Freedom of Speech motion:
Israeli-Apartheid poster... eep.
University refused to stamp the posters and has been taking them down.
Kishek:
- wants to talk about uni's limiting of 'freedom of speech, debate, etc...'
- doesn t want to talk about content of the poster or choosing a side.
- wants the SFUO to take a position on this issue (of free speech, not Israel-Palestine craziness).
Laura:
- wants minute to read the letter that was sent by the President
Federico:
- granted by the supreme power of Federico, ultimate Chair of the BOArd!
(the audience is pooling orders for pizza! SCORE! that should be deliciously disruptive!! huzzah for online ordering!)
(another audience update: BOA bingo cards are being distributed! I wonder what the prize is...)
Miriam: giving up speaker's rights. Joel Titleman - BA and Master's in Philosophy and in Law School now - does not represent a student group, but has been involved in the debate between the sides. Does not mind the poster, but thinks that what is being overlooked is WHY there has been offense taken... thinks it is not the violence that is offensive, but deep-seated issues in our culture. etc, etc ... seems generally down with the motion, and thinks that Jewish peeps showed up thinking that the motion would be more controversial, but is no longer concerned.
Rox: gives up speaker's rights to some girl who did not identify herself... probs just forgot, but who the crap are you? seems down with the motion as well. reiteration is booooooring.
Antonio: does not want to fight the university on their decision, although he is down with the freedom of speech part. Image of violence - it is clearly a part of the posting rules that we agree to. It is the university's space too.
* Fancie is making scary faces at co-good Cheevers - he never seems to have any control over his face. Just saying.
Mel Book: gives up speaker's rights - not sure who this is either, but apparently she sent Dean a letter this morning. She is against moving against the university - describes poster - violence! SFUO is accountable to ALL SFUO students - should not isolate and attack some students in defense of freedom of speech.
* contentious issue, much - the audience is full of Palestinian students.
PJ-Saurus: does not feel qualified to speak to this issue in a political sense, but feels that according to the posting rules, it is a violent image/'incites violence (as corrected by Faris)'. Does not think it should have been allowed to be posted.
Shut down by a Federico/pissed off girl! BOA Bingo! I ve got a square!!
Danika: cites random precedence that no one else is aware of... supports the motion
Dean: Point of information - shut down by Federico! SLAM! no talking for you!
Kyle: speaking against the motion - thinks the SFUO has already decided. Agrees with Rawb. whoa! wants to use a test to decide - some legal standard I ve never heard of - might be a good idea? Should we be taking a side in this debate at all?
Faris EXPLOSION! - do not make everyone who votes for the motion feel anti-Semetic! spazzzzz.
Back to Kyle: retracts previous statement, but is still against the motion.
Khadijah: for the motion.
Faris: was supposed to go first - is going now. way to GO, Federico! Glad that PJ-Saurus acknowledges our inability to really understand the issue. Pissed that we are worried about 'how people view us' - motion is about freedom of expression... not just about the poster and this freedom... keeps happening. too much censorship. 'those involved believe that they are advocating for their lives and aren t just trying to piss people off.' Does think the poster is crass. Because it is so important to the groups, it should be allowed... acknowledges slippery slope.
**Federico FINALLY cuts off the very emotional rant on Faris's part. But not for being chatty, only because they ran out of time. how selective of him.
Debate extended.
Faris keeps talking. so much table-hitting. on and on in the same vein. not professional in the LEAST. Somehow never told to stick to the issue, despite his obvious emotional investment and lack of control.
literally begs the board to support the motion.
Michele: gives her speaking rights to an audience member. Not really relevant - just says that his pro-Israeli group has been called racist. He says that the posters incite hatred and depict an untruth. Hurtful on the part of the University towards those who are pro-Israel AND pro-Israeli Apartheid's causes. AGAINST the motion.
Amy: thinks we are inflating the issue and that the poster does not really incite violence. chooses the pro-expression side. still for the motion. speaks to the audience and reminds them that the BOA is not (and will not be) taking a stance on the conflict.
(blogger's note: this is fucking intense. so much tension all up in here.)
Seamus: point of order - why two women in a row? Federico: had two males in a row... so there.
Becky: what did the SFUO look into re: candian human rights code
Seamus: in favour of the motion, but it s soooo hard for him. as usual, airing his vicious, EPIC internal battles!!! blah blah, freedom of speech. blah blah, conflict is not being debated. consulted the code so that they would be informed. Holy crap! he somehow manages to flog the 'accessible education' issue!! Impressive maneuvering!
Audience member: thanks Seamus! allow debate, please! does not see the logic in banning the poster. wants a real answer. 'causes confrontation' is not a good enough explanation.
Audience member: feels attacked by the poster - clearly not innocuous! Feels there should be a mechanism in place to internally ensure the use of common sense. Thinks that that is what the SFUO is for!
Dean: There are two issues: 1) makes one feel attacked vs 2) incites hatred/violence. These are not the same thing. Also, point of info: the SFUO did NOT take down the posters in the Uni Centre. Bottom line: For the motion so that one right is not preferred over the other.
Debate OVER!
Straight to a vote: those in favour - lots, those against - not as many, abstentions - Dee, Faris, Richard, possibly someone else?
Seamus: I can haz point of recess? 5 minutes please?
Federico is pissed that ppl don t follow the rules - actually dresses Seamus down in front of EVERYONE!! FTW!
10 minute recess. thank goodness - my fingers hurt!
What do you think, gentle readers? comment up!
6 comments:
woop party side of the table has interwebs!
:0
*contentious issue, much - the audience is full of Palestinian students.
***
Actually, there was only one Palestinian student in the audience...
Brown people aren't necessarily Palestinian. ;)
Soooo, just to clear things up, I meant to write Palestinian supporters. Thanks for catching that, Houda, although I don t appreciate the swipe. It is a long post and I was typing in real time, so I did not notice that I had dropped a word.
I will say that the racist jump was a bit quick and unforgiving of you seeing as how this blog has never made any kind of discriminating overtures.
How about a TINY bit of the benefit of the doubt in the future?
Eww. The last part was really not meant to be taken seriously. Being myself one of those brown people, I didn't feel insulted and I was clearly not calling you racist.
I guess the smiley didn't make that clear enough.
I think I know what liveblogging is.
I m glad that s not what you meant - tone and text are not very good bedfellows...
and you can t ever tread too lightly around the race card.
Post a Comment