Teacher reinstated after doing nothing wrong....

[Good Doctor HST]

Teacher who compared Bush to Hitler reinstated

Michigan native to resume teaching at Colorado school Monday.

Joe Menard / The Detroit News

AURORA, Colo. -- Geography teacher Jay Bennish has been reinstated at Overland High School effective Monday.

The 28-year-old Beverly Hills native had been placed on paid administrative leave since March 1 after a lecture he made where he compared President Bush to Adolf Hitler and criticized America's foreign policy was published in conservative media.

"We're pleased with the outcome," said his father, John Bennish. He said he talked to his son after the Cherry Creek School District reinstated him and that he is doing well.

"He's pretty stressed out, like we all are," he said. "It was an unfortunate situation and I think we can all get on with our lives now. Jay can get on with his teaching career and his life."

District officials said they were working with the family of the 10th-grade student who taped the lecture to get him back into Overland or another high school. The student, Sean Allen, has not been back to school since the national controversy erupted.

The Allen and Bennish families received several violent threats since the audiotape hit mainstream news outlets, but have not involved their respective police authorities.

District officials declined to say whether Bennish was punished in any way, citing Colorado privacy laws. John Bennish said his son didn't discuss the contents of the meeting with him because it was confidential.

Bennish said he always presents balancing viewpoints in class, but not always at the same time. His attorney, David Lane, acknowledged that was a mistake.

"Jay's teaching style will perhaps be, as some would say, a little more fair and balanced on a minute-to-minute basis," Lane said. "When you put out one side, put out the other then and there."

Bennish said he would continue to try to improve as a teacher and to encourage students to think critically.

"I will be back in the classroom on Monday and I am excited to continue to teach," he said.

The Associated Press contributed. You can reach Joe Menard at (248) 647-7429 or jmenard@detnews.com (jmenard@detnews.com).

[Gold9472]

Heh... nice title...

[Good Doctor HST]

I happened to see a piece on this story on CNN Friday morning. Many of the students held billboards saying "Teach, Don't Preach" and protesting the teacher's reinstatement. Seems the indoctrination process is working on the youth..... This is very frightening.

[Gold9472]

I happened to see a piece on this story on CNN Friday morning. Many of the students held billboards saying "Teach, Don't Preach" and protesting the teacher's reinstatement. Seems the indoctrination process is working on the youth..... This is very frightening.

I believe analogies are very educational. It's working on some of the youth. Other yoots know better.

[Partridge]

There was a big discussion about this on Guerilla News, and here's my contribution:

(You can listen to the 'rant' here (http://secure.eonstreams.com/koa_am/GeoTeacher.mp3))

"Uhh… why was he talking about Capitalism, Bush et al when he was supposed to be presenting a GEOGRAPHY class?"

Have you ever studied geography, even at high school level? I was taught three aspects of geography – Pyshical (how mountains are made, why volcanoes erupt, why plates shift etc), Political (the interaction between states, environmental effects of things such as war, pollution etc) and Economic (things such as the EU CAP program, ‘Develpoment’ Aid, why the IMF is the best thing since sliced bread etc).

I’d think a discourse on Bush, capitalism and war would fit right into such a class. But then, I live in Ireland, and that’s how our syllabus was (at least as of 1998 when I finished school).

I should point out though that what we were taught in economic geography was ‘capitalism good’, ‘imf good’, ‘eu good’ – never once did I hear a contrary opinion expressed. And I learned more, albeit in a skewed way, about contemporary politics from my geography class than I ever did in history class (history apparently ended in 1968 with the Prague Spring and Civil Rights Movements [USA & Northern Ireland] – funnily enough, no mention of the Paris uprising – though it did skip the 70’s & 80’s and come back with the fall of the Eastern Bloc).

And this horsehit about ‘both sides’ being presented – well we never had a Communist in class explaining why, say, they saw the crushing of the Hungarian Uprising as good thing, or any of the benefits they may have seen in the communist system. It was simply ‘communism was evil, carried out X, Y and Z, and be glad its gone’. We were never taught historiography – ie that there are different interpretations of history, not just of individually disputed events, but of historical development as a whole – needless to say, the first I ever heard about say Marxist or Whig Historiography was in University. As far as we were concerned, there was only one history and that’s what was in our textbooks.

