselves whether or not to access a source of information. Requiring parental permission with school admin validation is a clear and present case of censorship. What they should do, see, is to require all parents who DON'T want their children to see Rolling Stone magazine to write a letter specifically denying their children permission to view it. Continuing the subscription on a trial basis will allow them to say that they are not censoring the magazine, even when they do not renew the subscription for next year. --MN]
(see 04 Sep 2002)

See the appendix on Robie Harris.

By fans. The Fan Fiction network posted an announcement that it would no longer accept NC-17 rated material and all current material would be removed on 12 October. This decision was made in response to numerous complaints about such material. NC-17 rated material was clearly identified as such and a prompt screen ensured that surfers had to select such stories deliberately.

[Once again stupid shits who not only don't know how to avert their eyes but who went out of their way to see "offensive" material just so they could whine about it are screwing everything up for intelligent people. And the powers that be are doing what is politically correct in reply. --MN]

By Nathaniel Kennedy and other downtown activists in Santa Cruz. In Jun 2002 Mr. Kennedy wrote in chalk on a sidewalk, protest slogans and the badge numbers of police officers, at least five times within a twenty-four hour period. He was subsequently charged with misdemeanor vandalism. Activist Becky Johnson and artist Tim Rinker were charged with defacing public property in a separate incident. Ms. Johnson maintains that they have a First Amendment right to use this mode of expression. However, certain circumstance might force a reasonable time, manner, and place restricition. It seems the cement of these particular sidewalks is a porous type and chalk will not simply fade or wash away. Apparently chalk drawings must be pressure washed out. The general counsel for the California First Amendment Coalition, Terry Franke, recognizes that the city can regulate speech in a public milieu if two conditions are met. Any restriction can pertain only to mode of expression, not to content, and some alternative mode of expression must exist.

John Barisone, Santa Cruz city attorney, was reported as saying those conditions had been met. Ms. Johnson's position is that writing chalk messages is a more effecient method of reaching the homeless, though she apparently had admitted that other venues were open to her. She also contended, however, that she and the others were targetted for the content of their speech; that the municipal bylaw against chalk-drawings is a decade old and has been rarely enforced in past, but is now being enforced as a method of harassing the homeless in an attempt to drive them out of the area.
(see 13 Jul 2001; 24 Jan 2003; 08 Jun 2003; 16 Jun 2003)

By Cimarron Alliance Foundation. This Oklahoma gay-rights group had sued Oklahoma City over an ordinance passed in Aug 2001. This case got started in June after they put up banners on city lampposts to celebrate Gay and Lesbian History Month. They were ordered to take them down after the city received complaints, but subsequently got them put back up after threatening legal action. As a result, in August, the city council passed a new law forbidding "social advocacy" banners, and requiring banners to "promote or celebrate the city, its civic institutions, or public activities or events in the city." On this day, U.S. District Judge Robin J. Cauthron ruled the ordianance was unconstitutionally vague and overbroad.

[I'll say. Gay and Lesbian History Month is not a public event? It wasn't being held in OK City? I guess whether Cimarron Alliance Foundation is a civic institution depends on how you define the term civic. --MN]

By Ted Koppel. On the occasion of being a panelist before an audience of First Amendment lawyers. Quothe he, "What I'm saying, is if I'm running a war and I've got representatives of ABC, NBC, CBS, CNN, MSNBC, Al Jazeera, and the BBC, and they're out there with my troops and they've got the technical capacity to feed back what is happening live, so that the folks who are sitting in Baghdad have only to turn on their set to CNN and they can see what's happening on the front lines from the American vantage point-I'm saying it would be criminal to permit that." He later said in a phone interview by Village Voice, "Live TV coverage could realistically endanger U.S. troops in combat. The military ought to have the right to censor that."

[Bullshit. Military censorship is supposed to be for the suppression of information about troop movements. By the time those troops engage the enemy in combat that information is superseded. Although there are side issues to take into consideration. The only proper argument for not allowing live coverage of a battle in progress is that it would tell the enemy command about the assault more quickly than its own communications system would. However, that does not mean that the enemy command will be able to react in time to do any good. Especially in the case of Iraq which won't be any position to provide air support for its ground troops. Artillery is another matter. Other ground based units would probably have to be close enough to the fighting to hear the battle sounds to be able to launch an immediate counter attack, otherwise they would have to be moved into position, and those reinforcements would have to be behind the lines, not part of the front. Any troops holding adjacent front line positions cannot just pull up to counter-attack an assault. They have their own position to maintain. Then too, once the position is overrun the advancing troops aren't just going to sit on it.

Live coverage of such a battle would not needlessly endanger friendly troops unless the reporters transmitted the location of the battle, a likelyhood easily circumvented by not telling them where they are. News crews could be kept well behind the lines and transported forward just prior to an attack without being told exactly where they are going. Koppel's reasoning in this case is too superficial to be meaningful.

Leastways that's the opinion of this armchair general and former non-combatant serviceman. For the real reason we have war-zone censorship, see the report What Bodies? by Patrick Sloyan filed at Alicia Patterson Foundation, or the reprint at Alternet.org. --MN]

By Albuquerque, New Mexico, public schools. Faced with losing up to 14.7 million in funding for their schools, this city capitulated to federal extortion. Complaints about the software were pretty much what one could expect. The Albuquerque swim team was blocked from a site about swimsuits. In San Francisco, California, high school physics teacher Tom Henning reported that a student who was doing research on race tracks during the summer found resources blocked as gambling sites. He commented, "It has left a lot of teachers scrambling to help kids get the information they need."

Ossining High School senior Tim Kajsturain, in New York, had to choose a new senior project. The Red Hat Inc. web site was mysteriously blocked. He had intended to profile the company. He is quoted as saying, "About half the sites I try to access for research on any given topic are blocked, many of them the most useful. What's the use of technology if we can't use it?"

The last word in this incident seems to go to Mr. Henning: "This law doesn't add anything to our classroom. It creates troubles, distractions and barriers to learning."

[Yet, purple hair is disruptive to education. --MN]

By Marc Greenberg and Webe Web Corporation. Mr. Greenberg, co-founder of the corporation, is in the business of photographing children in modeling poses, commonly wearing bikini swimsuits or halter tops, and posting the photos on the web. Webe Web charges a twenty dollar U.S. a month subscription fee to viewers.

U.S. Representative Mark Foley, R-Florida, says that the practice provides a, "fix for pedophiles". He has a bill before the House Judiciary Committee that will criminalize "exploitive child modeling."

Mr. Greenberg says that the children wear outfits that can be bought in any mall. Critics say that this is irrelevant and the pictures are intended to be erotic while respecting existing porn laws. Mr. Foley says that he is worried about models being targetted for kidnap, rape, or murder.

[Foley also admits that the law doesn't seem to have much of a chance. Too many loopholes. What a waste of time, energy, and resources. Also, what a wonderful demonstration of the slippery slope in action. There are already existing laws covering pornography, but this site respects those laws, so we need another law to forbid what is still legal. Uh-huh. Sure.

This bill was introduced in the first week of May or so, and in an interview at the time, what Foley said is, "These web sites are nothing more than a fix for pedophiles. They don't sell products, they don't sell services -- all they serve are young children on a platter for America's most depraved. These sites sell child erotica and they must be banned immediately."

I took the liberty of scanning one such site and I can sort of see his point, but, of course, his methods are all wrong. If we want to ban the view of children from the eyes of the depraved, then we are going to have either keep them off the streets entirely or force them to wear burqas. --MN]

By Seminole Community College students. Editor Margaret Acker decided to run an opinion column about unwanted pregnancies that contained some crude language. Vice President Hank Hurley reviewed the paper and then held up publication. Michael Garlich, a spokesman for the college, commented, "The subject matter is not the problem. The article contains crude language that is not acceptable in a college newspaper." He said in an interview that the issue was one of upholding standards and responsible journalism.

Margaret Acker, Scribe editor and age 18, insists that editorial decisions are the perogative of the editor, not the college administration. She was reported to have said that officials insisted that she delete the offending language. She refused. Ms. Acker is quoted as saying, "This may not be the best story to start a fight with the administration about. But if I give in on this story, I'll have to give in on another story and another story and another." Robin Mimna, the author of the piece and age 22, allowed that she would remove the words if Ms. Acker asks her to, but is standing by her editor's principles. Ms. Mimna wrote the article to reflect the appalling dismay she felt on researching unwanted pregnancies from unsafe sex.
(see 19 Sep 2002)

By Alabama students. The Attorney General for Alabama, Bill Pryor, had issued a memo pointing out to school officials and campuses that the student organized prayer meetings, scheduled for one week after the WTC tragedy anniversary and to be held around flagpoles, are legal and allowed under the First Amendment. The memo was issued specifically to deflect knee-jerk reactionary attempts to squelch prayer in or at schools due to misinterpretations. Civil liberties lawyers agreed with the memo, noting only an unstated proviso that school officials must not be involved in the events.

By various school districts. A series of press conferences was scheduled for this day by a number of free speech groups; to whit:

• The Online Policy Group (OPG),
• Electronic Frontier Foundation (EFF),
• American Civil Liberties Union (ACLU),
• National Coalition Against Censorship (NCAC),
• Youth Free Expression Network (YFEN), a project of the Free Expression Policy Project (FEPP), and
• local school community members.

The conferences were slated to take place in San Francisco, New York, and Boston, with administrators, teachers, and students speaking out against censorware. OPG and EFF were to announce the results of studies on overblocking, while the ACLU and EFF planned to launch projects to lobby congress to repeal CIPA.

[This article was written up on 17 Sep 2002 based on a news release about the upcoming event. Also on 17 Sep, Seth Finkelstein issued an e-mail on his planned participation in the series of talks in which he detailed overblocking by Smartfilter; this time of web sites for schools. --MN]

By Eric Fischl. This statue of a naked woman falling was first covered up and then removed. The statue evoked images of people jumping from the burning World Trade Center. Because of complaints and a critical column in the New York Post, Rockefeller Center officials apologized and removed the statue from the underground concourse where it was on display.

[I wonder what half-baked rationale a soi-disant free press would offer to rationalize such censorship. I bet if I started a movement to have the New York Post banned from Rockefeller Center you'd hear them squealing like a stuck pig. --MN]

Along the California highway system. During the bombing of Afghanistan, a banner protesting the bombing was removed from a Highway 17 overpass in Santa Cruz while a near-by flag was left alone. The hangers of the banner, Amy Courtney and Cassandra Brown, won a lawsuit against Caltrans, which then decided to remove all expressions of free speech regardless of mode expression. Caltrans appealed the ruling, but in early September filed a document stating that it would allow banners and flags so long as such did not pose a hazard. When Ms. Courtney and Brown read the filing, they and their supporters immediately prepared new banners. On this day, they held a rally in town with the supporters and then hung the new banners reading:

U.S. = rogue state

and

War at what cost? $200 billion, 10,000 dead.

Caltrans' appeal of the ruling is scheduled for 09 Oct 2002.
(see 29 Jan 2002)

By Seminole Community College students. School officials ended their censorship efforts due to concerns that it would disrupt the learning environment for student journalists, saying in a written statement, "it is not in the best interests of the College to generate a prolonged, controversial dispute over this student learning issue."

According to the report at Student Press Law Center, Robin Mimna expressed her disdain and contempt for women who have unprotected sex by calling them "stupid bitches". She also described intercourse as "shagging ass", and also saw occasion to use the word "scumbag". She chose this language specifically because she was so dismayed by her findings about unwanted pregnancy during her research.

[And for all that, editor Margaret Acker had excised most of the crudities before doing the layout. It was the words she left in over which administrators threw their hissy fit. --MN]
(see 16 Sep 2002)

By Amiri Baraka. This poem was written shortly after and in response to the WTC tragedy. According to Mr. Baraka, it was written as "an attack on Imperialism, National Oppression, Monopoly Capitalism, Racism, Anti-Semitism." It was specifically meant to be deliberately provocative. The poem had been promptly posted to the internet and copied by many web sites, and publicized by Mr. Baraka as well at various readings. On this date, he read the poem at the Geraldine Dodge Poetry Festival at Waterloo Village in Stanhope, New Jersey. The crowd responded with thunderous applause, but Mr. Baraka reportedly came under immediate fire from the press; in particular Fox News, New York Times, and the National Review; all of whom were reportedly following the charge of the Anti-Defamation League.

["The National Review" was the politicized press outlet that fired Anne Coulter when even her ravings became an embarrassment. A group calling itself The Chicago Surrealist Movement believes this incident is a knee-jerk reaction triggered by Baraki being made New Jersey's Poet Laureate. --MN]

By American Civil Liberties Union of Texas. The list was released in the ACLU of Texas annual report, which this year was entitled: Free People Read Freely.

By Family Flix and cleancutcinemas.com, of Mesa and Phoenix, Arizona, respectively, and eleven other companies. These companies are violating copyrights conventions by unilaterally editing out material from popular films that might be offensive. The Directors Guild of America is seeking a permanent injunction, having filed a suit in a U.S. District Court in Denver, Colorado.

