Interstellar Marines E.A. – Realistic | Solo Assault on Starcrown Aerospace [1/4] – Video

Posted on by


Interstellar Marines E.A. - Realistic | Solo Assault on Starcrown Aerospace [1/4]
http://steamcommunity.com/sharedfiles/filedetails/?id=335811599 [not a scam link, it #39;s a funny picture for interstellar marines] EA stands for Early Access.

By: My Last R For You, My Love

Read more:

Interstellar Marines E.A. - Realistic | Solo Assault on Starcrown Aerospace [1/4] - Video

Aerospace Engineering at Illinois 2015 H.S. Stillwell Memorial Lecture – Video

Posted on by


Aerospace Engineering at Illinois 2015 H.S. Stillwell Memorial Lecture
Dr. David W. Miller, Chief Technologist for the National Aeronautics and Space Administration, delivered the H.S. Stillwell Memorial Lecture for the Department of Aerospace Engineering at the...

By: Aerospace Engineering at Illinois

Read more here:

Aerospace Engineering at Illinois 2015 H.S. Stillwell Memorial Lecture - Video

Mukesh Bhatt Breaks His Silence Over The Censorship Issues Faced By Anushka Sharma’s NH10 – Video

Posted on by


Mukesh Bhatt Breaks His Silence Over The Censorship Issues Faced By Anushka Sharma #39;s NH10
Producer Mukesh Bhatt voices his opinion over the censorship issues that have been going on currently. Watch the video to know more. For more Bollywood, log ...

By: businessofcinema

Read the original:

Mukesh Bhatt Breaks His Silence Over The Censorship Issues Faced By Anushka Sharma's NH10 - Video

University of Oklahoma expulsions may be speech infringement, experts say

Posted on by

The University of Oklahoma, which expelled two Sigma Alpha Epsilon members Tuesday for leading a racist chant, may have infringed on the students right to free speech, some legal experts said.

Two unidentified students were expelled Tuesday forplaying a "leadership role" in a racist chant by SAE brothers at theUniversity of Oklahoma, the university's president announced, following his orders Monday to ban the fraternity from campus and evict the members from the house.

"We will continue our investigation of all the students engaged in the singing of this chant," University President David Boren said in a statement, justifying the expulsionson the grounds that the chant had created a hostile environment for other students. "Once their identities have been confirmed, they will be subject to appropriate disciplinary action."

But at least two legal experts say the fraternitys racist song, although offensive, may be protected by the 1st Amendment.

The irony here is that [Boren is] arguing hes protecting the rights of some students while infringing on the 1st Amendment rights of other students, said Joey Senat, an associate professor who teaches media law at Oklahoma State University in Stillwater. The speech is offensive, the speech is abhorrent, but the 1st Amendment protects unpopular speech.

Eugene Volokh of the Volokh Conspiracy legal blog, agreed. Racist speech is constitutionally protected, just as is expression of other contemptible ideas; and universities may not discipline students based on their speech, Volokh wrote in the Washington Post.That has been the unanimous view of courts that have considered campus speech codes and other campus speech restrictions.

Joe Cohn, legislative and policy director of the Foundation for Individual Rights in Education, a student legal advocacy group based in Philadelphia, called the comments "a plain, vanilla case of protected speech.

I think the university president is betting on the fact that the public won't care because of its distaste for racism, Cohn told The Los Angeles Times.

The expulsionswere the latest fallout from a viral video that emerged Sunday night showing members of the SAE fraternity singing an anti-black chant.

Boren almost immediately banned the SAE fraternity from campus after the video showed members singing "you can hang 'em from a tree" and"there will never be a [n-word] SAE" on a bus.

The rest is here:

University of Oklahoma expulsions may be speech infringement, experts say

Can free speech and blasphemy live together?

Posted on by

Recent killings in Copenhagen and Paris have renewed an age-old debate: Should societies with vigorous traditions in free speech either adopt or strengthen laws against blasphemy?

