FW: [Peace-discuss] Fw: Lou Dobbs is dangerous ('murder music' as hate speech)

[John W.]

On Mon, Aug 17, 2009 at 4:24 PM, C. G. Estabrook <galliher at illinois.edu>wrote:

So those who contact the media outlets who broadcast Amy Goodman and demand
> that she be taken off the air would NOT be advocating the banning of [her]
> free speech?
>
> I think they would, and I'd object to it.


Oxford English Dictionary, Carl.  "Banning".

If you own/run a restaurant, Carl, and I request that you require your
employees to wash their hands before preparing my food or else I will not be
able to patronize your restaurant in the future, have I "banned" the "right
to unclean hands"?




> John W. wrote:
>
>
>> On Mon, Aug 17, 2009 at 1:57 PM, C. G. Estabrook <galliher at illinois.edu<mailto:
>> galliher at illinois.edu>> wrote:
>>
>>    Jenifer--
>>
>>    You seem to suggest that you were not "advocating the 'banning of
>>    free speech.'"
>>
>>    On Wed Aug 12 you forwarded to the list
>>     >
>>     > ...It's time to get Lou Dobbs and his hate speech off the air.
>>     > ...CALL NOW AND DEMAND LOU DOBBS BE TAKEN OFF THE AIR
>>
>>    Why isn't that "advocating the banning of [Lou Dobbs'] free speech"?
>>
>>    Regards, CGE
>>
>>
>> Maybe you should look up "banning" in your Oxford English Dictionary,
>> Carl.
>>
>> If Jenifer was suggesting (as she was NOT) that we call our state
>> legislators and ask them to make it a criminal offense for a radio or TV
>> station or web site to broadcast the words of Lou Dobbs, that would be
>> "advocating the banning of free speech".
>>
>> If, on the other hand, Jenifer was suggesting (as she was) that we contact
>> the media outlets who broadcast Lou Dobbs and make known our own private,
>> personal displeasure at the content of his speech and at anyone who would be
>> a party to such drivel, that is NOT "advocating the banning of free speech".
>>
>> What deep-seated psychological complex makes you feel, Carl, that you must
>> ALWAYS have the last word?
>>
>> John Wason
>>
>>
>>    Jenifer Cartwright wrote:
>>
>>
>>        Well said, Ron. Also a perfect example of the influence these
>>        shock jockeys have on folks, even those on this list.
>>        The MO is
>>        1) deliberately misinterpret what's been said
>>        2) lie about what's been said
>>        3) go on the attack
>>        4) repeat 1-3 ad infinitum
>>        Think: accusing me of advocating the "banning free speech"
>>        Think: Limbaugh, Sarah Palin et al on "death panels"
>>        Yeah, we're done here.
>>         --Jenifer
>>
>
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: http://lists.chambana.net/mailman/archive/peace-discuss/attachments/20090817/c1b8e666/attachment.htm