[Attorney Mark Wright, for Family Flix, said in a statement, "Family Flix and a myriad of other companies found that there is a huge demand for movies that don't make us wince. The customers said 'We would like to have a choice.' " You can see my opinion about this issue through this link.
(see 24 Feb 2002)

By The American Library Association, et al. This being the theme for this year's Banned Book Week.

By Fred Phelps. This baptist minister plans to picket the University of Wyoming and Colorado State University football game on 12 Oct at Colorado State University. The key to this exercise is that Mr. Phelps will not restrict himself to the "free speech zone" established on the campus. This zone, which Mr. Phelps has respected during previous protests on the campus, is too far, by about four miles (six kilometers), from the stadium where the greater mass of people is expected to be.

Linda Kuk, spokesperson for CSU, said that the university wants to respect free speech, but must also respect safety. She was quoted as saying, "There are cars, tailgating parties, people are drinking and enjoying themselves," she said. "Looking at the issue, we felt it was really dangerous. We are not going to extend our free-speech zone out there because we don't want any kind of that activity going on in a game."

The area around the stadium is not under campus jurisdiction, however, but public property.

[Hmmmm. "We don't want any kind of that activity going on in a game." An oblique admission of suppression or a mere slip of the tongue? It's difficult to tell even knowing what the underlying issues are at stake. The irReverend and apostate Mr. Phelps is a raving misohomonist who spends much of his time roaming Colorado to vilify homosexuals. The twelfth of October is the anniversary of the death of Mathew Shepherd, killed for being homosexual, in Wyoming. According to the article I read about this incident, the Topeka, Kansas, based Westboro Baptist Church says on its web site, the event is to, "celebrate the fourth anniversary of Matthew Shepard's journey to hell." The University of Maryland had scheduled a play about the killing called The Laramie Project for the incoming freshman class; and which is now under a censorship challenge by religio-political forces. Phelps, and a group of 15 anticipated protesters, are holding this event to celebrate and praise this murder. Personally, I hope he gets hit by a bus. Aside from that, how can you call it free speech when it is restricted to one small area? Still, I can sort of see Ms. Kuk's point. Plenty of potential in this one for someone to push Humpty Dumpty in front of that bus. --MN]
(For more about speech free zones see 22 Aug 2002; 11 Mar 2003; for more about Phelps see 16 Oct 2003; 28 Oct 2003)

[Addendum (15 Aug 2006:) Also see the The Anti-Phelps Affair page; about numerous states invoking bubble laws to restrict protests by the church at military funerals. --MN]

By Seth Finkelstein. He e-mailed a newsletter for "Banned Websites Week" about six sites that sell books, but which [Not-So]Smartfilter blocked as sex sites.

By Sharon Paz. This work was summarily removed by The Jamaica Center for the Arts, which had hosted the exhibit. The exhibit consisted of cutouts of human silhouettes falling through mid-air, which had been pasted to the windows of the center. Staff members objected because the silhouttes were too reminiscent of the WTC tragedy. Because of these complaints, the show was first cut down to three weeks, but then the exhibit was taken down without any consultation with the artists or the curator.

This closing seems to have been effected through the direct intervention of the board of directors. At any rate, that body issued a statement meant to clarify the situation. Instead, the statement reads as if it is an apology by both the board of directors and Sharon Paz for having unintentionally offered offense and as an obsequious capitulation to the demanded censorship.

In the hope, as always, that it will eat them last.

County Democratic Party chairman Raymond McNeel is quoted in the article I saw as saying, "The clear and apparent effort that the Commissioners Court made over time in incremental steps has been to appease a very impassioned group of voters in hopes that each baby step would satisfy them and make them go away."

This report comes from the Montgomery County, Texas, where the Republican Leadership Council claimed victory in two censorship issues; one of which was to implement a new library policy and the other of which was to place a plaster of paris fig leaf on a statue of Michaelangelo's David. A statue that had already been moved to the rooftop of the local mall.

The new policy was implemented after a four and a half hour meeting wherein anti-censorship advocates argued in the hallways with censorship advocates. The crowd of 150 overflowed the Commissioners Court. It was finally decided to add five more citizens to the library review committee. Not adopted was a motion to implement a citizen oversight committee to review books on a quarterly basis, or to fire the library director; also in opposition to banning It's So Amazing and It's Perfectly Normal, both by Robie Harris. In fact opponents to these measures had submitted a petition of eight hundred signatures.

Still on the agenda is an RLC boycott of and efforts to remove photographs of nude art from Buca di Beppo restaurant. The District Attorney had taken the grand jury there for lunch one day. They found the food was good but that there was nothing offensive.

[Neo-fascist Adam Sadler still maintains that this is all about community standards. He is quoted as saying, "Montgomery County has the right to create certain community standards as it pertains to how we use our tax dollars on our libraries. There were a lot of good points from all sides on the issue. But what it really comes down to is this: Something needed to be done to correct what we considered to be an imbalance in the current library system." For more on this issue, see my commentary.

In the case of the restaurant, however, the community supports the restaurant. Vice president of field marketing for the Buca di Beppo restaurant chain, Randall Lopez, was reported to be unaware of any complaints about the art in that outlet, but that since the boycott became public, the restaurant has received more support than criticism from the community.

Hypersensitive citizen Dianna Whitt of Shenandoah, said that the fig leaf wasn't good enough; even with the statue so high up detail was apparently indistinguishable. She insists that she will continue her challenge of the statue until it is placed where it cannot be seen by children without parental permission. --MN]
(See the appendix on Robie Harris.)

By Sidna Brower. Ms. Brower wrote an editorial decrying anti-segregation efforts, which were often violent, on the University of Mississippi campus. On 04 Dec 1962, she was censured by the student senate, who wrote that she had, "failed in time of grave crisis to represent and uphold the rights of her fellow students."

Ms. Brower had written in the editorial for that day that the demonstrations were, "bringing dishonor and shame upon the University and the State of Mississippi." It was on that day James Meredith of Jackson was admitted to the university.

On this day, the current student senate repealed that censure; voting unanimously to do so and citing Ms. Brower for her courage. This move stems from a year-long program concerning the University's integration during the 60's.

An article about Banned Book Week by Associated Press states the ALA reports an estimated twenty to twenty-five books were banned from schools in 2001. Ten percent of the estimated number from 2000. The director of the Office for Intellectual Freedom. Judith Krug, opined that the attentions and energies of people were being diverted from school to the internet.

[This slump might also be part of a downward trend in censorship efforts at the grassroots level. The ALA reported 448 challenges for 2001 vice more than 900 for 1981. I doubt that it is, however. I think it's too big a difference all at once. A 90% drop in bannings over the course of a year after a 50% decline in challenges over two decades? Granted, this is a matter of comparing apples to oranges. . . .

Using the numbers cited in the article, 200 / 900 is 0.22, or 22%. Twenty-two percent of 448 would mean 98 bannings for 2001; whereas twenty-five is only 5%.

I would think, all things being equal, that the number of bannings would remain fairly constant in proportion to the number of challenges. --MN]

By Kisteesha Lanegan. This fifteen year old student was told at the end of the last school year by officials that she was forbidden to go to school with her hair in dreadlocks. As a result, she has effectively been banned from attending her school this year; having been sent home on the first day. Last year the school had implemented a policy of not allowing dreadlocks or mohawks.

Superintendent Jerry House was quoted as saying, "We're not here as a fashion store or fashion occasion. If you want to dress in an outlandish way in your own time, that's your business. That's not our business."

Ms. Lanegan was quoted as saying, "It's not really my hair. They're trying to mold me into a person that I'm not. My hair is totally irrelevant to education at the school."

[BINGO! --MN]

In high schools in Cobb County, Georgia. Board members voted to have creationism taught as a valid alternative to evolution. The move is based on the idea that it will encourage critical thinking about the process of evolution. The vote to allow the teaching of creationism was unanimous.

[First: Creationism is dogma, a religious doctrine. It is not and cannot be any kind of a science. Hence: this move constitutes a clear and present violation of the church/state separation. Second: whose view of creationism do you suppose is going to be taught? The story told in the Book of Genesis was taken from the Babylonians, who got theirs from the Sumerians. Do you suppose either of their creationist myths are going to be taught? How about that of the Hindi? Buddhists? Zoroastrians ? Wiccans? Third: in light of the conclusion that only the Judeo-Christian version of creationism will be taught, this very clearly constitutes a second count of congress making a law respecting an establishment of religion. --MN]
(see 13 Jan 2005; 29 Jan 2005; 12 Jan 2007)

By Eleanor Eisenberg, executive director of the Arizona Civil Liberties Union. See the anti-Bush sentiment suppression timeline.

By Justice for All; an anti-abortion student group at University of Texas. A lawsuit filed on their behalf by Alliance Defense Fund of Arizona, alleges that the university denied permits for the group to stage exhibits, censored the accompanying literature and graphic photographs, and permitted a professor and counter-protesters to disrupt the exhibit.
(see 10 Aug 2001; 03 Sep 2001; 09 Nov 2001; 21 Dec 2001; 15 Feb 2002; 25 Jun 2002; 30 Jun 2002; 14 May 2003)

Melvin vs: Doe was argued before the Supreme Court of Pennsylvania. This precedent setting case received a ruling favourable to the ACLU in Nov 2000 and which firmly established protection for online anonimity.

By Cloverport, Breckinridge County, Kentucky. The ACLU has filed a challenge to a two year old curfew law in a federal court, alleging the curfew is unconstitutional. The ordinance prohibits any person, adult or otherwise, from being out in public between midnight on weeknights and 1 a.m. on weekends, and 5 a.m., unless they are engaged in a lawful occupation or travel to or from work or going to a legally permissible destination.

The law has not been enforced in its two years of existance. Cloverport's lawyer Charles Mattingly III, said he believes the law is constitutional in that it is a reasonable restriction on peaceable assembly. David Friedman, general counsel for the ACLU of Kentucky, says the law is "tantamount to martial law." Hardinsburg and Irvington, also of Breckinridge County, have similar curfews, but the plaintiffs, Darrell Embry, Raymond Harper, Marie Irby, and Bob Mercer, live in Cloverport.

[What the fuck is wrong with Kentuckians? This law was implemented as a juvenile curfew after a rash of vandalism resulted in broken windows and park benches, then extended to everyone because the juvenile curfew wasn't working and other such laws were being struck down. It is supposed to be reasonable because it is a blanket curfew rather than a discriminatory one. "So what's wrong with that?" you ask? I reiterate: this law has not been enforced in the two years since it passed. Why? Because there hadn't been any crimes since then? Or is it simply a law that was passed just in case it might be needed some day? --MN]

By grass roots groups. Several Washington State AIDS activism groups accused the Bush administration of engaging in a witch hunt. They state that non-abstinence only material has been pulled from web sites dealing with disease control, and that federal funding agencies are targetting them for audits.

President of Advocates for Youth James Wagoner is quoted as saying, "It's a campaign to censor science and research, and it's a campaign to use government auditors to intimidate opponents of the administration on key policy issues." Claude Allen, deputy secretary at the Department of Health and Human Services, said in reply, "We're looking at ourselves to see what we need to do to be efficient and effective."

[My money is Wagoner having the right of it. But then, I think Bush is a bible-thumping, pulpit-pounding, pompous-ass baby killer. See what I think about this affair in this commentary. Also see what Judith Levine has to say about the state of sexuality education as a result of right-wing censorship. --MN]

By Congress. And shot down by Congress. H.R. 2357, was rejected on a 239-178 vote. The bill, sponsored by Rep. Walter Jones, R-N.C., would have allowed religious leaders to talk freely about politics and to endorse candidates without endangering their organization's tax-exempt status. The House was deeply divided on the issue during the debates of the previous night.

The prohibition on political activity by 501(c)(3) tax-exempt organizations was imposed by Congress in 1954 under an amendment offered by then Senator Lyndon Johnson. Prior to this amendment, churches were freely involved in political debate.

Some comments against the proposal were:

• [the bill would] "erode the separation of church and state, a bedrock value of our nation" [...]
  --Rep. Christopher Shays, R-Conn.

• "if this legislation is allowed to pass or stand, you could have a minister coming into a pulpit and saying 'vote for so and so because God told me.'"
  --Rep. John Lewis, D-Ga.

• "Most Americans do not want their churches turned into smoke-filled rooms where political deals are cut and partisan politics replaces worship. When people put their money in the collection plate, they don't expect it to be used for candidates' campaign literature and attack ads."
  --Rev. Barry Lynn, executive director of Americans United for Separation of Church and State.

Representative Jones was quoted as saying, "Today we took a very important step toward bringing freedom of speech back to our pulpits. From the first day of the 108th Congress, I will continue this fight because I believe this battle can be won and will be won. Congress must return First Amendment rights to our houses of worship."