At least a fifth of all the countries in the world maintain anti-blasphemy laws, according to the Pew Research Centerwhich include several Western European countries such as Denmark, Germany and Italy.

Read MoreJindal's brilliant take on radical Islam

Yet laws against offending the pious have been accompanied by increasing criticism about whether liberal democracies should even entertain them. Although some argue that blasphemy laws actually encourage zealotry, and feed the cycle of religious-inspired violence, international organizations like the United Nations have pushed to criminalize religious defamation.

Secular governments are attempting to grapple with "problems associated with terrorism and fundamentalism," Tomas Byrne, an author and attorney based in Stockholm told CNBC. "The question becomes, if states are trying to respondis there a way to keep the peace?"

Byrne, a native Canadian who was educated at the University of Oxford, worked as a lawyer and banker for 20 years in London. As it happens, the U.K. has become one of Europe's hottest crucibles in the debate betweencultural assimilation and strict interpretations of Islam.

"I don't think the context we have in western society are neutral concepts," said Byrne, who cited the "direct clash" that ensues when religious groups are confronted with speech they deem offensive.

"There's no way to dance around that. In places like Denmark and Germany they have tried to show tolerance by putting in place [blasphemy] lawsand if we live in a society where we want to choose between visions, we have to be able to risk causing offense," Byrne said, asking, "How effectively can you enforce tolerance?"

Freedom House, an independent freedom watchdog organization, wrote in a 2010 report that blasphemy laws "inevitably fail to address the issue of what exactly constitutes blasphemy, leaving enormous discretion in the hands of prosecutors, judges, and accusers who may be influenced by political or personal priorities."

In other words, regardless of how strict laws are preventing blasphemy, their application and interpretation can vary widely from country to country, and lead to dramatically different results. Pakistan, for instance, is notorious for tough enforcement against apostacyyet blasphemy accusations and retributions have surged there in recent years.

Originally posted here:

Can free speech and blasphemy live together?

University Oklahoma expulsions may be speech infringement, experts say

Posted on by

The University of Oklahoma, which expelled two Sigma Alpha Epsilon members Tuesday for leading a racist chant, may have infringed on the students right to free speech, some legal experts said.

Two unidentified students were expelled Tuesday forplaying a "leadership role" in a racist chant by SAE brothers at theUniversity of Oklahoma, the university's president announced, following his orders Monday to ban the fraternity from campus and evict the members from the house.

"We will continue our investigation of all the students engaged in the singing of this chant," University President David Boren said in a statement, justifying the expulsionson the grounds that the chant had created a hostile environment for other students. "Once their identities have been confirmed, they will be subject to appropriate disciplinary action."

But at least two legal experts say the fraternitys racist song, although offensive, may be protected by the 1st Amendment.

The irony here is that [Boren is] arguing hes protecting the rights of some students while infringing on the 1st Amendment rights of other students, said Joey Senat, an associate professor who teaches media law at Oklahoma State University in Stillwater. The speech is offensive, the speech is abhorrent, but the 1st Amendment protects unpopular speech.

Eugene Volokh of the Volokh Conspiracy legal blog, agreed. Racist speech is constitutionally protected, just as is expression of other contemptible ideas; and universities may not discipline students based on their speech, Volokh wrote in the Washington Post.That has been the unanimous view of courts that have considered campus speech codes and other campus speech restrictions.

Joe Cohn, legislative and policy director of the Foundation for Individual Rights in Education, a student legal advocacy group based in Philadelphia, called the comments "a plain, vanilla case of protected speech.

I think the university president is betting on the fact that the public won't care because of its distaste for racism, Cohn told The Los Angeles Times.

The expulsionswere the latest fallout from a viral video that emerged Sunday night showing members of the SAE fraternity singing an anti-black chant.

Boren almost immediately banned the SAE fraternity from campus after the video showed members singing "you can hang 'em from a tree" and"there will never be a [n-word] SAE" on a bus.

Read more:

University Oklahoma expulsions may be speech infringement, experts say