In religion calss we were never given the atheist argument (this being Catholic Ireland) and I’m kinda proud to say that however apolitical I was in school, I was the ‘class atheist’ – and reprimanded several times for ‘distrubiting propaganda’.

Our art class was totally stripped of political context – we managed to study Warhol without once (as I recall) hearing the words commercialism or consumerism. Warhol made his images ‘just because’. We learned about Picassco without once learning that he was a PCF member and that his involvement with revolutionary politics probably played a role in his radical (in an artistic sense) works. And so on.

From my experince, it’s bunkum that ‘both sides’ [or even more than one side, that side being pro-status quo] are presented in schools, either in Ireland or the US or anywhere else. And no, having a democrat and a republican come in to explain their interpretation of say the State of the Union does not count as ‘diversity’, no more than does a Fianna Failer and Fine Gaeler coming in to give their opinions on the EU.

[Later...]



Having listened to the entire thing, I can’t really see any problem with the content of what he has said (maybe there are some small historical inaccuracies, one I noticed was he implied that the US set up Israel, it was the British – though maybe he meant ‘Western Imperialism’ – but certainly his comments about Israel’s place in US policymakers hearts rings true after ‘67) – his tone could rightly be criticised as ‘in you face’, but he engages the student who asks questions about 9-11, says “you gotta figure this stuff out for yourself, I want you think about these things”. He never tells the student to shut up, makes the point that ‘it depends on perspectives’, and repeatedly encourages them to think for themselves.

In regard to Cuba – You’ll get no argument from me that the Castro regime has carried out human rights abuses over the years – but suggesting that the CIA terrorist war against Cuba was motivated by concern for human rights is absurd. What the guy says is correct, it was an attempt to bring down the Cuban economic system, nothing else. This cannot seriously be disputed except by ideologues – these CIAers and if there are indeed ‘independent’ anti-communist crusaders, could care less about human rights – a fact proven by the terrorist war against the people they carried out over the years.

But its funny that Anthony says, as a criticism: ”[The student] reads about Castro’s human rights abuses and that maybe the situation wasn’t as black and white as his teacher made it seem, he’ll question the rest of rant.”

Isn’t that what we want? A critical perspective. So a student questions the rest of the ‘rant’, comes back the next day with questions and poses them. Dialogue is created, people are free to agree, disagree, or have independent thoughts of both sides. But I find it highly unlikely that even 10th Graders in the USA are not fed anti-Castroite propaganda (remember propaganda can be truthful, the best propaganda is always truthful) in history class when studying the Missile Crisis and Bay of Pigs (and if they are not taught about these things then that’s a serious flaw in the cirriculum). Like I said above, what we were taught about Communism, in the Eastern Bloc, China and Cuba was entirely negative – I find it hard to believe that the US cirriculum is radically different in that respect.

And his definition of capitalism, which he says came from the dictionary, is pretty much spot on:


From dictionary.com – Capitalism: An economic system in which the means of production and distribution are privately or corporately owned and development is proportionate to the accumulation and reinvestment of profits gained in a free market.

His opinion that capitalism and caring are at odds with each other is of course open to debate – one would presume the percieved benefits of capitalism are extolled in Economics class. (I’ll bet there is no counterpoint to the ‘capitalism=freedom’ argument in that class).

[Partridge]

I happened to see a piece on this story on CNN Friday morning. Many of the students held billboards saying "Teach, Don't Preach" and protesting the teacher's reinstatement. Seems the indoctrination process is working on the youth..... This is very frightening.

Thankfully,a lot of kids also took his side:

Students Protest After Teacher Suspended for Bush-Hitler Comments
ABC (http://abcnews.go.com/US/story?id=1679439)

March 2, 2006 — A Colorado school is in upheaval following the suspension of a teacher who was recorded comparing President Bush's rhetoric to that of Adolf Hitler.