[Sorry, pal, but as far as I'm concerned this prohibition poses a reasonable time, place, or manner restriction. Sure raises a sticky point, though, doesn't it? Can you use the First Amendment to trump the First Amendment? For my money, this restriction is reasonable in that: even if the endorsement of a candidate by a church would not violate church/state separation, the seeking after the endorsement by the candidate would. Candidates get votes by promising anything, and making a promise to enforce or legislate laws according to the prejudices of a church would consititute respecting the establishment of a religion. At least in my not so humble opnion.

Yeah, yeah; I know, they already do that by adopting an antiabortion and "family values" stance, but at least they can't do it in church to curry favour. --MN]

By Ronald Marcus, editor. The ACLU filed a free speech lawsuit on this newspaper's behalf against Ohoopee Regional Library System in Vidalia, Georgia. The newspaper had been displayed in the library lobby, but its presence generated complaints, resulting in it's being banned from display, while other material also being displayed was left in place. The library later removed those other materials as well and announced that it would review its display policy.

The library director contends that the paper was not removed because of censorship, but because it had failed to follow proper procedure. Mr. Marcus commented on the incident, "I don't think a librarian should be able to impose censorship or restrict information based on her own Christian views. When the government suppresses views that it disagrees with, we should all be upset -- gay or straight. It is completely un-American."

[Addendum (18 Oct 2002): In an article filed on 18 Oct in Savannah NOW online, Mr. Marcus was quoted as saying, "She told me I was publishing a newspaper that was trying to influence people to become gay." It was stated that he said this in an interview shortly after the confrontation. If that is the case, then this is a clear and present case of censorship based on the misohominist, right-wing misapprehesion that homosexuals actively recruit unsuspecting people; typically youths. --MN]
(See 08 Aug 2003)

By John B. Gardner. Mr. Gardner was teaching at Arthur J. Rooney Middle School in Pittsburgh on 11 Sep 2001 and made some notes in the margins of a newspaper. After he transcribed the notes he threw the paper in the trash; where another teacher saw the paper and the notes. As a result, Mr. Gardner was allegedly surrounded by armed guards, detained for an hour in front of the school, and suspended from teaching. He was later reinstated.

The notes he made -- "Osama bin Laden did us a favor," and "He vulcanized us, awakened us and strengthened our resolve," were for a non-fiction book about adversity. On this day he filed a free speech suit and is seeking $50,000 in damages.

By Maya Angelou. Her autobiography is under challenge at Hamilton High School, Hamilton, Montana. Although the complaintant's daughter and two other students in the freshman class of 150 were allowed to complete their assignments with other books, that is not enough for him. Parent Cary Monaco, pastor at Big Sky Baptist Church, insists that no 14 or 15 year old should be exposed to this book because their tender sensibilities. He is demanding that the book be removed from the curriculum. This work was selected as an interdisciplinary unit with global studies -- discrimination in African culture, historical perspective, overcoming hardships, personal testimony style of writing, and the importance of writing as a coping mechanism, as well as other themes. These benefits don't seem to be good enough for Mr. Monaco, however, as he is quoted as saying, "That (the book) has redeeming qualities isn't a good argument. You could teach the same things they are trying to get across with another book. We're hoping the school board will take it off the curriculum."

By Dr. David Swann. An Alberta medical health officer, he was fired for speaking out in favour of the Kyoto Protocols, contrary to the anti-Protocol sentiment of the Alberta government. He was reinstated on 10 Oct 2002 after the Palliser Health Authority held an emergency meeting on 09 Oct.

By Rudolf Guiliani, et al. An article written by Associated Press and posted at Freedom Forum Online details the difficulties of attempting to find and access public infomation about running New York City. The supression was initiated by Mr. Guiliani, but is now being assisted by the Bloomberg administration.

[In my comment for 24 Dec 2001 I wrote:

A spokesman at the archive center which received the documents stated that the purpose of the move was to allow the documents to be classified and made accessible to the public more quickly. Yeah, well, there is a finite chance that will happen, I grant you, as minuscule as I personally believe it to be. For the moment -- cynicism and all -- I'll adopt a wait and see posture. But I still ain't gonna believe it until I see it, and maybe not even then.

I stand by that statement. --MN]
(see 24 Dec 2001; 28 Feb 2002; 08 Jan 2003 27 Mar 2003; 27 Apr 2006)

By Jill Friedman. The photograph in question is of a poster being carried by two women wearing black. The words on the poster read, "In The Name Of Allah Oh Israel Give Palestine Back And Go In Peace." The offensive material is below that: A Star of David with an equals sign pointing to a swaztika. This photograph was one in an exhibit being shown in a museum. It was reported in the Hartfort Courant online that the complaints of offense came from the employees of the museum; not from patrons. The photograph was pulled.

By We The People. FAIR issued a report detailing three instances where the consumers held news services accountable and exacted changes in reporting.

[Kind of funny, isn't it, that a free press has to be told to protect our First Amendment rights vis a vis access to information; yet, how loudly do they squeal when somebody tells them there is something they're not allowed to know about. --MN]

By Student Council President Froilan Rellora; a senior and honors student at Dobson High School, Mesa, Arizona. School administrators ruled that the banner he had carried with the above slogan on it was inappropriate. He had carried the banner to an intramural swim meet, and some parents complained that it was too suggestive. Mesa Unified school district policy prohibits "obscene language" at school events. Mr. Rellora is facing impeachment and being barred from all future school events. Some sixty of the 2,500 students held a peaceful protest outside the principal's office on this day.

[Knee-jerk reactionism; pure and simple. --MN]

On the topic of Understanding Loved Boys and Boylovers, by David L. Riegel. A group calling itself United States Justice Foundation, based in Escondido, California, threatened to sue the bookseller in September under unfair business practice provision in California laws. Other ultra-conservatives soon jumped on the bandwagon; notably Jerry Falwell. The complaint is that the book encourages child molestation.
(See 04 Apr 2002; 27 Mar 2003; 26 Aug 2003)

By private citizens of Harborcreek Township, Pennsylvania, and on their own property. U.S. District Judge Sean J. McLaughlin imposed a ten day injunction against a town ordinance requiring a bond of $50.00 on campaign signs. Code enforcement officer Joseph Peck is reported as stating that the bond is commonly used by municipalities to ensure such signs are properly posted and in case the town has to pay the cost of cleaning up after an election. He is quoted as saying, "It does not restrict free speech. It is for the insurance that the signs do not litter the highways and do get removal," However, the bond is also required of citizens who put up signs in support of a candidate on their own property. This ordinance had been in place since before an updating in 1984, but has recently been challenged by the ACLU on behalf of candidate AnnDrea Benson. Ms. Benson commented on the situation, "For a grass-roots campaign like [mine], not raising hundreds of thousands of dollars, this becomes an important issue, let alone being unconstitutional."

[Uh-huh -- Mr. Peck does seem to have a valid point, doesn't he? Except the city does not clean up your property for you. It is up to you to take out your own trash. --MN]

[Addendum (21 Oct 2002): On this day town officials settled out of court; scrapping the fee and the time limits on campaign signs displayed on private property entirely. --MN]

By Chicagoans. The federal government had banned demonstrations from Chicago's Federal Plaza after the World Trade Center tragedy. In Mar 2002, under pressure from the ACLU, they allowed demonstrations, but by only one group at a time. On this day the General Services Administration reached an agreement with the ACLU to reopen the plaza to use by multiple groups at once; even groups with opposing viewpoints and agenda. While approving the agreement, U.S. District Judge Ruben Castillo commented, "Having the space across the street open is important to the Constitution, which did not die along with many others on Sept. 11."

By an unnamed store in Bucharest's main shopping centre. The underwear is printed with portraits of Jesus Christ and the Virgin Mary. The Romanian Consumer's Protection Office was flooded with complaints when the line of Turkish underwear went on sale in Bucharest. The store was fined £200. The CPO also ordered the sale of the underwear to be stopped.

By Grandville High school board. Concerned parent Tom Mouw filed a complaint against Steinbeck's Of Mice And Men but he was basically frozen out of the review process. Rather than sitting down with him to discuss his concerns or inviting him to participate in the review process to hear his viewpoints, the school board simply informed him of the decision. The same thing happened when he appealled that decision to the Board of Education. This situation was handled very poorly and instead of building concensus, its only outcome will be to foster resentment and distrust.

By pro-life students at Washington University. This group of law students had applied for status as a recognized group by the Student Bar Association but was disallowed by a 27-10 vote. On this day a second vote dramatically reversed that count -- to 27-6 with 4 abstentions -- in favour of allowing the anti-abortion group, even though sentiments among members of the SBA had not changed. The group is now eligible to receive funding and use campus facilities. The primary point in this case, however, is that university administrators had not overturned the constitutionally impermissible blocking of the group. It was left to the Foundation for Individual Rights in Education and the American Civil Liberties Union of Eastern Missouri to lobby on behalf of LSPL.

By Noelle Bush. Daughter of Governor Jeb Bush and niece to President George Bush. Someone (apparently her attorneys) initiated an attempt to have her hearing closed to the public. Circuit Judge Reginald Whitehead ruled that the hearings would be kept open after weighing Ms. Bush's right to privacy vs: the public right to see justice done.

[Gee, . . . what a poor, little rich girl; following in her druggy uncle's footsteps, flaunting the law, trying to get it covered up. My heart just bleeds. Icewater. --MN]

By American Civil Liberties Union. The ACLU launched a new campaign to safeguard rights and freedoms in America in response to the massive erosion of those liberties by post WTC tragedy law-making. The Safe and Free Campaign is based upon the proposition that America can be both free and safe at one and the same time.

By the American Library Association and adopted by Johnson County Library. This Bill of Rights was challenged by Library Board member Bart Cohen. Mr. Cohen could not understand why the Bill of Rights allows for all points of view. The challenge arose during a discussion about revising the current development policy to favour a greater cultural emphasis and to adapt to changes in organizational structure and technology.

By Jerry Rubin. This Santa Monica City Council candidate, who is no relation to the Jerry Rubin of the Chicago Seven, had run afoul of a rule prohibiting the use of the word activist on ballots. Mr. Rubin has been a full-time, paid activist for some twenty years.

He had sued the city of Santa Monica to have his occupation so listed on the November 2000 ballot, but U.S. District Judge J. Spencer Letts denied the request for a preliminary injunction. On this day, the 9th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals upheld that decision, writing in part, "A ballot is a ballot, not a bumper sticker." Although State law requires candidates to be identified on the ballot only by their profession, occupation or vocation, it also specifically bars the term activist. The panel found, however, that this law "does not severely burden a candidate's First Amendment rights." James Fosbinder, Mr. Rubin's lawyer, said he would appeal to the U.S. Supreme Court. Mr. Rubin is running again in the Nov 2002 election.

[Sure don't make no sense to me. --MN]

By Louise Rennison. It is under challenge by Linda Rutherford who read it when her eighth grade daughter brought the book home from the Oregon Middle School library. The book is about how one 14 year old girl deals with her burgeoning sexuality, and it contains language and views that are true to life.

[See my commentary on this issue --MN]

By Sonja Kerkhoff. Ms. Kerkhoff is one of six artists from Leiden, Netherlands, in twin-city Oxford, England, on an exchange program. As part of the program, they had intended to read poetry, entitled Colonising Oxford, by authors in former British colonies. The readings were to be done before motorists stopped at red lights. The Oxford City Council nixed the idea, ostentibly for security reasons. However, city councillor Maureen Christian, also a member of the twinning society, said, "She wants to put people right at the traffic lights. People are already frightfully irate around there. It's a very busy corner. We were concerned for her safety and we thought this event might cause a breach of race relations. It would be like an Oxford artist going over to Holland and giving talks on how the Dutch were colonial. It has nothing to do with modern-day life. She has not been censored. It's just a silly place to do this."

[Yeah, well it might be a silly place to do that, but even discounting the term "race relations" as an honest slip of the tongue or local idiom, it is still a clear and present case of content discrimination. Not to mention that the idea of all Oxfordians being irate enough to attack Ms. Kerkhoff because of political poetry strikes me as rather specious. Chances are that most of them wouldn't know enough history to be offended and the rest are too level headed. --MN]

By sweet-shops in Southport and Blackpool, England. A store manager in Southport was quoted in the article at Ananova.com as saying, "Two male officers came in here and ordered me to take all the rock willies out of the window. They said the rock boobs could stay because they hadn't received any complaints about them. I am absolutely fuming. I can't believe, with all the youth crime and shoplifting that goes on here, the police are choosing to spend their time worrying about rock willies."

Shortly afterward, Councillor Mary Smith of Blackpool began advocating for similar measures in that town. The primary problem seems to be that the confectionery is on display in the front windows. Said Ms. Smith, "These items are disgusting and give the town a bad image. Who wants to see this sort of thing when they are walking along the promenade with their children? It's OK for the stag and hen parties but it's putting the families off. If the police can do this in Southport why can't they do it here? I have already spoken to the chief executive about this. If we have got to get a byelaw to do this then let's get one."

