17 votes

Portland Teachers Shut Down Free Press at Controversial Talk: (Titled) "Post Traumatic *Slave* Syndrome" (4/25/2014)

Comment viewing options

Select your preferred way to display the comments and click "Save settings" to activate your changes.

Not yet a pattern, but...

Two days ago, the news reported about a high school student who noticed that his school had blocked right but not left websites on his high school's computer system. I'm still wondering about who went through all that work deleting conservative sites or was it an app that might also be employed at other schools. Now this attack on freedom of the press. Two incidents don't make a pattern but are cause for vigilance. Hopefully, other students will be checking their schools' computer systems for similar attacks on their freedom. More and more, it looks like teachers are in the front ranks of President Obama's propaganda army.

"an amazing, talented, gifted speaker."


Shut up Meg.

Those people will justly

Those people will justly deserve the hell descending on them. They don't even realize that they are already slaves.

"The United States can pay any debt it has because we can always print money to do that." — Alan Greenspan

SteveMT's picture

The behavior of the audience was even worse than the speaker.

The dumbing-down of these particular people has unfortunately been successful.

The speaker has her own personal requirements

To stop speaking, is the speakers decision. It is her personal requirement that no one records her speech, and her decision to stop speaking.

Why is the audience so angry at the person recording? He is not yelling, , not interrupting, nor is he trying to stop the speech.

She decided to stop speaking, that was up to her.

Good Lord

Has anyone in Portland read the Constitution?

The way this group is attacking this man for recording a public event is absolutely disgusting.

ChristianAnarchist's picture

I used to live in Portland -

I used to live in Portland - No, they don't have a clue for the most part... (it's one of the reasons I don't live there anymore)

Beware the cult of "government"...

Their behavior is so troubling to watch

I always viewed Portland as an open minded, well educated area. With that I had the assumption that these people who are so well versed, would understand the meaning of honor and good behavior.

Bad behavior is collectively berating someone who is not hurting you, and not stopping your event.

Bad behavior is standing in front of a person with your anus in his face. Bad behavior is publicly blocking a person from viewing and listening to the presentation, and yes... recording. It's ok, its a public event.

Bad behavior is tripping, and wishing to hurt someone.

Portlanders may pride themselves on being different on the outside, but the people in this clip show that on the inside their heart is not pure. What is so hip and trendy in having no honor, no self respect, poor manners, and poor public behavior.

She is willing to give a public speech

But doesn't want it to be made public.

I hope the audience wonders why.

I'm going to go out on a limb here:

I think this guy got thrown out because they thought he was a....Republican.

And by Republican, I mean they stereotyped him because he's white.

I'm not saying the whole room is racist, but watch the speakers eyes while the crowd is coming down on the cameraman. She gives him the "disgraceful" look and it's pathetic how everyone just jumps on board. Mob mentality.

By the way, nice muffin top on the guy blocking the camera with his ass.

If you don't know your rights, you don't have any.

Post-traumatic slave syndrome

must be the reason why he tried to trip him.

...or maybe he's just an a**hole.

It would appear

this is a public event (second entry in column on the right):

Hosted by the Office of School-Family Partnership officially "School Family Partnership," formerly Family Engagement is an official committee of Portland Public Schools to enhance parent engagement listed in the S section:


At Blanchard Education Service Center, 501 North Dixon Street, a public building owned by Multnomah County:


If you are a constitutional statist then any first amendment prohibition at a public event hosted by a government entity on public property organized by public servants ought to generate suit. You do not sue the School Family Partership or the Portland Schools unless an unreasonable first amendment prohibition is a matter of policy. Sue all 16 of those officials allegedly present from the office of School Family Partnership individually and personally in federal court for any abuses of discretion. Ignorance of the law is not an excuse. Some of these public servants should be taught a lesson in what the law is by getting their asses hauled into a federal court.

Does one have to be

a "constitutional statist" for this prohibition to "generate suit", or can any old American Joe see it?

Any Old American Joe

can see it if they want but looking at the voting trends of American Joe's I do not have much confidence they care enough about something like a constitution and have probably never read it.

I have a couple of those old American Joe relatives. If you knocked on their door canvassing they would listen, smile, be polite, etc. Hell after you left you might think they will be voting for your candidate or cause but when they close the front door they do not give a shit. As long as they can take their vacations once or twice a year and live fairly comfortably they could give a crap less. Sure they will admit things are screwed up all day long but they won't be doing anything about it to rock the boat.

At least the constituitional statists, despite their coercive implied consent tendencies I can not stand, do care to some degree and actually do things sometimes which might rock the boat even if just a little bit.