More than 100 students at Overland High School in Aurora, Colo., walked out of class this morning to protest the decision to put geography teacher Jay Bennish on administrative leave.

The school administration made the move after a student went public with a 20-minute recording of Bennish's comments to his class.

In the tape, the teacher is heard saying there were similarities between remarks Bush made in his State of the Union address and "things that Adolf Hitler used to say."

Superintendent Monte Moses told ABC News affiliate KMGH-TV that policy calls for both sides of an issue to be presented to students. He said Bennish's presentation appeared unbalanced.



Sophomore Takes Recording to Radio Station

The recording was made by 16-year-old sophomore Sean Allen the day after the president's speech. Allen said he had been disturbed by "political rants" he heard in Bennish's class.

"So these kids are going to have notes on why George Bush is related to Hitler and why the state of Israel was founded on violence and terrorism," Allen told KHOW Radio Wednesday when he went public with his tape.

"These kids are going to have notes on this and accept that as fact."

On the tape, Bennish, who has taught in the Colorado district for five years, is heard quoting part of the State of the Union address: "It is our duty as Americans to use the military to go out in the world and make the world like us." Bennish continues: "Sounds a lot like what Adolph Hilter used to say."

"We do want teachers to express their opinions, but to put that in context and to provide opposing points of view," Moses said. "All discussion must be fair and balanced."

"[The suspension] is not a disciplinary action. It is to give us enough time to sit down and gather all the facts," said Moses.

Tustin Amole, a Cherry Creek School District spokeswoman, told KMGH that an investigation of the incident would take about a week.

[Partridge]

Oh yeah, and do you think any action would have been taken if he said "I think Bush is great and everyone America has ever bombed and invaded deserved it. U!S!A! U!S!A!!"

[PhilosophyGenius]

The irony of this story is that after he compared Bush to Hitler, he was treated like a descenter in Nazi Germany! But great, now all classes are gonna be bland and straight from the book and no more critical thinking or politics in class cuz of this twerp.

And this little punk kid Sean Allen took verbal bitch slapping on Hannity & Colmes last week. It was great.

[Partridge]

Here's the little snot's myspace page (http://profile.myspace.com/index.cfm?fuseaction=user.viewprofile&friendid=38477781). He's allegedly a 'comedian' - his two routines (presumably his best offerings, seeing as they're posted online) are awful!

[PhilosophyGenius]

somone slap this mothafucka!

[jetsetlemming]

I say fuck this teacher. He should have been fired. I remember in high school and even i middle school, teachers making comments like this. Do you know how many teenagers and young adults are liberal? In most other groups, it's pretty much split 50/50. Not in my generation. I'd guess it at somewhere around %85. Teachers are brainwashing students, political advertisements are focused at teens on local channels... Theres a reason liberal protest when education reform is mentioned besides "pump more money into it, money fixes everything". This teacher and plenty more like him are brainwashing kids. They need to be stopped.

[PhilosophyGenius]

Personally I love teachers talking about politics in class- as do the other students. It makes the subject more intersting and relevant to our lives you feel me.

And about what you were saying, the vast majority of students and teachers who are at top schools such as U.C. Berkly are liberals, like you said. So what does this tell you about liberals and conservatives???

[jetsetlemming]

That liberals have more influence in public education. http://www.nea.org/index.html On their home page, there's a tab on the right that says "Take action". Does it say anything about instituting teaching regulations? Standards and practices? No. It says "Tell your congressman to increase public school funding". Public school is all one big fucking scam to steal public money and brainwash the masses.

[jetsetlemming]

Personally I love teachers talking about politics in class- as do the other students. It makes the subject more intersting and relevant to our lives you feel me.

Sure, its good to have a discussion on current events. This techer was ranting on public events with a speech drastically slanted to his politics aimed at converting other to his point of view. Teachers aren't supposed to be teaching their views, they are supposed to be teaching facts. Public eduaction is for establishing a minimum amount of knowledge in the public at large. It's been stolen and used for indoctrination.