[I assume "rock willies" means rock candy penises -- not rock hard, . . . or, . . . well, nevermind. Anyway, it isn't clear whether or not Southport can do that; legally. But what I find particular telling is Smith's attitude toward the law as some kind of almighty club that can be summarily used to bludgeon any upstart into submission. As for the complaint by the store manager, I sympathize with him, but the police are also required to respond to complaints about him by other citizens. As for the police, they really, really should'a gotten a warrant instead of summarily ordering those confections out of the window, and they sure as Hell should not have discriminated between the two types. --MN]

By Saddam Hussein. Arab News reported that as many as several thousand political and criminal prisoners were being set free under orders from Saddam Hussein. The move is seen as largely political; an effort to garner increasing support from the people of Iraq. A number of the prisoners had been jailed for refusing to do military service.

By Shohdy Naguib Surur. In Jun 2002 he was sentenced to a year in jail by the government of Egypt for having posted a poem his father had written. On this day, an appeals court upheld the conviction and sentence. The poem, by Naguib Surur, who is rather revered in Egypt and who died in 1978, is a satirical work that was written after Egypt was defeated in the 1967 war. Naguib was highly critical of Egyptian politics. In the poem, he slammed the government using sexually explicit imagery and the cant of the streets. The poem has never been published in Egypt, but was available on samizdat audio cassettes. Shohdy posted the poem to a U.S. hosted web site circa 1999. He was subsequently charged with possessing "immoral booklets and prints"; Egyptian officials presenting the case as a pornography violation, although Wired.com alleges that the case is clearly due to political motivation.

Once convicted, Shohdy took advantage of his double citizenship in Russia to flee into exile; from whence he said, "I have no illusions whatsoever regarding the justice system in Egypt. In the safety of exile and with an unlimited access to the Internet, I am having great fun discrediting and exposing the unlawful regime." Unless things change in Egypt or Shohdy returns to serve his time in prison, his projected length of exile is thirty years; to which the statute of limitations had recently been extended from five years.

See the entry in the Appendix G

By Rohan Gunaratna. This book makes claims that some Malaysian political groups have historical ties to Muslim separatists in the Philippines, and through those groups to the al-Qaeda terrorism network. Leading bookstores in Malaysia stopped selling the book while the government undertook to decide whether or not to ban it entirely. Some officials oppose such a ban, but for political reasons rather than out of concern for human rights. These opponents say state censorship would spark more international interest in the book and create the impression that Malaysia is trying to hide something.

By Brookfield Properties. This exhibit of news photographs tours the world each year. This year's exhibit includes photographs from the WTC tragedy. It is to these photographs that some office workers in the fifty-three story BCE Place in Toronto, Ontario, object. That building was also evacuated on 11 Sep 2001. In light of a flood of complaints, Brookfield Properties had reconfigured the exhibit so the photographs from the tragedy were screened from public view. On this day, David Arthur, president of Brookfield Canada, flatly refused to end the exhibit before the scheduled date in November.

It was only those photographs of the WTC tragedy that drew complaints in this incident. Other photographs of human rights abuses, and in particular the one of a dead Palestinian child with six hands pulling a funeral shroud over the body, went unremarked. The exhibit had also come under attack in Saudi Arabia and China; due to nudity (most likely) and depictions of Falun Gong practioners, respectively. The article I read stated that WPP policy is to show the exhibit in full or not at all. It was reported that the exhibit is rarely shown in a skyscraper, and that it had never been pulled from a venue. Claudia Hinterseer, of World Press Photo, was quoted as saying, "That's part of our fight against censorship. [...] There's no way we'd cut out some images for whatever reason. Some people get shocked by the intensity and the sadness of certain pictures ... but it's reality, in the end."

By Leonard Nimoy. Mr. Nimoy, the same who played First Officer Spock of the U.S.S. Enterprise, has an art photography book which mixes female nudes with Jewish symbology. He had been invited to speak at a fund raising dinner by the Jewish Federation of Greater Seattle on this date, but the foundation cancelled the invitation in early October. Mr Nimoy described the work as, "It's a photographic essay on the subject of the Shekhina, which is the feminine presence of God, the feminine aspect of divinity. This is not some figure that is a foggy mist in a cloud somewhere. I have depicted her as being a flesh-and-blood woman."

Federation Director Barry Goren explained the decision with, "I think it's pretty self-explanatory. If you were running a charity fund-raising dinner and there were going to be images of naked women or naked women with Jewish ritual objects draped on them, that might be offensive to some folks."

[When the stated reason for a cancellation is that the material "could" cause "some" offense to "some" people, that is a clear and present case of censorship. Goren defended this censorship on that argument that the contract was for Mr. Nimoy to speak about his "jewish journey". Mr. Nimoy had apparently planned to speak about the book and to show slides of the images from the start. After his engagement was cancelled, he was invited to speak about the book instead at the Temple Beth Am in Wedgwood on 24 Oct.

Temple Beth Am Rabbi Jonathan Singer commented about the engagement, "He has freedom of the pulpit, as we say. We wanted to very much reach out and make sure that his work would be on display and that it would be understood that the Seattle Jewish community was interested in having artists think about how to express themselves creatively as Jews. If you see what anyone's doing in the Jewish world today, people are taking traditional forms and applying them to contemporary circumstances." --MN]

By an Orthodox Jewish community. Officials in the burough of Tenafly, New Jersey, had ordered an orthodox Jewish community to take down the plastic tape they had used to mark out a religious pseudo-district. The eruv is an artificial enclosure considered to be a single extended home, in which the orthodox may perform tasks on the Sabbath that are forbidden outside the home. Tasks such as a pushing a baby carriage or helping with an infirm, elderly person's wheelchair. An eruv may enclose an entire neighbourhood or even an entire community. Many orthodox communities string up a thin wire high above the ground, so such eruvs are unobtrusive.

The community in Tenafly had marked their eruv with a plastic tape (probably the day-glo, soft plastic type you can buy in hardware stores), which was strung from utility poles. In Aug 2002, the burough ruled that this use of the poles constituted a violation of church/state separation and ordered the eruv dismantled. On this day, a three judge panel of the 3rd U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals reversed that, ruling that the eruv had not constituted an improper government endorsement of religion.

[I'm not sure how deeply this issue goes. I do know that in some places, Montreal, Quebec, for instance, eruvs have been challenged by citizens. Mostly out of simple ignorance, of course. In this case, it was probably just an honest concern badly handled; the same way religious observance in schools often is. --MN]

By the Bush administration; and repressed by the Bush administration. A group called Defenders of Wildlife filed a suit to demand a draft of proposed changes to the National Forest Management Plan. Rodger Schlickeisen, president of the group, is quoted as saying, "the Bush administration is stonewalling our request for information on why they suspended and began rewriting the rules for managing national forests." [A document leaked to the group] "confirms our worst fears -- that (administration officials) are listening only to their timber industry supporters." Mr. Schlickeisen compared the governments witholding of documents to the actions in the Cheney Energy Task Force Affair.

By the Bush administration. A suit was filed against it by the ACLU, Electronic Privacy Information Center, the American Booksellers Foundation for Free Expression and the Freedom to Read Foundation in an effort to hold the government accountable for how it is gathering records from libraries, bookstores, and ISPs.

In the Montgomery County Affair. See the appendix on Robie Harris.
(see my commentary about this waffling)

At Park High School, Livingston, Montana. The school board voted 5-3 in favour of banning the magazine from the library; overruling the 12 Sep 2002 decision by the library committee to keep the magazine, albeit requiring parental permission. The decision appears to be based on the premise, "we must protect the children". Trustee Jim Braley commented, "It is the obligation of this board to determine what our students are exposed to. A lot of the information I read in Rolling Stone, I can find no way it supports the curriculum of our schools. Many of the articles are contrary to the curriculum." However, the magazine does not seem to have been required reading as part of any curriculum. Spoken commentary about the magazine at the meeting was evenly divided, but written comments favoured the banning 48-12. Some of the comments offered are:

• "My job is to teach my children right from wrong. The school should complement, not supersede me. Requiring parental permission allows me to teach my children what I want."
  --Tim Gable, Parent

• "You're hearing from a majority of the people that they don't find this (magazine) acceptable. No doubt if you put it to a vote it would be turned down."
  --Kelvin Hoover

• "We should teach our students to argue, to think and to challenge. We should teach them how to think, not what to think. "
  --Trustee Storrs Bishop Jr.

[It is the obligation of this board to determine what our students are exposed to. A statement that, to my mind, clearly delineates this as a blatant attempt at thought control. --MN]
(see 04 Sep 2002; 12 Sep 2002)

By groups of activists and demonstrators in Portland, Oregon. On 22 Aug, when President Bush was in Portland for a fundraiser for Senator Gordon Smith, hundreds of protestors gathered to chant and shout about a half a block away from the Hilton Hotel where the event was being held. They were pepper sprayed and shot at with rubber bullets. On this day, they filed a lawsuit against the city and the police department seeking monetary damages for pain, suffering, and First Amendment Right violations, plus a cease-and-desist order against the use of pepper spray and rubber bullets at peaceful events.

There is some question about how peaceful this event was, however, as Police Chief Mark Kroeker said that the police retaliated only when a police car was attacked and officers were in danger.

By Murray State University Department of Journalism and Mass Communications. The television station went back online two weeks previously after a five year hiatus due to a lack of space and equipment. In those two weeks, it rebroadcast football games containing profanity, and an eight-minute animated version of the Professor Hobo comic strip, a cartoon about a fictional Black College, a dorm specifically for black students, which was seen as racist by Provost Gary Brockway because it depicted segregation. Justin Young, who produces the campus-newspaper cartoon and the animated comic strip with David Rothwell, said it was a pun on White Residential College.

On this day, administrators announced new guidelines for the campus cable television station. These guidelines require that programming be reviewed by an editorial board of ten paid students at least 48 hours before broadcast; except newscasts.

People involved commented on the issue thusly:

• "The board will review an outline, script or storyboard before the program airs. But this does not include news programs."
  --Jeanne Scafella, chairwoman of the Department of Journalism and Mass Communications

• "On one hand, classes are teaching that the government cannot control what is said by the media, and on the other hand, the administration is trying to control the media on campus. I see a journalism department that is only allowed to produce public relations messages for the university as a scary and disturbing thought."
  --Justin Young

• "We may have controversial programming. But if we have responsible students in charge as an editorial board, they will make responsible choices."
  --Gary Brockway

• "They may have gone a wee bit too far. The First Amendment doesn't say anything about 'great' journalism. It just says 'free.' These things happen far too often."
  --Jim Highland, journalism professor at Western Kentucky University and vice president of camp us chapter affairs for the state chapter of Society of Professional Journalists

[My first impression was to consider this censorship, and there are some elements along those lines. This analysis of the case at Student Press Law Center sheds more light on the situation and clarifies it greatly. --MN]

By Illinois State University. The purpose of this misnamed policy was to create free speech zones on campus and to restrict the materials demonstrators were allowed to use to illustrate their views. It was overwhelmingly shot down by students and staff; so much so that it never passed the debate stage, but was moved to an early vote by the senate and rejected with only one vote in favour of it. The policy was created as a backward attempt to develop guidelines to promote free expression.

According to the 9th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals. A three judge panel ruled that physicians cannot be stopped from recommending medical marijuana. This ruling upholds a two year old court order enjoing the government from stripping doctors of their perscription privileges for doing so. The policy of the Justice Department was found to interfere with the free-speech rights of doctors and patients. Chief Circuit Judge Mary Schroeder commented, "An integral component of the practice of medicine is the communication between doctor and a patient. Physicians must be able to speak frankly and openly to patients." The government's position was that such a recommendation constituted aiding and abetting a crime, but the court ruled that a physician could get into trouble only for helping the patient to procure marijuana.

[Huzzah!! And here's an end to the stupidity of making war on a sociological phenomenon. As unlikely as that is in the lifetime of the Bush presidency. --MN]

By Bill Neel. See the anti-Bush sentiment suppression timeline.

By Jan Lentz, Sonja Haught, and Mauricio Rosas; two grandmothers and a gay activist. See the anti-Bush sentiment suppression timeline.

By Eric Stern. Mr. Stern wrote a brief but perspicacious article about municipal political sign ordinances. A very well balanced look at efforts to respect free speech and public security and aesthetics at one and the same time.

By Google. According to a report released by Jonathan Zittrain and Benjamin Edelman at Harvard Law School, Google has removed 113 search indices from its engine. Sites of which the content is outlawed in France and Germany: Pro-Nazi material. They arrived at this conclusion by comparing the listings of several thousand controversial sites through google.com, google.ge, and google.fr. The two were researching the affects of filtering world-wide, and found that sixty-five sites were not listed on the German and French versions, with the French site blocking access to an additional forty-eight sites. What is most pertinent, however, is that Google had never announced the delinkings and blockings.

