Snagglepuss

Bonehead is right. Is it not a possibility that Sannes falls under the category of miscriant just because he's young? If he were speaking before a fresh batch of recruits, just about to go into training, would one be forever banned from such assemblies if one asked the question Sannes did? I think not.

Sannes is young, and that fact automatically brands him as a trouble-maker in the minds of many people--coincidentally, the same people that don't have any common sense. At all. The same people that scoff at the notion that there are oriental people that don't eat rice, white people that don't golf, and black people that don't listen to rap. You must know that, just because of factors which we have no control over, people are stereotyped.

Sannes was stereotyped because he wanted to ask a serious question, but it was asked at the wrong time. Now, please refer to the quote I have from Bonehead.

And no one should raise their hand, because no one is perfect; Sannes is only human, he's not God. He was simply wondering what kind the harsh reality of life is like, maybe even wondering what he might have been getting into, if he sought a military career. But because of a factor he had no control over, his question is taken the wrong way. As I said, if this was a soldier who had just signed up and was about to go into training, would his superiors take such a shock? Or would they see the question for what it really was--a question, and not some cruel joke?

__________________
You're unique, just like everybody else.

Snagglepuss

Hey, HERE'S a thought! Why don't you CONSULT a few ninth graders? With the knowledge from them, your words would make you seem more intelligent.

There IS always someone to impress, Eric. Good job.

But there is always someone who really doesn't care.

You're unique, just like everybody else...

Parihaka

Hmmm, lets see. Hero comes to school to tell schoolchildren about himself. Child out the back sits patiently through the talk and at the end raises his hand and says "excuse me sir but did you take it up the Ass?"
10 out of 10 for cheek,
0 out of 10 for brains,
punishment extremely likely.

Snagglepuss

Parihaka, those were most certainly not the words given in the article. Did Sannes ask those words, as many adults wish he would have? No, he worded it a bit more sensibly.

Either way, he was still asking a question that would help people intending to go into the armed forces to better understand that war isn't anything like Cremepuffsville. Now, if he had said it as you have, there would be something to be upset about. But the way he asked it (or at least the way it was presented to me), was, "Were you raped during your capture?"

As I said before, I think this entire situation would have been handled much differently if this was a group of recruits about to go into training. The fact that he's young causes some people (a lot of people, it seems) to interpret the question wrong.

Scenario:
An online friend gets a book I want before I do.
My response when I find out:
I'm going to kill you.

Am I actually going to kill my friend? Or was I just playing around?

Was Sannes actually wondering what Black Hawk pilot Durant had to suffer through? Or was he just playing around?

Without having been there, without having seen the expression on his face, without having heard the tone of his voice, we cannot know. It can be interpretted either way; I'm just assuming he was serious because of

1. He's somewhere between the ages of 13 and 15. That's about the time to start thinking about one's career, isn't it?

2. When someone asks a serious question in a newspaper article, no one says it's a serious question. If someone jokes in one, however, it is somehow stated that the speaker was joking. I saw no indication in the article that Sannes was joking when he asked his question.

Parihaka

Is he seriously asking the hero whether he was raped because as a 13 yr old he was interested in a future occupation of being raped? Or is he concerned about being raped should he join the military services? Perhaps he has a serious concern about locker-room hi-jinks escalating to innapropriate touching? What a jolly serious child this young fellow must be in your scenario, he needs a good detention or two just to get him to lighten up.
Oh, and we can't tell with what intent he asked the question? His Principal obviously can.

Monk

This is the most insanely idiotic analogy of what happened in this case. We are all dumber for having heard this, Thank you.

The quest for truth. BAhhh!

__________________
"Many forms of Government have been tried, and will be tried in this world of sin and woe. No one pretends that democracy is perfect or all-wise. Indeed, it has been said that democracy is the worst form of Government except all those others that have been tried from time to time. "

"Although prepared for martyrdom, I preferred that it be postponed."

Sir Winston Churchill

Monk

You are missing the point. It is immaterial whether the kid was trying to be funny or not. His question was wrong. Period.

There is no "quest for knowledge" here. And he most certainly is not going to be "emotionally scarred" for the rest of his life due to the suspension.

Monk

Bluesman's terms are not directed at me, therefore it is not for me to record my objections. Read what I said again "free speech is about self-regulation". It is for us to do the right thing.

Monk

Snagglepuss,

I have a little questionaire for you to fill up if you can,

1) Why was a 14-yr old boy most interested in that aspect of the whole episode?
2) Why is it that he felt it was the most appropriate question to ask the soldier?
3) What are his thoughts about rape?
4) What fascinates him so much about rape, that he feels the urge to question a national hero on the subject?
5) How would Durant's answer have been educative to the boy in any manner?

I am not concerned about whether the boy was a smart alec or not, in fact I am not even implying that. But to justify making statements or forming questions of this nature and justifying it as "Free-Speech" is serious degradation of societal norms.
One can hardly be restrained for fighting for the right cause like Rosa Parks did. But a question which is directed at a very personal and traumatic aspect of one's life and which can possibly serve no purpose such as "quest for knowledge" is not appropriate. The boy should have excercised the self-regulation which becomes a responibility with free speech.

Monk

The boy was socially inadept, his father was not. Why is he defending his son's words? "Quest for knowledge" hey?

Ray

THL

Is the speaker going to have additional emotional scarring because of the students question? I am sure that he has dealt wonderfully with his ordeal since he is out there making public apearences and one little question from a 14 yo is not going to push him to the point of no return. The speaker did not push for the kids punishment, he did not request that the child be punished. He publicly said he would not answer the question and moved on.

If this had been an adult, I can see a punishment. This child should have been coached on proper social etiquette.

__________________
"To dream of the person you would like to be is to waste the person you are."-Sholem Asch

"I always turn to the sports page first, which records people's accomplishments. The front page has nothing but man's failures."-Earl Warren

"I didn't intend for this to take on a political tone. I'm just here for the drugs."-Nancy Reagan, when asked a political question at a "Just Say No" rally

"He no play-a da game, he no make-a da rules."-Earl Butz, on the Pope's attitude toward birth control

Monk

This statement is unacceptable to me. Any question which does not stand up to some fundamental moral code (self imposed not by restriction) is inappropriate whatever may be its impact on the one facing the question. What would be the impact or how the person handles it is secondary, primary is our responsibilty to ourselves. And for the record, the boy's father is a moron, his ineptitude in handling the situation is galling.

1) I agree, the boy's father should have been punished too.
2) which is what I believe was done in a manner he wont forget anytime soon.

THL

Snaggle- If you see this comment by Bluesman as being "barbaric" and "hurtful" - Sweetie, you are in the wrong place. If you are looking for a bunch of nice, soft, fluffy, pink comments you are setting yourself up for a HUGE dissappointment.

Also, directing this comment @ Monk appears to be an attempt to turn members against eachother or to get someone "on your side". Probably not a good idea. There are people here that already agree with you, I have agreed with much of what you have said myself, for example.

bonehead

Maybe the father is the only person who has heard BOTH sides of the story (from his son and the vice principle) Have You heard both sides of the story Monk? I didn't think so. If any one knows the boys true intentions, it would be the father. Not you, not me, or anyone else on this board. The only info we know is from tidbits from the Associated Press. In case you have not learned yet the press is good at leaving out relevant details and slanting stories to make the readers jump to the wrong conclusion. Shock value sell in the news. Ho hum stories do not.