[Partridge]

they are supposed to be teaching facts

Would you care to point out any substanial errors of fact in his rant - other than the Israel one I already pointed out?

[PhilosophyGenius]

That liberals have more influence in public education. http://www.nea.org/index.html On their home page, there's a tab on the right that says "Take action". Does it say anything about instituting teaching regulations? Standards and practices? No. It says "Tell your congressman to increase public school funding". Public school is all one big fucking scam to steal public money and brainwash the masses.

No, it tells you that liberals are smarter than conservatives since they dominate all the best schools in the country- and the world!

[jetsetlemming]

You don't need to be smart to be a teacher. Intelligence has nothing to do with political veiw anyway. Your politics are decided by your view of the world, not how smart you are. Of course, srupid people are easy to brainwash, such as teenagers already bored out of their minds in high school.

[jetsetlemming]

Would you care to point out any substanial errors of fact in his rant - other than the Israel one I already pointed out?
Teachers should at least try to check their facts, but that's not what I'm talking about. He was giving his biased opinion on the president as a fact.

[PhilosophyGenius]

You don't need to be smart to be a teacher. Intelligence has nothing to do with political veiw anyway. Your politics are decided by your view of the world, not how smart you are. Of course, srupid people are easy to brainwash, such as teenagers already bored out of their minds in high school.

C'mon now, it's gotta mean something most of the people who teach and attend the best schools in the country are liberals, and that the red states have on average a higher IQ that blue states.

And yeah, all those idiotic college students in the 70's were brainwashed into thinking the Vietnam war was wrong. What a bunch of sheep they all were.

[jetsetlemming]

Kids dohn't get into those colleges on grades alone. They are interviewed by the staff, and fill out opinion tests. Also, there are plenty of students who don't have the highest grades, but get in based on sports or affirmative action.

[Partridge]

Teachers should at least try to check their facts, but that's not what I'm talking about. He was giving his biased opinion on the president as a fact.

Did you even listen to the recording? What are these 'opinions presented as fact' re: Bush? 'Sounds a lot like what Adolf Hitler used to say'? Cos, y'know - IT DOES. He talks about Bush for all of 3 or 4 minutes, where he says:

Jay Bennish: Rice said this the other day, and Bush reiterated it last night and the implication was that the solution to the violence in the middle east is democratisation. And the implication through his language was that democracies don't go to war. Democracies aren't violent. Democracies won't want WMDs. This is called 'blind niave faith in democracy'. Who is probably the single most violent nation on planet Earth?

Student: We are.

JB: The United States of America, and we're a democracy, quote unquote. Who has the most WMDs in the World?

Student: Us.

JB: United States. Who is continuing to develop new WMDs as we speak? United States. So why does Mr. Bush think that other countries that are democracies won't want to be like us? Why does he think that they'll just want to be at peace with each other? What makes him think that when the Palestinians get their own state that they won't want to pre-emptively invade Israel to eliminate a potential threat to their security, like we supposedly did in Iraq? Do you see the dangerous precendet that we've set by illegally invading another country and violating their soveringty in the name of protecting us from a potential future attack?

Stundents:

JB: Why doesn't Mexico invade Guatemala? Maybe they're scared of being attacked? Why doesn't North Korea invade South Korea? They might be afraid of being attacked. Or maybe Iran, and North Korea, and Saudi Arabia [error of fact, Saudi is not an 'Outpost of Tryanny' in US eyes - I guess he meant Syria]... and who else did he add to the list last night? Zimbabwe. Maybe they're all gonna team up and invade us cos we might try to invade them.

Students: [Laughter]

JB: Where does this cycle of violence end? This whole do as I say not as I do thing doesn't work. What was so important about President Bush's speech last nigh, and it doesn't matter if it was President Clinton still, cos its important - is that it's not just a speech to America, its a sppech to who?