[Even if they must comply with local laws, covering it up is certainly not the way to go about it. --MN]
(see 23 May 2002)

By Virgin, Utah. The mayor of this town of 350 got fed up with all the complaining and levied a twenty-five dollar fee on people who wished to speak at town meetings. When that doesn't work he takes it upon himself to cancel the public comment sessions altogether. It seems that Mayor Jay Lee wants to keep the meetings short and civil because he got tired of hearing about a proposed project to put a home for troubled youth in the community. The residents responded in full-blown NIMBY mode. All this happened in the Spring 2002, and in May a number of townspeople formed a free speech movement.

By Toronto Police Association. This union of law enforcement officers is suing The Star newspaper for a series of articles that ran from 19 Oct to 29 Oct 2002. The articles allege that Toronto police employ racial profiling in law enforcement. The police union announced that it would sue the paper for an apology, a retraction, and two billion dollars in damages. In a letter to The Star, union lawyer Tim Danson wrote, "The aforesaid articles contain numerous falsehoods, malicious innuendoes and untruthful allegations, all of which amount to a very serious libel. The extreme nature of the defamation in the herein matter demands each of the 7,200 members of the police service are entitled to general damages in the amount of $300,000."
(see my commentary on this affair)

By Suzanne Pitt. Ms Pitt put Superstar Barbie heads on the bodies of big-breasted dolls she allegedly designed herself. The body was apparently done in an S&M motif. She had been marketing the product as a dungeon doll through a web site. The site was taken down when Mattel sued her in a New York court for copyright infringement. Judge Laura Taylor Swain found in Ms. Pitt's favour, however, ruling that it was not a market subsitute. She commented, "To the court's knowledge, there is no Mattel line of S&M Barbie."

[Censorship? Well, not really. A company has a vested interest in protecting its copyrights and trademarks or it will lose them through genericide. In this case, I'd say that Mattel had a real concern that the use of the Barbie image on non-Mattel dolls did infringe on their trademarked image. Unlike the case of Anita Roddick's Ruby which did not resemble Barbie at all. --MN]
(see 1998; 27 Jan 2003; 29 Dec 2003; 29 Jun 2004)

By Parents Against Bad Books in Schools. Richard Ess, a member of the Fairfax County, Virginia, group filed challenges in October to eighteen books in the school libraries of the district. The 31 Oct Northern Virginia Journal reported Maribeth Luftglass, Fairfax school district Chief Information Officer, as saying that each review will cost some $2,600, bringing the overall cost to almost $50,000. Mr. Ess also asked that no members of the American Library Association or the National Education Association serve on the reconsideration committees because, according to the PABBIS Web site, both organizations "are officially against any attempts at removal of books from any school."

Challenged in elementary-schools are:

• I Know Why the Caged Bird Sings by Maya Angelou,
• Girl Goddess by Francesca Lia Block,
• Witch Baby by Francesca Lia Block,
• The Rose and the Beast: Fairy Tales Retold by Block and Suza Scalora,
• The Chocolate War by Robert Cormier,
• Tenderness by Robert Cormier,
• The Silver Pigs, by Lindsey Davis,
• A Time for Dancing, by Davida Hurwin,
• Fallen Angels by Walter Dean Myers.

Challenged in the middle schools are:

• How the Garcia Girls Lost Their Accents by Julia Alvarez,
• I Was a Teenage Fairy by Francesca Lia Block,
• The Perks of Being a Wallflower by Stephen Chbosky,
• Shogun by James Clavell,
• Heroes by Robert Cormier,
• Growing Up Chicana/o by Tiffany Ana Lopez,
• When I Was Puerto Rican by Esmeralda Santiago,
• The Color Purple by Alice Walker,
• A Thousand Pieces of Gold: Growing Up Through China’s Proverbs by Adeline Yen Mah.

Mr. Ess contends that the books contain profanity and descriptions of drug abuse, sexually explicit conduct, and torture. PABBIS member Stan Barton cited similar reasons for challenging Gates of Fire earlier this year, but school officials declined to pull that title.
(see 22 Apr 2002)

By the U.S. government. The Supreme Court announced on this day that it would consider whether or not it is legal to require filtering software on all library computers. Both proponents and opponents of filtering predicted victory.

Seth Finkelstein commented on the issue, "By the way, it's important to keep in mind that while almost all news coverage will tout this as filtering pornography, censorware also usually bans anonymizers, language translations sites, google caches, even the archive WayBack Machine. This is because sites such represent a threat, a LOOPHOLE in censorware's control. This overbroadness has been a factor in the CIPA decision."

[Proponents of this law say that such a law is necessary to protect children, but I'll bet not one of them can rationally explain how it will protect children by blocking computers that adults will be using. Oh, yeah, I'm familiar with all the arguments -- unwarranted assumptions every one of them -- but I said "rationally". Look, people, if you fear what your child is going to be exposed to in the library or what might happen to him there, THEN FUCKING GO ALONG TO WATCH OUT FOR HIM, ASSHOLE! --MN]

By Officer Yvette Walton. Ms. Walton had been critical of the police department after the shooting of Amadou Diallo in 1999. She had even blown the whistle on the illegal searches of visible minority members. Although she had worn disguises and had her voice electronically altered, she was subsequently fired. The department claimed that the firing was because of disciplinary issues, but U.S. District Judge Alvin Hellerstein found in Nov 2000 that she would not have been fired if she had not criticized the department. The New York City Police Department agreed to pay $327,500 and to reinstate Ms. Walton so she can retire with a pension. Georgia Pestana, the city's lawyer, remarked, "We felt this settlement was the most prudent course of action."

Ms. Walton was assisted in this case by New York Civil Liberties Union attorney Christopher Dunn.

In Wilton, New Hampshire. Preston Heller, a resident of the town, is a photographer. His current preferred subjects are people "down on their luck." When his children asked him if he was exploiting these homeless and unemployed subjects, he came down with a crisis of conscience. As a result, he began to think about how to resolve the issue and came up with the idea of an exhibit to solicit donations for the needy. This exhibit was mounted in the Wilton Town Hall. Unfortunately, the photographs garnered more negative comments than positive ones. This prompted the Board of Selectman to suggest terminating the display to put up something more in line with the holiday season.

Artist Gail Hoar, who organized the exhibit, said that she would not remove the show; that the space had been dedicated to Mr. Heller and the Food Pantry until the end of December. Ms. Hoar commented, "I am not going to censor art. I think this is the right season for people to think about others less fortunate." Mr. Heller is quoted as saying, "I'm not surprised people are offended, but they need to ask themselves why the pictures upset them. I know they make people uncomfortable. Art isn't always about pictures of sunsets or lakes. It is also a tool to help us understand our world."

[This appears very much to me to be a fine example of how censorship is so often initiated through a misbegotten attempt to do what is "right"; right as perceived by the naive. I don't for a second think that any member of the Board of Selectman wanted to wilfully censor those photographs of the homeless and unemployed, it's just, gee whiz, this is the holiday period and shouldn't we put up happy scenes of Santa Claus and elves? As Ms. Hoar and Mr. Heller point out, however, the world is not always a happy, gee whiz place, and hiding those photographs would not have made the problem go away in any event. To my way of thinking, the real problem in this incident is with those people who felt discomfort and couldn't handle it in any productive fashion. I'll bet that not one of them donated so much as a dime and that they certainly won't be doing any volunteer work at the shelters on Christmas Day or New Year's Eve. --MN]

For the internet. The U.S. Congress passed a law, voting unamimously, for the creation of an internet domain exclusively for child appropriate material. On 15 Nov, the Senate voted on this measure and also passed it unanimously. It remains only to ratify the bill.

[Six will get you one, however, that this measure will not be enough to stop all the demands in the U.S. for censorship of the rest of the internet. In as much as Bush himself is one step away from being a foaming-at-the-mouth fundie.

Civil liberties groups critical of the dot-kids-dot-us domain, say it will do more harm than good. The associate director of the Washington-based Center for Democracy and Technology, Alan Davidson, commented, "Many parents will find that limiting their children's Internet activity to '.kids.us' will not be a solution to keeping them safe online. And the company administering the domain would be required to make decisions for millions of children that would be better made by families." A sentiment with which I concur since any well experienced person knows that the one-size-fits-all approach doesn't fit anybody. What is of paramount concern in this issue is the body governing the dot-kids domain will itself be subject to government intervention. Hence, it is a foregone conclusion that factual information on sexuality that might be appropriate to twelve year olds will not be permitted. --MN]

[Addendum (30 Jan 2003): Oops. A foregone conclusion under the Bush regime. Sloppy writing. --MN]
(see 07 Mar 2002)

By J.K. Rowling. See the Harry Potter censorship timeline.

By anybody with an opinion on the Mideast bloodbath, within the confines of Concordia University. And enforced by court order.

[See my commentary on this issue Christ! -- what a rotten mess! For a very fine commentary of this affair, also see the statement by Svend Robinson which was printed in newspapers on 25 Nov 2002. --MN]

By Utah. When high school student Ian Lake created a web site on which he disparaged faculty members, he wrote among other things that the principal was the town drunk and that he was having an affair with a school secretary. So he was charged, in May 2000, under the 1876 law instead of the more recent 1973 law which corrected the flaws in the 1876 law. And for which flaws the law was struck down by the Utah Supreme Court as overly broad and unconstitutional. The 1876 law permitted libel charges against people who spoke unkind truths.

Richard Van Wagoner, Mr. Lake's lawyer, commented, "The court properly concluded this statute, as written, criminalized a substantial amount of conduct protected by the First Amendment."
(see 09 Dec 2002)

By book-writers. The Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints launched a crusade in the name of morality. The enemy is books. This campaign was inspired by the banning of The Last Promise by Richard Paul Evans. The Deseret Book chain banned the work from its shelves because of what it perceived as immoral content: a love affair between an abused married woman and the man she turns to for emotional support. Mr. Evans said there is no sexual relationship, that he prefers to explore the b eauty of love and friendship.

See the appendix on Robie Harris.

By the South Dakota Supreme Court. This court launched a program of live audio internet transmissions, as well as establishing an archive of those broadcasts at its web site. Those archives will permit people to listen oral arguments at their convenience. Chief Justice David Gilbertson said of the program that it will help a larger audience to understand the legal system and follow imporant cases. The courtroom has seats for only twenty spectators, and many people who wish to attend must take a day off work to drive to the city of Pierre.

By any and all people resident in or visitors to the United States of America. The Senate voted to approve the Homeland Security Department by 90 - 9. The holdouts were:

• Ted Kennedy, D-Massachusetts;
• Paul Sarbanes, D-Maryland;
• Jim Jeffords, I-Vermont;
• Daniel Akaka, D-Hawaii;
• Daniel Inouye, D-Hawaii;
• Robert Byrd, D-West Virginia;
• Carl Levin, D-Michigan;
• Ernest "Fritz" Hollings, D-South Carolina; and
• Russ Feingold, D-Wisconsin.

In a written statement, Russ Feingold wrote that the new bill comes "at the expense of unnecessarily undermining our privacy rights" and "weakening protections against unwarranted government intrusion into the lives of ordinary Americans." and, "While I commend the president for recognizing the need to consider a major government reorganization in light of the tragic events of September 11, this could have been accomplished while preserving our privacy and our liberties as Americans." Senator Robert Byrd was equally condemnatory in his speech at the close of the debate about the bill in the senate.

[Still to come after this sweeping violation of the entire Bill of Rights is the Total Information Awareness Office, headed by Stalinist John Poindexter; who was once convicted on five felony counts of misleading Congress. And if you're going to try to tell me that his conviction was overturned, it was overturned on a technicality, not because new evidence came to light that exonerated him.

Proponents of Homeland Security might reply santimoniously that it contains a provision for a Privacy Ombudsman, however, Electronic Privacy Information Center legislative counsel Chris Hoofnagle says of this, "Many of the missions of the Homeland Security agency are so inherently invasive of privacy that it will be difficult for the privacy officer to offset the risk to personal privacy." --MN]

By Oriana Fallaci; an Italian journalist. The World Trade Center tragedy galled her into breaking her self-imposed silence and writing a book in which she was highly critical of Islam. So much so that The Movement Against Racism and for Friendship Between People alleged the book was a work of hatred and sued in a French court. The court dismissed the suit on technical grounds, ruling that it had been improperly filed.

By Dallas Observer; an alternative weekly newspaper. In 1999 the newspaper printed a parody entitled Stop the Madness. It was based on the actual arrest that year of a Ponder student. In the story, they wrote about a six year old being jailed and shackled. However, the piece featured two characters from the real incident: Denton County District Attorney Bruce Isaacks and County Court at Law Judge Darlene Whitten. They sued for defamation, alleging that they had been subject to public ridicule and threats after the article appeared; even being asked to resign.

