Bay Area students wear Stars-&-Stripes to class

[Prince of the North]

You can disagree all you want, but the district has already said the principal was wrong. By making the decision that he did, the principal violated the Constitutional rights of these students.

I don't think it's an acceptable position to say that the principal was between a rock and a hard spot. We have no evidence that 5 students wearing American flags would have escalated into violence. Zero. None. But now, because the principal acted irresponsibly, we have cops lining the school to protect the white students from Latino gangs. We have rednecks driving by the school flashing the American flag.

That is SO much better than five students eating peaceably at the lunch room table wearing an American flag.

I think I'll take you up on that and disagree with you again :) In my opinion the District is covering its ass after the fact by throwing the Principal under the bus. I don't think it's an acceptable position to hold against the Principal the fact that he did not possess 100% clear foresight that 5 students wearing American flags as an "in-your-face" statement on Cinco de Mayo would not have escalated into violence. You, of course, have the benefit of 20-20 hindsight that the Principal did not have.

Think about this: What if the Principal had simply thought nothing of it, it's just freedom of expression, that nothing would happen, etc. and violence had ensued? What possible repercussions could there be for the Principle in that case? I'm of the opinion, for starters, that the District would be loudly decrying the Principal as being wrong then as well ;) Although, in hindsight, it would have been the smart way to go. Then, at least, the Principal could just throw up his hands and mutter "Well, I'll be damned, I didn't think that would happen!"

[TheKassi]

Think about this: What if the Principal had simply thought nothing of it, it's just freedom of expression, that nothing would happen, etc. and violence had ensued? What possible repercussions could there be for the Principle in that case?

None, that would have been the fault of those that started the violence absent any sort of provocation.

I'm of the opinion, for starters, that the District would be loudly decrying the Principal as being wrong then as well

Ridiculously unlikely. I find it extremely unreasonable to argue that a school district would have released a statement saying a bunch of kids should have been sent home for wearing the American flag, particularly if they just got assaulted for wearing an American flag to school.

Such an action would be dumber then the action of this administrator.

On the other side of the table, I doubt the distract would release a statement saying the administrator should have expected a bunch of Hispanic kids to kick off a riot absent provocation, and acted to prevent the hot blooded Latino eruption of violence.

The politically correct thing to do in this situation is to assume that the innocuous personal expressions on both sides wouldn't provoke more then raised eyebrows. That, and lets be real for a second. It isn't like they couldn't have watched the small group of kids to see if the situation escalated in the slightest. Waited for someone to shout "Mexico/America sucks!" before sending kids home ect.

These kids were not the crips and the bloods, ready to start shooting at each other at the drop of the hat. Treating them as such is stupid.

[Doran Doran]

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=yGqPo5ofk0s

Californian history teacher explains what this is all about. Everything becomes clear.

[Former Lord of Winterfell]

I disagree with you on this particular ground. I'd be interested in seeing if there's been any polls in the last year or two. I know Zogby carried out a poll in 2002 which claimed 58% of Mexicans felt that way, but I think I vaguely recall some arguments regarding his sampling in that particular case.

Let's assume the sampling is off, and the the meme of Aztlan/reconquista/irridentism is supported by only 50%. I think that is a monstrously huge problem. And if you are an American citizen, of any ethnic background, I could see why that would be a major concern. We don't know if those boys in that school saw some of that opinion refelcted within their own school or not. Though given the percentage, I'd be inclined to believe they must have. And if that was what induced them to make their statement, I can't say I blame them too much.

Of course, there remains the possibility that they are just racist assholes as well. We can't know for sure. But there is a virtue in all this because that attitude needs to be brought out in the open, discussed, and addressed. I've never been a fan of the idea that Americans should be hyphenated. But if they are, then those preferring to use that hyphen should be able to draw the line between cultural pride and national loyalty.

[Ran]

Let's assume the sampling is off, and the the meme of Aztlan/reconquista/irridentism is supported by only 50%.

Uhm. The sampling could be hugely off. I don't know, but I don't trust any numbers until I can verify them. I'd like to see a fresh poll, in any case.

Until then, all signs that I can see is that this is fringe stuff. The vast majority of people in MEChA chapters in universities across the U.S., for example, are not aware of this radical-era manifesto, or interpret it to be figurative rather than literal, and the NCLR has repeatedly supported legislation to improve border control (with an eye towards preventing needless deaths in the desert, or employment abuses).

[Prince of the North]

None, that would have been the fault of those that started the violence absent any sort of provocation.

So, let me get this straight. You don't think a Principal, who is ultimately responsible for ensuring safety on their campus, would be held responsible if violence erupted?

Ridiculously unlikely. I find it extremely unreasonable to argue that a school district would have released a statement saying a bunch of kids should have been sent home for wearing the American flag, particularly if they just got assaulted for wearing an American flag to school.

Such an action would be dumber then the action of this administrator.

On the other side of the table, I doubt the distract would release a statement saying the administrator should have expected a bunch of Hispanic kids to kick off a riot absent provocation, and acted to prevent the hot blooded Latino eruption of violence.

The politically correct thing to do in this situation is to assume that the innocuous personal expressions on both sides wouldn't provoke more then raised eyebrows. That, and lets be real for a second. It isn't like they couldn't have watched the small group of kids to see if the situation escalated in the slightest. Waited for someone to shout "Mexico/America sucks!" before sending kids home ect.

