DP: Have you read this thread? It has some answers for you. |
As I have written repeatedly, the transcript posted here is not for the version of the video the students plan to show. Your current "WHOLE POINT", which is different than you previous said, is fairly accurate other than your references to Hamas' charter which, as I previously explained to you, is not in the video that the students plan to show. The ACLU press release which is linked in the first post of this thread links to the video. Again I ask that you at least take the time to watch it before you demand that students be prevented from seeing it. Here is the link provided by the ACLU: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=-jKRwdsq-As As for the narrator of the video, his role is brief and nobody has argued that he had any editorial control over the video. He simply read a script. Arguing that a video should be banned due to its narrator rather than its content is the height of absurdity. |
So if David Duke was narrating a film about Brown v BoE it would be absurd for people to impute messaging or import to the choice of narrator? Louis Farrakhan could narrate a film about Jewish owned banks and people would be absurd to believe the choice of narrator is without import or meaning? |
Come on Jeff. Imagine this scenario: A group of students wants to show a documentary on “woke culture”. Part of it is narrated by David Duke. An earlier version included statements about how “slavery wasn’t that bad and didn’t cause the civil war” but was edited out. You actually think JR would allow it to be shown? |
We have apparently reached the point at which posters are no longer able to credibly dispute the content of the video. I am not going to engage your hypotheticals. If you have an objection to the content of the video, let’s hear it. Right now you are simply back peddling. I will again ask that you watch the video. |
I watched the film and it seems reasonable.
No group should try to 100% control the narrative. Complex issues have multiple perspectives. It is ridiculous to shut down uncomfortable conversations. Let the film be shown, participation is optional after all. Everyone should be encouraged to participate in a moderated discussion after the movie |
That's a ridiculous scenario. The bass player from Pink Floyd has certainly said some inartful things and may have views you disagree with, but he's no David Duke. In fact, his "going around in Nazi uniforms" consists of music performances (i.e., rock concerts) that are meant to be a depiction of an unhinged fascist, as portrayed in the popular movie "The Wall". They are thoroughly *anti-fascist*. Ralph Fiennes dressed as a nazi in Schindler's List as well. How is that different? Watch the film, and speak to the content. Or don't. Just don't spread lies. |
You don’t win hearts and minds by silencing people. Let them show the documentary. It is the right thing to do |
This same film caused a bunch of controversy in Takoma Park 5 years ago:
https://wtop.com/montgomery-county/2019/07/documentary-screening-sparks-controversy-in-takoma-park/ They first banned it, then decided it was OK to show as long as there's a panel discussion afterwards. |
If anyone in the world could watch the movie version of The Wall and not immediately get that it’s 100% anti-Fascist, then they’re really not very bright. I think PP knows this and is just throwing stuff at the wall to try to distract people. |
how does the "current context" have anything to do with the hamas attacks and the war? |
Both his former saxophonist and his former producer have spoken out about his anti-Semitism. "Norbert Stachel, Waters’ former saxophonist, alleged several instances where he said Waters displayed anti-Jewish sentiment. He claimed Waters lost his temper on tour in Lebanon after a succession of vegetarian dishes were produced at a restaurant and demanded that waiters “take away the Jew food”. Stachel also alleged Waters mocked his grandmother who was murdered in the Holocaust, and that a colleague warned him not to react to any comments about Jews if he wanted to keep his job." https://www.theguardian.com/music/2023/sep/28/roger-waters-accused-of-repeated-antisemitism-in-new-documentary I think you knew this already. |
Based on my scan of the transcript of the shorter, 45-minute version of the film, it doesn't say anything that's explicitly antisemitic. But the idea that there's this ONE THING that nefarious hidden forces working to control the media won't let you criticize definitely does seem to echo longstanding antisemitic conspiracy theories. Especially when the one thing is the Jewish state, maybe you can see why some Jews find it problematic?
I'm anti-occupation, pro-Israeli left, and wouldn't mind seeing Netanyahu hauled off to The Hague, but I don't think the movie is quite as straight-ahead/just-the-facts as its defenders want to suggest sometimes. That said, hard to see where DCPS is on firm legal ground barring it. The First Amendment protects stupid and/or racist speech at least as much as it protects speech no one objects to. The better response here would have been to allow the club to screen it and also make sure there was a similar venue for anyone who wanted to air some response film. (Though I guess the footage from the Oct. 7 attacks themselves would probably be inappropriate for school-age viewers...) |
Thank you for so clearly articulating where I'm at with this too. (I would argue this is a more "typical" reflection of Israel supporters than what Jeff suggested up thread.) Based on what's been shared, I don't see why the school interfered. But I also don't understand why people are so forcefully defending the content of this film either. |
+1 Whether this was a time-place-manner or a content restriction seems based on facts I don't have about the school's policies and how they enforce them. If it was a content restriction, that seems potentially hard to defend legally. But the comments about how the film is reasonable, or we should just let people talk -- I know what that is. I've had conversations like this before. It's not good faith. "No group should try to 100% control the narrative. Complex issues have multiple perspectives" is textbook "I'm just asking questions." |