The real incident was the result of post-Columbine hysteria, coming six months after that tragedy. In it, Christopher Beamon, then 13 and a seventh-grader in Ponder, was held in a juvenile facility for five days after he wrote a graphic Halloween story depicting the shooting death of a teacher and two classmates. Mr. Beamon was released after Mr. Isaacks and Judge Whitten found out that the letter had been a homework assignment. The satire appeared six weeks later, derived, no doubt, from the national attention drawn by the case. For more about this case and the free speech issues involved, see the report at Freedom Forum Online.
(see 25 Sep 2003; 23 Dec 2003; 03 Sep 2004)

On Judging Amy, Boston Public, and Victoria's Secret Fashion Show, among others. The fashion show, which aired during prime time on 20 Nov, featured lingerie designed to enhance rather than suppress sexuality and sensuality. Judging Amy had received complaints because of a scene where a nude male, his genitals covered with one hand, was enticing Amy to skinny dip with him. Boston Public was cited because of a scene where two adolescents were petting; the boy fumbling with the girl's sweater. Both incidents were cited by Los Angeles-based Parents Television Council.

Federal Communications Commissioner Michael J. Copps says too much similar material is falling through the cracks and generating complaints from consumers. He also cited concerns about children being exposed to such material. However, Judging Amy is in the Safe Harbor time slot, and when the first airing of Victoria's Secret Fashion Show was investigated because of complaints, it was found to have not violated indecency guidelines. And the 500 or so complaints to the Commission in the past year have generated precious few actions against programming. Mr. Copps has devised a method to circumvent such inconveniences, however. Quothe he, "If our definition leads to that result, then our current definition of indecency just isn't getting the job done."
(see my commentary on this issue, 01 Apr 2002)

By artists, galleries, and civil liberty groups. See the entry on the Child Porn/Harmful to Minors page.

By the Bush Administration. The Town of Eugene, Oregon, passed a resolution opposing the law. This resolution is entirely symbolic, however, because officials do not have to comply with it; all it does is to encourages their congressmen to repeal the law. This brought to fifteen the number of communities that have expressed such opposition to the act.

By Pat Conroy. Superintendent Daniel Nerad had ruled the book inappropriate for 10th-graders, who are usually 14- and 15-year olds. Mr. Nerad, to give him credit, apparently did not simply order the book removed from the curriculum. He also implemented what were presented as sound guidelines for future challenges, to be effective immediately. On this day, the school board met to hear public comments about his decision and to ratify or reject it. His decision and the guidelines were all accepted.

Kelley Bruss of Green Bay Press-Gazette reported that not everyone liked Mr. Nerad's decision. Ms. Rebecca Sule was reported to have said that she might file a challenge of her own to have the book removed from high school entirely. Her daughter is in the 10th grade class that had read it. RuthAnn Reynen, co-chair of the language arts department at the school didn't like the ruling for other reasons, saying, "I don't think the decision that was made was right." The Press-Gazette shone a generally good light on how Mr. Nerad handled this case. It was reported that the district will:

• develop a list of books which are required reading and which will be made available to all parents;
• create a school-based review process for books not on that list;
• establish a policy of parent notification and alternative assignments when a book to be used has themes of explicit sexuality or profanity.

The fly in the ointment in this incident is that Mr. Nerad removed the book unilaterally rather than suspending its use pending the outcome of a review process. Also, there are conflicting presentations and reporting of the facts in this incident. The report of this incident in National Coalition Against Censorship newsletter issue #88, Winter 2002-2003, was rather critical of Mr. Nerad and cast the entire incident in a bad light.

This novel portrays life in a southern military academy. The themes include friendship, loyalty and betrayal, but it also includes words which are vulgar, sexually explicit, and racist.
[See my letter to NCAC about the diverse slants on this story. --MN]
(see 1992)

By U.N. weapons inspectors and Iraq. The weapons inspection team won't allow visiting journalists to Iraq into facilities they are inspecting during the inspection. Iraq, which has the most heavily controlled press in the Mideast, wants the journalists inside with the weapons inspectors so they can see for themselves that there are no weapons of mass destruction despite the assertions of the Bush administration.

["The Devil can quote scripture to suit his purpose." In this case, I fully agree with the Iraqis. Because, quite frankly, I don't trust Bush any more than I'd trust Hussein. The U.N. officials say they don't want the press to contaminate their analysis with premature conclusions about any materials that might or might not be found. They maintain that the journalists don't have the technical expertise to provide a cogent analysis, and the press's jumping to a conclusion could taint the expert analysis of the team. Yeah, I can see his point. 'Cause I don't trust the American press any more than I trust Bush and Hussein. Albeit for different reasons. --MN]

By 2DTV. Their commercial was effectively banned by The Broadcast Advertising Clearance Centre. This watchdog group required producers of the advertisement to get permission beforehand, from the person depicted in it: George Bush Jr. The advertisement, for an animated comedy show, has Bush opening a video package and saying, "My favourite - just pop it in the video player." He then puts the cassette into a toaster.

Uisdean Maclean, the BACC director, justified the censorship by saying, "People are entitled not to be exploited for someone else's commercial gain." Giles Pilbrow, producer of the comedy series commented that asking targets of satire for their permission is a "ridiculous request."

By a Waterford School District student. The student, who was indicated as not identified in the article I read at Freedom Forum Online, had created a web page in Aug 2001 for which he was suspended for posting "intimidation and threats" on the internet. It reportedly included this material:

Satan's mission for you this week: Stab someone for no reason then set them on fire throw them off of a cliff, watch them suffer and with their last breath, just before everything goes black, spit on their face.

However, the school district thoroughly violated the student's rights. He was suspended after a hearing in which he apparently was not allowed to cross-examine witnesses and was forbidden legal counsel. He subsequently sued for $75,000 in damages. U.S. District Judge Patrick Duggan ruled that the school should not have suspended him.

By B'Nai Brith Canada. This former human rights advocacy group has tended to be suppressive and reactionary in recent years. A key player in the Concordia Affair, it has also been active in the suppression of access to information that it has decided should be hate speech. It has now demanded that the government of Canada ban the entire Lebanese organization Hezbollah as a terrorist group. The Hezbollah does have a militant wing that advocates suicide bombing, however, it also has a social wing that apparently acts as a charitable organization, including day care groups. B'Nai Brith wants the entire organization added to the list of terrorist groups and has launched a lawsuit to force the Canadian government to accede to their demand.

[Sounds just like the Israeli government's policy toward Palestinians: Nits make lice.

Okay, so there's a very good chance that some -- even a large proportion -- of the money from charitable donations is making its way into suicide bomber coffers, but this is supposed to be a free country and one of the principles we usually pretend to uphold is assumption of innocence. In other words, B'nai Brith should show admissible evidence that moneys are going to support the militant wing. But, of course, they aren't going to do that, and anybody who suggests they should will, I'm sure, just be dismissed as anti-semitic. --MN]

[Addendum (28 Dec 2002): I just found out from reading an article at CBC Newsonline that Canada had already banned the military wing of Hezbollah about a year ago. I have no doubt that the full ban is a political response due to pressure from the extreme-left B'nai Brith oppressors. Our officious (sic) deny any such allegations, of course. Why, I wonder, don't I believe them? Perhaps because I don't think that one can separate foreign policy from politics? --MN]

By Chabad of Southern Ohio. They had wanted to display a menorah in Fountain Square, Cincinnatti, but a city ordinance forbade it. They sued and won, but the city appealed and was granted a stay on the menorah pending resolution of the appeal. On this day the Supreme Court struck down the ordinance. The ordinance had reserved the square starting the second half of November to the end of the first week of January for the exclusive use of the city. It had been enacted in an effort to restrict free speech by the Ku Klux Klan.

[The loser in this case, Mayor Charlie Luken, was heard to whine, "I do tire of federal judges telling us what to do when they don't have to live with the consequences." Maybe we should gag him and let him sue for free speech violations. --MN]

By John Bohman and Juan Diaz. These two students at Grinnell College, Iowa, were flying the American flag upside down in Sep 2001, in protest of U.S. imperialism and capitalist economy. On 26 Sep, they were told by two police officers that they must remove the flag or face misdemeanor charges. They complied. On this date, the Iowa chapter of the ACLU filed a suit challenging the Iowa flag desecration law, which makes it unlawful to, "publicly mutilate, deface, defile or defy, trample upon, cast contempt upon, satirize, deride or burlesque" the U.S. flag. In short, it is strictly forbidden to use the flag to protest in any way, shape, or form.

[U.S. Flag etiquette rules say that a flag may be flown upside down only to signal distress. I don't think these are hard and fast laws, however. The Iowa ACLU is basing their suit on Texas v. Johnson, in which the U.S. Supreme Court ruled that burning the flag in protest is a valid mode of expressing free speech. --MN]

By Misohomonists. A group of nine anti-gay protesters had filed a suit against the city of Harrisburg, Pennsylvania, after being arrested for disorderly conduct. They alleged that city ordinances requiring permits violated their First Amendment rights. U.S. District Judge William W. Caldwell agreed that the ordinances hindered their rights without serving any government benefit. The disorderly conduct charges, however, were let stand.

[What a bunch of hypocrites. Whining about what a violation it is of their right to violate the human rights of homosexuals. I will never understand why it is that self-righteous bastards who demand oppression of outsiders are always the first and loudest whiners when they are the ones being oppressed. You see, this system of oppression is the one they seek to emplace, so they should rejoice that their system works. --MN]

By Harvard Law School. Researchers found that China regularly denies local users access to 19,000 Web sites. The government of China deems these sites threatening. The study tested access from multiple points over a period of six months; finding that China blocked thousands of the most popular sites for news, politics, and religion. As well as selected sites for entertainment and education. The researchers also said that China sometimes punishes surfers attempting to access such sites by temporarily disrupting their accounts.

The study is filed at: http://cyber .law.harvard.edu/filtering/china. A brief sample of the reported findings:

• China's control was far more broad though sometimes shallower than that of Saudi Arabia (which the group had studied earlier);

• Nearly all hits for a keyword search for "democracy China" at Google would be inaccessible;

• Complete blocking of access to
  • the major sites on Tibet and Taiwan;
  • Amnesty International;
  • Human Rights Watch;
  • major Western religious sites;
  • National Public Radio;
  • The Los Angeles Times;
  • The Washington Post;
  • Time magazine.

The government of China reportedly maintains that the censorship is to block access to pornography, but its banning of real porn sites was less than assiduous. It blocked only fifteen percent of the top porn sites whereas Saudi Arabia blocked eighty-six percent.

By Michael Maginnis. See the anti-Bush sentiment suppression timeline.

By Richard Humphreys. This Portland, Ore., man was convicted in Sep 2001 on a charge of threatening to kill or harm the president, stemming from a "prophesy" he had uttered in a bar in Sioux Falls, South Dakota. He had been engaged in a discussion with a local trucker and the bartender overheard that part of conversation. The bartender subsequently informed the police because President Bush was scheduled to visit the city the next day. He reported that Mr. Humpreys had talked about the possibility of someone pouring a inflammable liquid on the president and igniting it.

Mr. Humprheys based his defence on free speech rights, testifying during the trial, "I said God might speak to the world through a burning Bush. I had said that before and I thought it was funny." On this day he was sentenced to 37 months imprisonment.

[Interesting. A wisecracking wiseass or a threat to national security? In a related case I once heard about years ago, a man was found guilty of threatening the president who had based his defence on free speech rights, alleging that his statements were equal to similiar comments by a local comedian. Judge didn't fall for it. --MN]

[Addendum (23 Dec 2003): The 8th Circuit Court of Appeals ruled that Humprheys was correctly sentenced to three years in federal custody, but ordered that he serve his prison sentence in a federal medical center. Humphreys is reportedly afflicted with a bipolar disorder that is treatable with medication. He was described as a "delusional, self-proclaimed prophet". The decision as to the correctness of the sentence hinges on Humphreys having made similar statements in an Internet chat room. The 8th Circuit court called the "single instance" reduction inapplicable due to Humphreys having repeatedly communicated the threat using various communication methods: online, by fax to the White House, and separately in person to three people. The court ruling reads in part, "Humphreys knowingly and willfully made the statement and a reasonable person could view it as a serious expression of intent to inflict bodily harm." Moreover, the Secret Service has said its previous contacts with Humphreys included two instances when Bill Clinton was president, when Humphreys apparently said Clinton and his wife would commit suicide. --MN]

Berkeley mayor Tom Bates, to be precise. He had stolen 1,000 copies of the 04 Nov 2002 edition of The Daily Californian. This issue of the paper had carried an editorial endorsement of his opponent in the mayoral race. Several witnesses had reported seeing him throwing the copies of the student newspaper into the trash and alerted the police, but Mr. Bates stonewalled and denied the action. On 05 Dec he finally admitted to it. On this day, police recommended charges of petty theft. Mr. Bates issued a statement in which he apologized for his actions and stood foursquare for free speech.