Student: The world

JB: The whole world. It's very obvious if you listen to his language, listen to his body language, and if you paid attention to what he was saying, he wasn't always talking to us, he was talking to the whole planet. Threatening the whole planet. He started off his speech by declaring that America should be the country that dominates the world [i][Partidge: Bush said: "The only way to protect our people, the only way to secure the peace, the only way to control our destiny is by our leadership -- so the United States of America will continue to lead"]. That we have been blessed by God, that we have the best, most advanced system and its our duty as Americans is to use our military to go out into the world and to make the world like us. Sounds a lot like the things Adolf Hitler used to say [see Hitler quotes below]. 'We're the only ones who are right, everyone else is backwards, and its our job to conquer the world and make sure they all live just like we want them to'. Now I'm not saying that Bush and Hitler are exactly the same, obviously not, ok. But there are some eeire similarities to the tones they use. Very, very ethnocentric, right, 'we're right, you're all wrong'.

--------

This is what all the fuss is about? Hah! Like I said, if he came into the class and said "George Bush and Jesus say some very similar things", we would never have heard of this Jay Bennish, or that little snot Sean Allen.



Hitler quotes:

Here's a great one from a speech the Riechstag in 1937 on the fourth Anniversary of the fascist siezure of power. One need only replace 'Bolshevik' with 'Terrorist', and few other changes in the world situtation and Presto! We have essentially a fill-in-the-numbers Bush speech:

"Here it is not a question of a special form of national life in Russia [nations who harbour terrorists] but of the Bolshevic [Terrorist] demand for a world revolution. If Mr. Eden [Annan] does not look at Bolshevism [Terrorism] as we look at it, that may have something to do with the position of Great Britain [The UN] and also with some happenings that are unknown to us.

But I believe that nobody will question the sincerity of our opinions on this matter, for they are not based merely on abstract theory. For Mr. Eden [Anann] Bolshevism [Terrorism] is perhaps a thing which has its seat in Moscow [Tora Bora], but for us in Germany [America] this Bolshevism [Terrorism] is a pestilence against which we have had to struggle at the cost of much bloodshed. It is a pestilence which tried to turn our country into the same kind of desert as is now the case in Spain ; for the habit of murdering hostages [terrorist attacks] began here [on 911], in the form in which we now see it in Spain [Iraq].

National Socialism [America] did not try to come to grips with Bolshevism in Russia [Afghanistan, before 911], but the Jewish international Bolshevics [Muslim International Terrorists] in Moscow [Tora Bora] have tried to introduce their system [hatred of freedom] into Germany [America] and are still trying to do so. Against this attempt we have waged a bitter struggle, not only in defence of our own civilization but in defence of European [Freedom loving] civilization as a whole."

[...]

The teaching of Bolshevism [Terrorist ideology] is that there must be a world [Islamic] revolution, which would mean world-destruction. If such a doctrine were accepted and given equal rights with other teachings in Europe, this would mean that Europe would be delivered over to it. If other nations want to be on good terms with this peril, that does not affect Germany's [America's] position. As far as Germany [America] itself is concerned, let there be no doubts on the following points: — (1) We look on Bolshevism [Terrorism] as a world peril for which there must be no toleration.

(2) We use every means in our power to keep this peril away from our people.

(3) And we are trying to make the German [American] people immune to this peril as far as possible.

[...]

"I shall not neglect anything that is necessary to guarantee the existence of the German [American]people, although other nations may become the victims of the Bolshevic [Terrorist] infection."

[...]

Since January 30th [September 11th] four years ago I have made the acquaintance of the third friend — anxiety for the people and the Reich [America], which have been entrusted to my guidance. From that time this anxiety has never left my side and will probably remain a faithful companion until the end of my days. But how could a man bear the burden of this anxiety were it not for the faith he has in his mission and which enables him to trust that He who is above us all sanctions my work.


[i]Some other quotes from that 'strong leader', which I could easily see the Bush regime spewing forth:

"In actual fact the pacifistic-humane idea is perfectly all right perhaps when the highest type of man has previously conquered and subjected the world to an extent that makes him the sole ruler of this earth… Therefore, first struggle and then perhaps pacifism."

"It must be thoroughly understood that the lost land will never be won back by solemn appeals to the God, nor by hopes in any League of Nations, but only by the force of arms."

"Strength lies not in defense but in attack."