These kids were not the crips and the bloods, ready to start shooting at each other at the drop of the hat. Treating them as such is stupid.

I don't even know what you're saying in the first paragraph above. In no way did I say that. What I said was that I think the Principal would be thrown under the bus by the District if violence had ensued just like he was thrown under the bus when there was an uproar that some US flag-wearing kids' freedom of expression was infringed upon.

However, you keep saying there was "no provocation". This is blatantly false. The kids wearing the US flag chose to do so on Cinco de Mayo for the express purpose of sending a message to the hispanics celebrating the holiday. To say or imply otherwise is what's actually stupid if you want to point out what's stupid. My contention has been and will always be that the Principal was in a no-win situation. They are being criticized for somehow infringing on the US flag wearing students' freedom of expression (even though said expression was possibly incendiary) and they would also be criticized if violence had ensued and they had done nothing. You are yet another who seems to enjoy judging the Principal with the benefit of 20-20 hindsight that he, of course, did not have.

[moirne]

Well I guess this should be a lesson to us to never wear anything that is in direct opposition to a holiday. It's amazing how censored and politically correct America has become.

[Noontidal]

Well I guess this should be a lesson to us to never wear anything that is in direct opposition to a holiday. It's amazing how censored and politically correct America has become.

Whoa, I find that offensive, and you said that with the intent of inciting... how dare you!

(administrators, please remove this person before violence occurs relating to her deliberate intent to incite)

[moirne]

I do hope you're kidding ;)

[TerraPrime]

Well I guess this should be a lesson to us to never wear anything that is in direct opposition to a holiday. It's amazing how censored and politically correct America has become.

If the best you can lob at the other side is accusing us of being "politically correct," you should consider finding a better line of argument.

Like, if you were right, then why would we even care? That'd be like me calling the Pope up and tell him "But you're Catholic!!"

[moirne]

That's not really my argument, just an observation. I felt like a little sarcasm was in order considering how heated this debate had become.

[Snarfy]

However, you keep saying there was "no provocation". This is blatantly false. The kids wearing the US flag chose to do so on Cinco de Mayo for the express purpose of sending a message to the hispanics celebrating the holiday. To say or imply otherwise is what's actually stupid if you want to point out what's stupid. My contention has been and will always be that the Principal was in a no-win situation. They are being criticized for somehow infringing on the US flag wearing students' freedom of expression (even though said expression was possibly incendiary) and they would also be criticized if violence had ensued and they had done nothing. You are yet another who seems to enjoy judging the Principal with the benefit of 20-20 hindsight that he, of course, did not have.

Where did you read that it was coming to violence? They were sitting at a picnic table talking amongst themselves when they were sent to the principles office. And it doesn't take hindsight to see that telling kids to stop wearing American flags would cause a huge debate. To miss that one takes stupidity.

Were the kids pushing other peoples buttons? yes. But the big question is SO WHAT? If these people are so easily offended i don't feel sorry for them in the slightest, but than again do we know what the people at the school thought? Did they even care? All we know is one stupid, overly pc principle has no foresight.

[S John]

The funny thing is that by sending them home the 'PC' principal gave them exactly what they wanted, a bone to pick. If he had ignored them we wouldn't even know about this.

I will say this, I am absolutely not one of your shut down the border at all costs, they took our jobs!, minuteman sympathizing types. I don't have it in me to hold it against someone for seeking out work and a better life for their family. However, I also believe in free speech, and if the only way you can construe something as non-protected speech is by conjuring up a fairly unlikely scenario then that speech shouldn't be restricted. Especially something like wearing a shirt with the flag of your country on it, while in that country. It is beyond ridiculous that these kids were sent home and it played right into the hands of those who were just waiting to say, 'see, I told ya so!'

Reminds me quite a bit of the hysteria over drawings of Mohammed. Its OK now to restrict free speech whenever we are afraid? I'd say that flies in the face of the whole concept.

[TheKassi]

So, let me get this straight. You don't think a Principal, who is ultimately responsible for ensuring safety on their campus, would be held responsible if violence erupted?

No. First off, fights happen all the time in high schools, no one gets fired. Second, absent escalation there is no reason to suspect that there may have been violence. Third, unexpected eruptions happen without the administration paying for it. See almost every school shooting.

I don't even know what you're saying in the first paragraph above. In no way did I say that. What I said was that I think the Principal would be thrown under the bus by the District if violence had ensued just like he was thrown under the bus when there was an uproar that some US flag-wearing kids' freedom of expression was infringed upon.

Which means that the school district would have to release a statement saying that the administrator was wrong for not sending kids home for wearing the American flag. There is no other way to throw the administrator under the bus in this hypothetical.

However, you keep saying there was "no provocation". This is blatantly false. The kids wearing the US flag chose to do so on Cinco de Mayo for the express purpose of sending a message to the hispanics celebrating the holiday. To say or imply otherwise is what's actually stupid if you want to point out what's stupid.

Sitting at a table wearing a flag t-shirt and eating brunch isn't provocation to kick off a riot or commit acts of violence. Thus if acts of violence had been committed, or a riot started, it would have been unprovoked. Try to hype this any way you want, but that does not change.

The administrator was not in a no win situation. Had they done nothing this wouldn't be a news story. They overreacted and turned a non-event into a national story.