[Oh, yeah, right. Typical of this type of censorship. "Really, people, I'm not a free speech opponent; that was just an aberration, but I'm all for it. Honestly." The Daily Californian carried an editorial calling on Bates to resign. He won't of course.

The Student Press Law Center article reported that this was one of at least six newspaper thefts at American schools that had been reported to the SPLC in that one month period. --MN]
(See 08 Jan 2003; 09 May 2003)

By Univerité du Québec. On Friday, 06 Dec, they had cancelled a room reservation for a lecture by Israeli journalist Gideon Kouts. The reason offered was security concerns. Mr. Kouts was to lecture on his experiences in Beirut and university officials were worried about rioting as had happened at Concordia on 09 Sep. They revisited this decision and reversed it, deciding to allow the lecture to proceed despite those concerns. Francine Jacques, University spokeswoman, was quoted as saying, "We're an open learning institution so we decided to revisit this decision, adopting several security measures to ensure the event goes smoothly and as planned."

Concerns about security were raised after complaints about posters and pamplets advertizing the event were distributed in violation of a decision to forbid advertizing for the event.

[Yes! Chalk one up for the good guys! --MN]

By the City of New York. The Thomas More Law Center filed a suit against New York City alleging discrimination against Christian students through permitting Islamic and Jewish holiday symbols in public schools while Nativity scenes are banned. The suit specifically claims that Department of Education holiday policy, "endorses and promotes the religions of Judaism and Islam, conveys the impermissible message of disapproval of Christianity and coerces students, including the two minor sons of (the plaintiff), to accept the Jewish and Islamic religions."

[Oh, for Christ's sake. A simple allegation of content discrimination is all that's necessary, not all this pseudo-psycho babble. The only thing the court has to decide is to allow the nativity scenes or order the images of the menorah and star and crescent removed. Trust some self-righeous, pompous ass to go overboard every time.

According to the report at Freedom Forum Online, spokeswoman Margie Feinberg said the policy adhered to the constitutional requirements for church/state separation. Yeah, but whose church? The First Amendment means ALL religions, you silly twits! You can't select to allow other faiths and discriminate against your own just because its yours! --MN]

By the American press covering the Robert Pickton trial. The trial judge had imposed a publication ban of some of the information in the pre-trial hearing and the American reporters violated that ban. The material was reportedly posted to online sites and published in one newspaper that is available on the streets of Vancouver, B.C. They did so out of an apparent misapprehension that the ruling was not a reasonable restriction.

[See my letter to the editor on this issue. It was sent to several news organizations by e-mail although I don't imagine any of the American papers will run it because it does not conform to their guidelines. Basically, in my perception, the self-righteous fools have no concept of the idea of selection vs: censorship and automatically assumed that a ruling which protects the rights of the accused and the victims and their families over the rights of the almighty press must necessarily constitute censorship. --MN]

By Utah. Since an 1876 criminal libel law was struck down as unconstitutional when it was invoked to punish Ian Lake, the Beaver County attorney saw fit to charge Mr. Lake under the more recent and constitutionally correct 1973 law. Robert Leger, Society of Professional Journalists National President, said of these new charges, "This is an unconscionable assault by a government prosecutor on the cherished American principle of free speech. The proper channel to settle any differences about what Ian Lake said was in civil court and that has already been done. Government should not be deciding what is proper or improper speech."

[Strictly, hence legalistically, speaking, this is not a double jeopardy violation. Lake is not being charged a second time for a crime of which he was acquitted or previously convicted. It just stinks that way is all. I don't know what it is with prosecuting attorneys in the U.S. As if the Leggett Affair wasn't bad enough, now another self-righteous smeghead is going after someone for something stupid he did when he was sixteen. {Yeah, yeah; intellectually I recognize that this very small handful of dolts constitutes a minuscule and insignificant percentage. It still rubs me the wrong way.} --MN]
(see 15 Nov 2002)

By online newspapers. The Australian Supreme Court promoted the globalization of offensiveness censorship and SLAPPS with a ruling allowing a local businessman to sue an American newspaper for an article published in the U.S. and posted on the internet.

[This is an exceedingly stupid move. For one thing, Australia, being a Commonwealth country and former British colony, will almost certainly have the same bassackward and horribly outdated libel laws that Canada has. (It is imputed to have this law in one article I read.) Secondly, it paves the way for every politically correct, knee-jerk reationary, snivelling whiner in Australia to sue anybody anywhere in the world for anything that whiner is offended by, and such trash goes out of the way to find and look at things they find offensive. --MN]

The Supreme court has historically been protective of cross burning as a free speech rights, as much as flag burning. The primary issue dealt with in this day's arguments was whether disallowing cross burning as intimidation served the interest of states as much or better than other laws which prohibit criminal trespass and arson. This case stems from a Virginia Supreme Court ruling that a cross burning on the lawn of an interracial couple did constitute free speech. Which ruling overturned the convictions of the men who had burned the cross.

[I still avow, aver, and maintain that disallowing cross burning on the property of a victim constitutes a reasonable time, place, or manner restriction. Let the bastards burn their crosses in their own backyards. --MN]
(see 02 Nov 2001; 28 May 2002; 08 Apr 2003; 08 Mar 2004; an analysis by Tony Mauro, special to Freedom Forum Online)

By Florida state pathologists. The Orlando Sentinel and the South Florida Sun-Sentinel filed an appeal in the 4th District Court of Appeal in West Palm Beach. They are challenging the constitutionality of the Family Protection Act which not only restricts access to autopsy photos but can punish "unauthorized" viewers with a $5,000 fine for committing a felony. Proponents say it will protect families from seeing autopsy photos of relatives published in print or on the Internet. The newspapers argue that the law is overbroad and will restrict the use of such photos for teaching. The law was ruled valid by a lower court in Jul 2002. That suit, filed by the Independent Florida Alligator at the University of Florida, is still pending. The state Supreme Court had not decided of this date whether to hear the case or not.
(see 29 Mar 2001; 05 Apr 2001)

See the entry on the Church/State Entanglement page

By MiraMax, and starring Michael Caine. Finished before the WTC tragedy, this film was subsequently shelved for over a year because it was felt to be unAmerican. It details the story of a young, American idealist in 1952 Indochina and his well intentioned actions that led to the decade of warfare in Viet Nam.

Miramax co-chairman Harvey Weinstein apparently told the New York Times that the studio decided "you can't release this film now; it's unpatriotic. America has to be cohesive and band together. We were worried that nobody had the stomach for a movie about bad Americans anymore." In Dec 2002 it was released for a two week run because critics who previewed it in 2001 said that Caine had delivered the performance of his life and was a likely Academy Award winner for Best Actor. It was released only to make it eligible for nominations and only because Caine had lobbied so hard for the release. Caine said of the Miramax view, "I wouldn't make an anti-American movie - I'm one of the most pro-American foreigners I know. I love America and Americans."

By way of KUGN-AM radio station. This station carries Oregon Duck football and basketball games and bills itself at "The Voice of the Ducks"; those being teams at the University of Oregon. However, it also carries Savage Nation, which originates at KSFO in San Francisco, is syndicated on more than 350 stations nationwide, and which seems to be exceedingly politically incorrect. At best. Critics describe it as offensive and racist.

On this day a forum of fifty-five students and faculty reportedly demanded that the university end its affiliation with KUGN-AM. The forum was sponsored by the university's Center on Diversity and Community. The station had not been carrying Savage Nation at the time the university entered into the contract with it. Dan Williams, vice president for UO administration apparently told the forum that the school could not use the contract to dictate programming content, and that the State Board of Higher Education prohibits making purchasing or contract decisions based on politics. He was quoted as saying, "Quite frankly, we're no less embarrassed than anyone in the community or the university about these circumstances"

Detractors of the radio station were quoted as saying:

• They keep saying it's a First Amendment issue, their hands are tied or you can just turn off the radio. I call this academic elitism and cultural chauvinism on behalf of our administrators.
  --Matt Garcia, professor of history and ethnic studies

• [This] doesn't feel like an affirmation of rejecting bigotry.
  --Student Nicole Barrett, one of nine panelists

[Oh yeah? Well what about your bigotry and small-mindness, chicky-poo? And what kind of academic snobbishness is part and parcel of viewpoint discrimination, perfesser? --MN]

The 4th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals reversed a ruling allowing Warden Stanley Young to sue in his home state of Virginia his reputation was damaged there by material published in Connecticut. The three judge panel decided that the fact of the postings being available to Virginians was not enough to support the lawsuit. Judge M. Blane Michael who wrote the unanimous opinion, said in it, "The facts in this case establish that the newspapers' Web sites, as well as the articles in question, were aimed at a Connecticut audience. The newspapers did not post materials on the Internet with the manifest intent of targeting Virginia readers."
(see 03 Jun 2002)

By Josh Freed; columnist for the Montreal Gazette. Mr. Freed has a weekly humour column in which he usually engages in social commentary. In his column for this day, he focused on a series of Christmas-suppression movements; particularly how expressions of Christmas were being forbidden in favour of expressions of Holidays. These measures were apparently being implemented in an irrational attempt to avoid giving offense. Two cited examples are: Michéle Provost private school removed all carols with the word "Christ" in them; the City of Toronto christmas tree was briefly renamed The Holiday Tree.

By Malaysia. The advertisements for the Toyota Altis had featured Brad Pitt and non-Asian models. The reason they were banned? "We cancelled the ads because they were considered an insult to Asians," said Deputy Information Minister Zainuddin Maidin. The nature of the insult? The ads did not feature any Asians. The ads had run for several weeks in Malaysia and other Asian countries, on television and in newspapers, during mid-2002.

[Do you see what's going on here? This incident is not based on what is in the offending material, but what is NOT in the offending material. --MN]

By Dutch Animal Rights Organisation. They are being sued by the Foundation for Dutch Roman Catholics over the use of a composite of the Virgin Mary holding a bleeding rabbit. The caption (not shown), reads, "Merry Christmas - don't be wild about it!" In Holland, the tradition is to have chicken or rabbit for Christmas Dinner; although turkey dinner is becoming popular. The poster campaign is an effort to draw attention to inhumane methods of farming rabbits, turkeys, and ducks.

[The poster seems to be tastefully done to me. I don't see a sacrilege but a Catholic epitomy of kindness and compassion showing mercy to a wounded animal. But, then, I'm sane. At least by my standards. --MN]

By Romanian gymnasts. The country itself, however, faces being punished because three of their [apparently former] gymnasts posed nude for an adult film; in Japan. The three had also previously posed for Playboy (Romania). Ms. Milosovici, at least, is retired from competition. Despite that, a complaint about their comportment and against Romania in general was made by Japanese gymnastics officials, who also said they might ask the International Gymnastic Federation to ban Romanian gymnasts from competition at the Yokohama junior Grand Prix 2003. The Romanian Gymnastics Federation is worried that if other countries join this movement, they could be banned from all international competitions. The main point of all this flak is that the three women were posed on competition-standard apparati such as the beam.

[The most knee-jerk of the reactionaries in this incident seems to be the executive director of the Japanese Gymnastics Association, Koji Takizawa, who is quoted as saying, "Even if Milosovici has retired from competition, her act is a disgrace to gymnastics." Adrian Stoica, secretary of Romania's Gymnastics Federation, reportedly said the photos of the women in gymnastic positions were demeaning. He is quoted as saying, "Everyone has a free will, but I believe they have stained the image of the country. " Nicolae Vieru, the president of Romanian Gymnastics Federation, was reported to have said, "What these girls did is very shameful for us and I don't think we deserved that. The Japanese were the first to react but other federations would do the same and we may be in the situation of not being invited to any competition." What I think is shameful is how the Romanian Gymnastics Federation is trying to appease the Japanese reactionary. The magazine apparently bought the photos from the publisher of a book in which they were to appear, without mentioning the gymnasts had appeared in a porn film. However, the film seems to have only been an exercise video for adults; not a film of people fornicating.

You can view Lavinia Milosovici, Double Olympic gold medallist and five-time world champion, Corina Ungureanu, and Claudia Presecan, another gold medalist, au naturel and posed in ways that will kick start your fantasies. Especially Corinna. Hoo, boy! If you think nudity is some kind of perversion then you are forbidden to click those links. Forbidden by your own morals. Of course you've never let that stop you before so why start now, eh? --MN]

By Arizona inmates. On this day, however, a federal court ruled that Arizona inmates were allowed to correspond with or create their own internet sites. U.S. District Judge Earl Carroll granted the injunction at the request of the American Civil Liberties Union. The statute, enacted in 2000, is the subject of a pending lawsuit. It makes it a misdeamenor for inmates to communicate with ISPs, to send a letter to a Web site [via an onsite form as well as by e-mail, I assume], or to e-mail another person who then forwards the message to a Web site or publishes it for the inmate. David Fathi, ACLU attorney, commented on the ruling, "Putting free speech behind bars simply because it concerns prisoners sets a dangerous precedent. The court's decision makes clear that Arizona may not jail the Internet."

