Student Suspended for Broken Pencil Sharpener

Hilton Head Island International Baccalaureate Elementary School officials have supplied yet another example of blind mindless application of policies. They has suspended a student for having a broken pencil sharpener.


The boy — a fourth-grader had no criminal intent and merely brought a broke sharpener to school. Officials in South Carolina treated the exposed razor as a weapon.

For the full story, click here.

99 thoughts on “Student Suspended for Broken Pencil Sharpener

  1. Hi rafflaw,

    I would like to go through the footnotes before making a judgement. I want to see if they are reliable sources that support his claims. I believe he is saying that our own govt. faked those calls. From a technological standpoint I believe he is correct that cell phone use in planes at that altitude was not all that feasible in 2001. Airlines have only been advertising the use of cell phones on planes, since around 2005? I do know they had to refine the tech capabilities to get them to work. You might want to look up Coleen Rowley, a whistleblower at the FBI and also Sibel Edmonds who can’t get her case to court due to “state secrets”.

    CroMM,

    I just hope JT is O.K. and not in an undisclosed location or goin’ huntin’ with dick cheney.

  2. rafflaw,

    “It is pretty hard to accept some of what he stated.”

    There’s the rub.

    Are you sufficiently self-aware to realize which arguments you’ll assent to and which ones you won’t? More importantly, are you aware of your reasons why?

    Up to now you’ve no doubt swallowed quite a few counter-factual premises.

    Example of ‘swallowing’ a counter-factual premise:

    1. All celestial bodies are made of green cheese.

    2. The moon is a celestial body.

    3. The moon is made of green cheese.

    Jet fuel melts steel?

    Steel can remain in a molten state for six months without a sustained source of heat greater than the heat of fusion?

    In the history of architecture, only three steel buildings in the world have ever ‘collapsed as a result of fire’ and they did so on the same day?

    Buildings collapse entirely at nearly the speed of free fall without any help of demolition devices?

    Did you like that last Indiana Jones movie; where Jones survives a nuclear blast by hiding in a refrigerator?

    Like I said, it all boils down to what you’re willing to believe and why.

    Regards,

    Bob

  3. I received a free DVD with my newspsper today, called Obsession, Radical Islam’s war against the West endorsed by several right wing sites (one linked below). The DVD shows a picture of the twin towers after they were burnt with the American flag. On the flyer it says: “Obsession is a film about the threat of Radical Islam to Western Civilization…it reveals…their incitement of global jihad, and their goal of world domination…The film also traces the parallels between the Nazi movement of WWII…” Funny how that comes right around 9/ll and the election. It obviously took a great deal of money to distribute this whole thing.

    P.S., CroMM, If I had to put money on it I’d say JT was sacrificing animals to crocodiles in exchange for a blessing!

    http://www.libertyfilmfestival.com/index.php?option=com_content&task=view&id=13&Itemid=30

  4. Jill,
    I saw postings on that DVD yesterday on another site.
    Bob, ESq., I have progressed beyond the green cheese theory. I do know which arguments I could understand and believe and I do know which ones I could not. Your example of the steel building melting and the freefall are examples of ones that I cannot buy into.
    CMM,
    I was also wondering why there was no new postings. I am sure that Prof. Turley is simply having a family weekend without having to deal with us!

  5. Jill
    1, September 14, 2008 at 3:52 pm

    You might want to look up Coleen Rowley, a whistleblower at the FBI

    Thats the FBI agent who reported on the terrorists learning to fly jets that got transferred that I was referring to Raff.

  6. rafflaw,

    This is from Sibel Edmond’s website: August 1, 2004: Sibel Edmond’s Letter to Chairman Thomas Kean found at:

    http://www.justacitizen.com/

    It makes for very interesting reading touching on 9/ll and even Gitmo.

    It did look like that DVD has been “released” a great many places.

  7. Jill, CMM, I have read about Rawley before and also about Sibel Edmonds.I will look at the link to Edmonds letter to Kean. The DVD has been issued in thousands of newpapers throught the country.

  8. Bob, Esq.,

    The term “conspiracy theory” has a meaning in plain English that is not dependent on the meaning of “conspiracy” in law. It is disingenuous for you to try to impose a legal definition on what is obviously a plain-English discourse. (It is also futile for you to try to impose your will on the terms I do or do not use.)

    You may be a lawyer, but I’m a semantician.
    Semanticians eat lawyers for breakfast.

    (I add that last bit since I always escalate ad hominem attacks.)

  9. Thanks, Jonathan, for providing this blog. You have many interesting tidbits that I don’t find elsewhere.

    I’ll not bother to post here anymore (as activecatalyst or otherwise), though, because you have too many bottom-feeders who resort to personal attacks at the drop of a hat.

  10. Mark P. Line
    1, September 15, 2008 at 2:15 pm

    You may be a lawyer, but I’m a semantician.

    😐

    Religion has nothing to do with it.

  11. Mark P. Line
    1, September 15, 2008 at 2:15 pm

    Semanticians eat lawyers for breakfast.

    That seems rather extreme.
    😐

    Couldn’t you guys just do the fish on Friday thingy?

  12. “Zero Tolerance (of error/abuse)” philosophy strikes again. Sure one of the stupidest notions to come out of the 90’s, but even forced upon the people at NASA. And you see how well THAT worked!

  13. Mark P. Line:

    “The term “conspiracy theory” has a meaning in plain English that is not dependent on the meaning of “conspiracy” in law. It is disingenuous for you to try to impose a legal definition on what is obviously a plain-English discourse. (It is also futile for you to try to impose your will on the terms I do or do not use.)”

    Not dependent on the legal definition?

    “A theory seeking to explain a disputed case or matter as a plot by a secret group or alliance rather than an individual or isolated act.”

    “a theory that explains an event or set of circumstances as the result of a secret plot by usually powerful conspirators”

    Perhaps you mean to say that the term “conspiracy theory” is a ‘plain English’ term imbued with a connotation of being ‘unworthy of any further critical analysis?’

    I’d call that disingenuous; wouldn’t you?

    “You may be a lawyer, but I’m a semantician. Semanticians eat lawyers for breakfast.”

    So you’re familiar with predicate logic?

    http://www.seop.leeds.ac.uk/entries/kant-judgment/

    “The question, famed of old, by which logicians were
    supposed to be driven into a corner, obliged either to have
    recourse to a pitiful sophism, or to confess their ignorance
    and consequently the emptiness of their whole art, is the
    question: What is truth? The nominal definition of truth,
    that it is the agreement of knowledge with its object, is
    assumed as granted; the question asked is as to what is
    the general and sure criterion of the truth of any and every
    knowledge.”

Comments are closed.