To clarify a point in my first comment. The reason one does not sue an agency unless it relates to a matter of policy is some principle behind government immunity which is government is not a moral agent capable of doing right or wrong. Only individuals are moral agents capable of doing right or wrong. If a government actor is engaged in wrong doing by exceeding their office then they are not acting in an official government capacity while engaged in wrong doing and are personally liable. They are operating only under color of title, office, or law when engaged in any wrong doing. However since policies are formulated by more than one individual agencies are susceptible to suit for unreasonable policies that infringe against rights. For instance if wrong doing was guided by bad policy one would sue the agency and individual.

Thanks for that Cyril

Portland Oregon. My hometown. These are the folks teaching our children. My children. Whining like a bunch of spoiled children. And they are teaching OUR children.

Because of reasons beyond my control my children attend these Portland PUBLIC Schools.

And I see the result of this teaching in their daily actions. The good news? It's summertime. Dad gets to show them the real world.

I came across a photocopied half page letter from my daughters PPS just the other day. It was dated Oct 25 2013. Stuffed in my youngest girl's school bag. It was related to some incident that happened with a student in the school that threatened some other student. The police had apparently been called. At the end of the short notice are the words, "Together we are a strong and safe community".

I will be checking out the Daily Disinfectant.


So I have been in email contact

with Daylight Disinfectant and perhaps I will help him out. He sounds like my kind of guy.


Cyril's picture

Good !

Good !

Yes. You good folks, please document on.

Document, document, document...

"Cyril" pronounced "see real". I code stuff.


"To study and not think is a waste. To think and not study is dangerous." -- Confucius

Imagine Dr Paul speaking about liberty

Would he care if he was being taped? Hahaha, these people are wasting their time because they don't even believe in their own ideas.

ChristianAnarchist's picture

Haha.. u must b old like me.

Haha.. u must b old like me. Taped is old school. It's "recorded" now. People today don't even remember vcr's..

Beware the cult of "government"...

Rofl!! Yeah ok, I'm mid 40's

I do have a DVR and iPhone :)


There is a trend going around now,of bashing on our founding fathers & calling them vermin & criminals.Then they turn around & defend islam.I did not hear this woman defending islam,but she didn't get far before a very rude audience interrupted the performance by refusing to allow this man to continue documenting her THEORIES for further examination.But she did make claims of the founding fathers "beating & raping women & little girls"......Has she read up much on the islam religion?????In islam,women are considered property.There is much worse then beating & raping happening to islamic mens property.Not that I am condoning beating or raping,but I am sure that most women would rather be beaten that have their genitals mutilated so they can't enjoy sex.
I would just really like to know just what this speakers point was getting at,with this line of thinking......

Her facts are a little off on Jefferson

Sally hemming was probably about 16, not 13, when she and jefferson connected in Paris. Jefferson was a widower by then, and it was not uncommon at all for Rich Men to take younger "concubines", Interestingly She would have been able to stay in france and be free, but chose instead a life with the wealthy and powerful Jefferson. About the same age difference as Dennis Kucinich and his current wife. Also it was common to marry in the teen years in those days because most people would live much past 50. There are other examples of young women using sex to gain advantage from powerful, wealthy men.

Of course the liberals all want to forgive modern day lovers of teenage girls, like Roman Polansky, Rob Lowe, and a few others.

The speaker's 'facts' can't bear scrutiny

The speaker doesn't want video because her historical 'facts' are disputable. We know, for example, that Sally Hemmings was impregnated by someone from Thomas Jefferson's family (DNA evidence supposedly shows that to be true, though there has been some dispute about how absolute DNA evidence can be), but we do not 'know' that it was Thomas Jefferson himself. That's about as close to the truth as science can get us. The speaker, however, states categorically that Thomas Jefferson was the father.

How much else in her speech was over-the-top historical insinuation? We won't know because there is no video record.

"You can get in the way of

"You can get in the way of the free press if you want to". This guy is great, extremely witty and brave, and glad he had a couple supporters in the room. Not all is lost.

Cyril's picture

A (presumably?) "liberal" response (version 2014) springing

A (presumably?) "liberal" response (version 2014) springing from the audience :

"... the founding fathers didn't talk of videotaping [re: 'free press' in the 1st Amendment]..."

(@ 6 mins. 35 secs.)

"Cyril" pronounced "see real". I code stuff.


"To study and not think is a waste. To think and not study is dangerous." -- Confucius

Cyril you rapscallion.

Wie gehts, L'Emmerdeur para mi?

Don't feed the pandas. Ever.

Cyril's picture

I'm sorry!

I'm sorry p:ssed!

"Cyril" pronounced "see real". I code stuff.


"To study and not think is a waste. To think and not study is dangerous." -- Confucius

Just saying hello in my

Way. Didn't mean to be a snuffbumble.

Don't feed the pandas. Ever.

Cyril's picture



Heya :)

"Cyril" pronounced "see real". I code stuff.


"To study and not think is a waste. To think and not study is dangerous." -- Confucius

Cyril's picture



"Cyril" pronounced "see real". I code stuff.


"To study and not think is a waste. To think and not study is dangerous." -- Confucius