By Ralph W. Omholt. A Contributing Editor of DefenseWatch, career pilot, and pilot instructor, he reported in an open letter that was reprinted at Soldiers Of The Truth web site, that he was going to be served with a Grand Jury subpoena for buying an instructional CD-ROM for the Boeing 737. He wrote and published his article before being served, thereby circumventing the gag provisions of the USA PATRIOT Act. The sole cause of this subpoena appears to be that he purchased information.

By Wooster High School students. All 4,500 copies were seized while in storage awaiting distribution on the grounds that a story was inaccurate and potentially libelous. This determination was made by school district lawyers who recommended the seizure. Student editors believe the copies were seized because of whistle-blowing. One article reported that some athletes and a daughter of a school board member had done some underage drinking at a party.

The two primary issues in this case are:

• Federal law prohibits naming students who face disciplinary action without the permission of their parents. Violating this law could leave the school open to a lawsuit.

• At least two students said they had been misquoted with statements that "attributed to them acts of misconduct and potentially acts of criminal behavior."

The student advisor had not been able to review this edition because she had been called away before the deadline to deal with a family matter.

[Sorry, kiddies, but free speech does not allow for the publication of slanderous remarks; although in the U.S. the injured party has to prove malicious intent and reckless disregard. If the school has serious questions about the legality of material in the school paper, however, it is not unreasonable to delay distribution. In my not so humble opinion, of course. --MN]
(see 19 Dec 2002; 09 Jan 2003; 14 Feb 2003; 19 Nov 2003)

By Pennsylvania. The state Supreme Court ruled cities cannot ban strip joints just because of a perceived negative affect on the surrounding area. The move to ban such bars was an effort to do an end run around the U.S. Supreme Court ruling of nude dancing as protected expression or speech, by targetting so-called secondary effects. The 1994 ordinance, enacted by the town of Erie, required exotic dancers to wear pasties (nipple covers), and g-strings on the rationale that toning down nudity in strip joints would tone down illegal activities in the neighbourhood; such as prostitution. The case had made it to the U.S. Supreme Court in the year 2000, and that court had ruled that the ordinance did not violate free expression rights, but it also sent the case back to the Pennsylvania Supreme Court for further consideration.

["Illegal activity", in cases such as this, is almost certainly a buzzword. I have no doubt that it is used in a fashion similar to "media violence", and that determinations about "secondary effects" are based on the same kind of pseudo-science most of the claims of media violence are based upon. Oh, certainly, there are areas around strip joints where private property owners find empty beer cans and used syringes on their front lawns and hookers line the street, but victimless crime is a whole separate issue. In my not so humble opinion, any crime that is "victimless" is not, perforce, a crime at all. Drunken rowdiness is not a crime either, just a nuisance, but a compelling nuisance for those who live near a bar that closes at two or three in the morning when testosterone driven lunks full of piss and vinegar, not to mention a goodly ration of beer, make a lot of noise when departing the premises. Night, after night, after night, . . . yeah, I can see how I'd get pissed off with plunging property values and trying to raise a family in that environment. --MN]

By Asha's Mums, Belinda's Bouquet, and One Dad, Two Dads, Brown Dads, Blue Dads. In 1997, John Chamberlain, a homosexual British Columbia kindergarten teacher, had wanted to use these three books in his curriculum but was forbidden to do so by the school board because of religious intolerance toward homosexuality. Each book deals with the topic of same-sex households. Objections to the books were made by religionists who objected because homosexuality is regarded as a sin. The Surrey school board said it had ordered the ban because the books were not suitable for five to six year olds. On this day, the Supreme Court of Canada ruled: Tolerance is always age-appropriate. The ban on the books was struck down as constitutionally impermissible because it was based laregly on religious grounds and therefore violated church/state separation.

Commented John Fisher of Equality for Gays and Lesbians Everywhere, "The Supreme Court of Canada today ruled that learning about difference actually enhances children's education, that kids benefit when they learn respect for those who are different."

On public protests and demonstrations. On this date, Washington D.C. police announced, in accordance with a city council ordinance, that they would be mounting electronic surveillance by remote cameras on demonstrations scheduled for the weekend of 18-19 Jan 2003 and another for 22 Jan 2003. The ordinance also requires that signs be posted in those areas to be monitored. Various comments pro and con are:

• "The major advantage is to deploy police resources if you see any problems developing, if you need more people one place or fewer people another place."
  --councilwoman Kathleen Patterson.

• "I don't think the police ought to be taking video of peaceful demonstrators when there's no hint of lawbreaking."
  --Art Spitzer, legal director of the ACLU's National Capital Area chapter.

• "Big events like this that attract people to the nation's capital could either themselves become targets of terrorists, or terrorists could use those major events as cover to launch some sort of attack."
  --Kevin Morison, spokesman for the Metropolitan Police Department

• "We expect tens of thousands of people to be coming out Jan. 18 to oppose this war drive. We hear from people who are outraged by the surveillance cameras."
  --Mara Verheyden-Hilliard, a lawyer with the Partnership for Civil Justice

Police spokesman Morison also said that the cameras would transmit images of the areas but would not be connected to videotaping equipment, nor would the cameras employ face recognition or biometrics technology to identify specific individuals. The department also allows that there is no indication there will be civil disobedience or violence.

[However, organizers cannot speak for every raving fool with an axe to grind that is going to show up with deliberate bad intentions. All from the holiest motives, of course. Off the top of my head I'd say that resistance to such surveillance is based primarily on a slippery slope argument that it will desensitize people to electronic surveillance and that oversight and privacy measures can be repealed once a full surveillance network is in place. Mind you, the slippery slope is a very real phenomenon in the physical world. --MN]

By the Bush Administration. Rep. Bernie Sanders, I-Vt., announced that he will introduce a bill to repeal the part of this anti-terrorism law that allows the FBI to monitor what books a person borrows from a library or buys from a store. He intends to table it shortly after Congress reconvenes in January. He was quoted as saying, "This is a crashing, crushing attack on basic rights in this country, and it's got to be opposed. I will do everything in my power in the Congress, working in a non partisan way with other concerned members, to strip this very dangerous language from the bill."

By Berkan Abatay. And in the oppressive state of Turkey, too. Mr. Abatay, age 27, finally starved to death after 587 days of a hunger strike. He had apparently survived the year and a half by subsisting on sugared water and vitamins, although human rights groups report that hunger-striking prisoners are sometimes force-fed. His was the 63rd death in a mass hunger strike over prison conditions in Turkey; twenty more strikers are listed in critical condition. The strike was begun in protest of new policies that move inmates from dormitory housing to cells for one or three inmates. The prisoners claim this arrangement leaves them open to attack by prison officials; which claim is backed up by human rights groups. Turkish authorities argue that the new prisons allow them to keep order in the prisons. This view is shared by the recently elected government.

[Makes you wonder, doesn't it, about how far you would be willing to go to stand up for your principles? --MN]

By Time magazine. The issue slated to hit the newstand on this day named three whistleblowers as its Persons of the Year. Time said of them that they were "ordinary people who did not wait for higher authorities to do what needed to be done", and that they were selected, "for believing -- really believing -- that the truth is one thing that must not be moved off the books, and for stepping in to make sure that it wasn't."

The Time magazine 2002 Persons of the Year are:

• Coleen Rowley: the FBI agent whose memorandum to FBI Director Robert Mueller in May 2002, said agency headquarters ignored her pleas to investigate Zacarias Moussaoui aggressively. He is charged as an accomplice in the attack on the World Trade Center and the Pentagon.

• Cynthia Cooper: the internal auditor at WorldCom who alerted the firm's board of directors about accounting irregularities to the tune of $3.8 billion.

• Sherron Watkins: a vice president at Enron; she had warned Kenneth Lay in 2001 that the firm faced collapse as a result of extensive false accounting.

[These exercises in doing what is right came with a price tag, of course. Even ordinarily good people don't like it when someone leaks information about criminal activity in their workplace. Makes for a very stressful environment, and all. --MN]

By J.K. Rowling. See the Harry Potter censorship timeline.

By South Carolina. Senior U.S. District Judge William Bertelsman ruled the "Choose Life" slogan creates a First Amendment violation in that they give anti-abortion rights advocates a forum to express their beliefs while abortion rights supporters have no equitable forum. The South Carolina Attorney General's office plans to appeal the ruling in the 4th District Court of Appeals. This ruling runs counter to the 5th District Court of Appeals ruling that such plates are permissible in Louisiana. If Judge Bertelsman's ruling is upheld, the issue is likely to go to the U.S. Supreme Court. These particular specialty plates are enjoined from distribution by court order.

By Stuart E. Eizenstat. The full name is Imperfect Justice: Looted Assets, Slave Labor, and the Unfinished Business of World War II. This book came under heated attack before it even came out; as with Judith Levine's Harmful To Minors. In this case, however, objections are not to sex but symbology. Officials in the Swiss government have taken exception to the cover art. The book jacket features a swaztika formed of gold ingots on a background of the Swiss flag. Alex Biscaro, a spokesman for the Swiss Embassy in Washington, commented, "It put the whole Swiss country and its people equivalent to the German Reich, the Nazis, which was obviously not the case." Mr. Eizenstat and his publisher both say the design is an accurate reflection of what he learned during negotiations for reparations for art and gold looted from Europe by the nazi regime during WWII. The Swiss National Bank was the major repository for the stolen gold. Mr. Eizenstat also maintains that his book is not a condemnation of all Swiss people, saying in one statement, "They had a mixed record. And some of the Swiss people actually had an enviable record. There was a great disconnect between the people and some of the institutions." He also wrote in an op-ed piece to be published in a Swiss newspaper, "Clearly, a jacket design cannot adequately capture this mixed picture. But changing the cover cannot change history shown by those gold bars. It must be faced, in all its complexities."

By the Federal Energy Regulatory Commission. An article at Freedom Forum Online reported that information about cracks in the Milltown Dam, outside Missoula, Montana, had been removed from public access; it had been taken off the FERC web site and anyone wanting to see it will have to ask for it. Assuming they ever find out about the document in the first place. Ostentibly, it was removed as an anti-terrorism security measure. However, not only was the document removed after it was found out about by county employees, but the FERC never advised Missoula County commissioners about the cracks in the first place.

[I pointed out in the entry for 18 Apr 2002 that the suppression of such information was more likely to pose a greater threat to private citizens, didn't I? --MN]
(see 18 Apr 2002; 11 Sep 2003; 21 Aug 2004; 19 Mar 2005)

By Chestnut Publications. In keeping with the revered New York Mayoral tradition of attempting to suppress whatever the Mayor finds offensive, Mike Bloomberg ordered the city lawyers to jump all over Chestnut Publications to stop the distribution of trading cards featuring mostly people who were killed trying to save others in the collapse of the two World Trade Center towers. Mayor Bloomberg said of the cards, "I think it's disgraceful, despicable. Why anybody would ever want to do that, I can't quite understand. It's just sick."

Even the lawyers admitted, however, that they had no legal power to stop distribution. For one thing, all of the people on the cards are featured with the consent of the families. Secondly, the New York Times had profiled 1,910 fatalities, with a photograph and brief biography of each victim. The cards do not feature any more than that.

[Moreover, Chestnut Publications is paying a royalty of eight percent; newspapers do not pay for anything they publish. A few self-righteous, hypocrital, hack-scribblers, however, were quick to jump on their high horse and run down the project in their columns. Just try to tell those self-same knee-jerk, reactionary snivellers that there's something they aren't allowed to publish, however. . . . At any rate, Ken Paulson allows in his column for this date that the real offense to sensibilities seems to be the mode of expression rather than the content; that trading cards aren't good enough to be a proper memorial. --MN]

By Toppers and Chelsea's. These strip joints had their liquor licenses revoked by Athens-Clarke County, Georgia. The county said the clubs were in violation of a local ordinance prohibiting both nude dancing and the sale of alcohol in an establishment and refused to issue new licenses. The ordinance was passed in 1997, but could not be enforced because of a loophole; which loophole was closed in Mar 2002. However, their licenses were revoked in Dec 2001 by a local judge, before the loophole was closed. Their licenses were renewed that time when they threatened to sue and the county backed down. The two clubs will likely sue in state court as well as challenging the denial in municipal court. The U.S. Supreme Court has ruled that nude dancing is a protected form of free expression.

By J.K. Rowling. See the Harry Potter censorship timeline.

Appendix A: The Salman Rushdie Death Threat timeline

Appendix B1: Harry Potter censorship issues

Appendix B2: Harry Potter censorship timeline

Appendix D: ACLU cases

Appendix E: Canadian Post-Columbine Hysteria

Appendix F: Taliban's knee-jerk reactionary act of monumental insecurity timeline

Appendix G1: Censorship by President GeeDubya and company

Appendix G2:George Bush religious initiatives and cover-ups

Appendix G3:Actions to shield George Bush from free speech

Appendix H: Robie Harris Censored timeline