"The German people are not a warlike nation. It is a soldierly one, which means it does not want a war, but does not fear it. It loves peace but also loves its honor and freedom"

"What we have to fight for is the freedom and independence of the fatherland, so that our people may be enabled to fulfill the mission assigned to it by the creator"

"There is a road to freedom. Its milestones are Obedience, Endeavor, Honesty, Order, Cleanliness, Sobriety, Truthfulness, Sacrifice, and love of the Fatherland."

"Let us never forget the duty, which we have taken upon us"

[PhilosophyGenius]

Kids dohn't get into those colleges on grades alone. They are interviewed by the staff, and fill out opinion tests. Also, there are plenty of students who don't have the highest grades, but get in based on sports or affirmative action.

You need to be interviewed to get into a University?

[Partridge]

Ivy League probably, like Oxford & Cambridge in the UK. I was never interviewed for my acceptance into Uni in the 10th best (at the time) Uni in Britain.

[PhilosophyGenius]

Thanks for posting that Patrige, J. Bennish is the man!!!!

[Good Doctor HST]

Jay Bennish says the U.S. has the most weapons of mass destruction and continues to develop more. He says Bush believes the U.S. has been "blessed by God, that we have the best, most advanced system and its our duty as Americans is to use our military to go out into the world and to make the world like us."

I'm sorry jetset.... what part of this isn't a fact?

[jetsetlemming]

How about that America is the most violent country in the world? Bush never said that we should use the military to make the world like us. That's Bennish's opinion. Anyway, it's the overall speech to the students I didn't like. He was telling them that Bush is bad, and that america is evil. He was teaching them liberalism, he wasn't teaching them anything he was supposed to. Political points of view aren't on the lesson plan.

[jetsetlemming]

And about the wmds, you don't know that America has the most. It's known how many nukes America has, but that's only one type of wmd. Russia was far more interested in biological and chemical weapons than America, and who knows what China does.

[Partridge]

How about that America is the most violent country in the world?
You want a list of US interventions, wars and proxy-wars since 1900? I'll be happy to oblige. Ok they may not have directly killed the most number of people (I don't have a total death toll), but they are certainly the most bellicose nation of the twentieth and twenty-first centuries.


Russia was far more interested in biological and chemical weapons than America, and who knows what China does.

Indeed, who knows what the US does in secret.


Bush never said that we should use the military to make the world like us
Quotes from 2006 State of the Union:

"The terrorists hope these horrors will break our will, allowing the violent to inherit the Earth. But they have miscalculated: We love our freedom, and we will fight to keep it."

"In a time of testing, we cannot find security by abandoning our commitments and retreating within our borders. If we were to leave these vicious attackers alone, they would not leave us alone. They would simply move the battlefield to our own shores. There is no peace in retreat. And there is no honor in retreat. By allowing radical Islam to work its will -- by leaving an assaulted world to fend for itself -- we would signal to all that we no longer believe in our own ideals, or even in our own courage. But our enemies and our friends can be certain: The United States will not retreat from the world, and we will never surrender to evil."

"Once again, we accept the call of history to deliver the oppressed and move this world toward peace. We remain on the offensive against terror networks. We have killed or captured many of their leaders -- and for the others, their day will come."

"The only alternative to American leadership is a dramatically more dangerous and anxious world. Yet we also choose to lead because it is a privilege to serve the values that gave us birth. American leaders -- from Roosevelt to Truman to Kennedy to Reagan -- rejected isolation and retreat, because they knew that America is always more secure when freedom is on the march." [Of those four leaders, only Reagan was not involved in large-scale open warfare, preferring the proxy-war method in Nicuragua (Contra war) and Afghanistan (Mujaheddin war), and one might say the Lebanese Civil War was an extensaion of US/Israeli foriegn policy. Of course Reagan invaded Grenada too, but I wouldn't describe that as large-scale.]

"Our own generation is in a long war against a determined enemy -- a war that will be fought by Presidents of both parties, who will need steady bipartisan support from the Congress."

