ONE OF US

According to the Bish, Miss Snuffy, aka Katharine Birbalsingh who spoke so passionately about how the State education system has failed children at the Tory conference, has been sent to work from home - suspension by any other term.

Now it should be pointed out that there could have been breaches of child confidentiality but I do suspect that it will be the hook to hang her on because she dared to speak out.

Once again we see how the orthodoxy outweighs any such high minded ideals like, erm, free speech.

Time and time again I have argued that free speech is not a pic n mix, either everyone has it or no one has it.

The left-wing educational establishment freely allows its Marxists to criticise, threaten and cajole us all but as soon as one stands up and says the Emperor has no clothes, the principle of free speech goes out of the window.

Miss Snuffy was no longer "one of us" and had to be punished.

Once more the educational orthodoxy fails children. Instead of looking at the issues behind the critique and looking inside itself to see how there are a bunch of feckless, ruthless kids who are barely able to read and write, it punishes those that fail to tow the line.

It is the educational establishment that should be sent home, not a teacher who's passion for teaching has led her to 'out' herself at the Tory conference in the belief that children should come first.

UPDATE: Dizzy has pointed out that the head teacher at Snuffy's school allowed Blair to use her school to launch his 2001 election campaign!

And to quote Iain Dale:

Quentin Letts's new book "Letts Rip!" includes an account of the day Bishop allowed her south London school to be used by Tony Blair for the launch of the 2001 general eleciton campaign. It notes that "Mrs Bishop is a fanatical Blairite who considers him the most wonderful Prime Minister in the world".
The piece describes how Blair used Bishop's school remorselessly for political ends. For Birbalsingh now to be accused of political agitation is unbelievably hypocritical.

Indeed!

COMICS BAN

Whilst I am on the subject of comics, the American Library Association has released its annual banned list - a celebration of free speech.

The list gives the reasons why people thought the graphic novels should be banned. My comments in bold

On the Graphic Novels section we have:

Absolute Sandman: Reasons: Anti-Family, Offensive Language, Unsuited to Age Group. Erm 75 chapters challenging our perceptions of reality, story telling and life.

Blankets: Reasons: Sexually Explicit content, Other (unspecified. Mea Culpa haven't read

Bone: Reasons: Sexually Explicit content, Offensive Language, Unsuited to Age Group, Drugs. Huh? I presume the drugs bit is about the Red Dragon smoking and all the beer people drink

Fun Home: Reasons: Sexually Explicit Content. haven't read

Maus: Reason: Anti Ethnic. WTF???????? A book about the Holocaust based on the author's father and told in a simple form of cats, dogs, mice, and pigs.

Pride of Bagdad: Reasons: Sexually Explicit Content. Sex with lions

Tank Girl: Reasons: Sexually Explicit Content. And Kanga sex, don't forget Kanga sex

The Dark Knight Strikes Again: Reasons: Sexually Explicit Content. Superman and Wonderwoman banging at 10,000 ft. Seriously ban it for the horrendous artwork

The League of Extraordinary Gentlemen: Reasons: Nudity, Sexually Explicit Content and Unsuited to Age Group. Invisble man rape, yeah OK

Watchmen: Reasons: Unsuited to Age Group. Right, how? Too challenging for the little dears?

Free for all not Pic n Mix

"Five years on, the broadcasting ban remains a nasty little law, flirting with censorship."

Peter Hain is continuing his campaign to prevent the BNP from appearing on Question Time

I have always argued and will continue to argue in favour of free speech.
It is not a pic and mix, if there is free speech for one there is free speech for another.

"Tolerance of the intolerable is the hallmark of a democracy."

Why do Labour want to block these odious idiots anyway? They complained loudly about the Sinn Fein broadcasting ban - or were those bunch of political thugs acceptable to their ideology? (I thought the broadcasters did a brilliant job circumventing a ban that should never have been ordered and Labour correctly applauded the media's actions.)

You cannot decide on who has free speech. Although we don't have a written right to free speech, we do have laws and precedences to protect people. If Griffin, or any other loony commits an offence for incitement to racial violence or violence against a person then hit him with the law.

There is one straight precedence, it is fine to exercise free speech but you cannot shout fire in a packed cinema. So apply that. And whilst you're at it, arrest those thugs at the Finsbury Mosque for incitement as well. Like free speech, laws should be applied to all no matter what religion, colour or which House of Parliament you sit in.

As always, confront the bigot, don't make him a martyr. It is your natural constituents, Labour, that are voting for them.

The BNP is tapping into fears about jobs, housing, crime, the "way of life", and the only answer you're coming up with is to try and ban them?

AS I argued before, if you ban one political party, where does it stop? Hmmm, UKIP, bunch of loons, ban them. Tory Party? Full of rascists and capitalists, ban them. Lib Dems? Those orange book lads look a bit off-our-message, ban them.

Where do you stop?


Oh, and while I'm here, THE BNP IS A LEFT-WING PARTY! Look at its manifesto commitements, they're all socialist ideals. Just because they want to kick "anyone not them" out of the country and use nationalist imagery, it does not make them right wing, the left has used that as well!!


One final thing, the quotes on this blog - you may be interested to know that these come from Ann Clywd, the then-Labour spokesperson on National Heritage,on the fifth anniversary of the Sinn Fein broadcasting ban.
Here's the final one...

"Being right is not the key. Being allowed to be obnoxiously wrong is. The constitutional concept of free expression means something in continental Europe, and it means something in the United States. It should mean something here."

Appendum: Even Richard Littlejohn is calling for a ban!?! H/t Obo