"Fellow citizens, we've been called to leadership in a period of consequence. We've entered a great ideological conflict we did nothing to invite."

"Lincoln could have accepted peace at the cost of disunity and continued slavery."

"We will lead freedom's advance."

[Partridge]

And from yesterday's National Security Strategy (http://www.whitehouse.gov/nsc/nss/2006/intro.html) document, the preamble by Bush states:

"We choose leadership over isolationism [...] We seek to shape the world, not merely be shaped by it; to influence events for the better instead of being at their mercy."

[jetsetlemming]

Influence, does not mean militarily influence. America already influences cultures all over the world. We're the cutting edge :P. Anyway, this topic is going off nowhere. It's about how this teacher was teaching his students his personal beliefs and politics instead of the course at hand. He was indoctrinating them. I have seen teachers do this first hand, and in most cases about half the students like what they hear because it re-enforces what they've heard before, about half don't like it but don't say anything because the teacher controlls their grades, and the resy don't care enough to pay attention, and keep hearing this crap over and over and over until it becomes a default statement to them when thinking about politics.

[Good Doctor HST]

It's about how this teacher was teaching his students his personal beliefs and politics instead of the course at hand. He was indoctrinating them.

What I'd like to know is: what was the course at hand? How did the topic of conversation steer towards the disputed discussion? Did a student ask a question related to the actions of the president? Did the teacher knowingly go off on a rant to shed light on how the U.S. operates under the guise of "democracy" and "peace"? I just wonder how it built up.

"He was indoctrinating them." Are you kidding? He wasn't exercising hypnopaedia (sleep teaching) or drilling anti-American slogans into the students' heads. He spoke for about 3-4 minutes on a view of a topic the students would never hear or read in popular press.

[Partridge]

Influence, does not mean militarily influence.What a truly ahistorical thing to say. But in way you're right, it might mean economic 'pressure', or CIA covert ops, or proxy-wars/insurgencies - but it all boils down to the same thing - domination of other countries by whatever means the US government deems necessary - 'shaping the world'.


what was the course at hand? How did the topic of conversation steer towards the disputed discussion? It was geography class, and a discussion of this nature falls well within the remit of such a class - geography isn't just about identifying countries on a map. The class took place the morning after the SotU address.


He spoke for about 3-4 minutes on a view of a topic the students would never hear or read in popular press. Actually he spoke for at least 21 minutes (that's all that was recorded). The bits I transcribed were the bits where he talked about the Bush administration. He also talked about the US terrorist war against Cuba, 9/11 and the 'war on terror', Israel/Palestine, 'collateral damage' and other topics.

[jetsetlemming]

"He was indoctrinating them." Are you kidding? He wasn't exercising hypnopaedia (sleep teaching)
Wow, it's been a long time since you've been in school. :P Students for the most part don't really pay much attention, and just accept anything the teacher says because they can't be bothered to think about school. Thinking about girls and when class is over and how not to get grounded is more important, so the lesson is just dropped right inot the brain without mulling it over. I've heard some people on tv defending this teacher by saying the kid that taped him "led him on", though these are typically the same people that question that he only taped the teacher's lecture and not the kids doing assigned work and chatting while the teacher graded papers at his desk.

[PhilosophyGenius]

Check out this theory:

The govnt pulled some strings to have teachers like Churchill and Bennish blasted in the media to discourage teachers all across the U.S. making students think for themselves.

[Good Doctor HST]

Thinking about girls and when class is over and how not to get grounded is more important, so the lesson is just dropped right inot the brain without mulling it over.

If it's true that information gets dropped into your brain when you're not paying attention in school, then I should have been valedictorian!

[AuGmENTor]

Sure, its good to have a discussion on current events. This techer was ranting on public events with a speech drastically slanted to his politics aimed at converting other to his point of view. Teachers aren't supposed to be teaching their views, they are supposed to be teaching facts. Public eduaction is for establishing a minimum amount of knowledge in the public at large. It's been stolen and used for indoctrination.The facts according to WHO, sir? The history books? BWAHAHAHAHAHAHA. Some people not coming around so much is a GOOD thing.