† Since When Is Kidnapping And Rape A Matter For Arbitration?: U.S. District Judge Keith P. Ellison ruled that Jamie Leigh Jones is not bound by an arbitration agreement she signed when she was hired by Halliburton Co. subsidiary KBR and can sue over claims that she was drugged and raped by co-workers at Camp Hope, Baghdad, in 2005, reports The Associated Press. Halliburton's attorneys argued that the employment agreement Jones signed compelled her to arbitrate claims against the company “that in any way touch on his or her employment.”  

† It’s Only Racist When Don Imus Says It: In February 2007, columnist Kathleen Parker detailed an Equal Employment Opportunity Commission (EEOC) discrimination complaint filed by Elizabeth Kandrac, a white teacher in Brentwood Middle School in North Charleston (SC), because of continual verbal abuse by black students that made Don Imus “look like a church deacon.” Now, Townhall.com columnist Mary Grabar explains why white teachers in public schools dare not discipline black students for unruly, disruptive or disrespectful behavior that Rev. Jeremiah Wright describes as a “different learning style.” More shocking, when a black student assaults a teacher liberal pedagogists chalk it up to “racial determinism, the idea that one’s behavior is the result of society’s injustices,” writes Grabar, adding:

[I]nterviewed on National Public Radio by Terry Gross in June 2007, Frank Burd, a Philadelphia math teacher … [demonstrated that a teacher] can say, “Put the iPod away” … as a command, and then in a nice, sensitive way. Ms. Gross, a former teacher herself, agreed that it is important that students know teachers are not “disrespecting” them.

But, some months earlier, when Burd asked a student to turn off his loud iPod, the 60-year-old teacher suffered a broken neck, brain damage, and a shoulder injury, his lesson for not making the request sensitively enough, apparently.

Teachers are also encouraged to display cultural sensitivity in their curriculums. Burd’s colleague, Ed Klein, a music teacher … undertook a course of study on the high art form of rap music and incorporated it into his curriculum. …

For calling in a parent one too many times, the 55-year-old Klein suffered a broken jaw. But that was after the perpetrator had come in two days in a row and sprayed him with a fire extinguisher, then told him on the third day that he would be killed, and on the fourth day, “ain’t nothing you can do about this, cracker.” It was on the fifth day that Klein was beaten. …

Terry Gross asked Klein and Burd, both white, about students “testing” teachers, and whether race was a “subtext.” Well, no, said Klein, “aside from the fact that I was referred to as ‘cracker’ numerous times.”

† Incarcerated Murderer Sues To Continue Sex Change Treatments: Harold Clarke, who heads the MA Department of Corrections filed a court statement outlining his objections to convicted killer Michelle Kosilek (née Robert) receiving the surgical and hormonal treatments needed to complete his sex change, reports The Associated Press:

“[B]ased on my review of the designated trial testimony and my many years of experience as a corrections professional, I believe that the safety and security concerns presented by the prospect of undertaking sex reassignment surgery for Michelle Kosilek are insurmountable.”

These include making him a target for assault by other inmates, and making it easier for him to escape if taken out of state to receive the surgery.

In 2002 U.S. District Judge Mark Wolf ruled in Kosilek’s favor in a lawsuit claiming that the prison system’s refusal to allow the sex change – which would be paid for by taxpayers – was cruel and unusual punishment.

Kosilek filed a second suit in 2005, because hormone treatments, laser hair removal and psychotherapy were inadequate, and he needed surgery.

† The Other Shoe Drops (“What Freedom Of Speech Means To Muslims, third item): In a speech at Stanford University Flemming Rose, culture editor of Jyllands-Posten, took American newspapers to task for not republishing the “Danish cartoons” of the Prophet Muhammad that sparked murderous riots worldwide by “outraged” Muslims two years ago. Here's a snippet of his comments, according to The New York Sun:

“Europe has usually been criticized for being politically correct and on the defense when it comes to Islam, but more European newspapers published the cartoons. We might not have had the kind of ongoing crisis if more newspapers around the world would have published the cartoons at the same time because by doing so you would have drawn a clear line. ... Instead, it was pretty unclear what people in liberal democracies thought of this issue.”

Rose, who received death threats and faces criminal charges over the cartoons, also noted, “It reads on the top of The New York Times, ‘All the News That’s Fit to Print,’ but it’s very hard to argue that this was not news on February 1, 2006.” Rose added that The Times later admitted to concerns that its foreign correspondents could have been endangered, but didn’t tell their readers this was the reason for their self-censorship.  

San Francisco Chronicle columnist Debra Saunders writes about her paper’s decision not to republish the cartoons, and how she wrestled with the decision at the time:

Then-Chronicle Managing Editor Robert Rosenthal wrote, “We always weigh the value of the journalistic impact against the impact that publication might have as far as insulting or hurting certain groups. In this case, we described the cartoons and felt that was sufficient.”

It was a controversy so complicated that it gave many opinion-makers - including me - pause.

On the one hand, any newspaper person will defend and must defend the right to run a cartoon that offends people. The day we fail to run opinion lest we offend anyone, we should pack it up.

On the other hand, newspapers regularly exercise self-censorship. If I were an opinion page editor, I would not run a cartoon that gratuitously insults members of any religion.

When you offend people's sensibilities - and I seem to do so every week - at least you should do so to make a larger point. The Danish cartoons seemed the journalistic equivalent of waving a red flag in front of a bull.

Saunders interviewed Rose after his speech at Stanford and had a change of heart:

I emerged from that meeting righteous in the belief that we in the media ought to be a little less concerned with Rose's manners and far more concerned about those who seek to intimidate and silence those who express opinions they don't like.

This February, Danish authorities arrested three men for plotting to behead cartoonist Kurt Westergaard, who drew a cartoon depicting Muhammad wearing a bomb as a turban. In solidarity, two years after the 2006 riots, 17 Danish newspapers reprinted the cartoon.

Rose noted that the plot to kill the cartoonist proved the cartoonist's point: "They are basically saying, 'If you say we are violent, we are going to kill you.'" …

To Rose, who has been highly critical of the “victim-ology” practiced by radical imams living in Europe, the belief that criticizing Muhammad is incendiary is Islamophobic.

Rose warned against newspapers giving into intimidation by loudmouths who want to quash dissenting opinions.

“If you give into intimidation, you will not get less intimidation, you will get more intimidation.”

As Rose told The Sun, every day U.S. papers publish cartoons that are far more offensive than the ones he published. Yeah, well, our intrepid cartoonists prefer to exercise their free speech rights by taking on “safe” targets, such as Christians and conservatives.

† The Other Shoe Drops (“Desperate Congressional Candidate Fakes Disappearance,” second item): Former Dem congressional candidate Gary Dodds, sentenced in March to 20 days in jail and a year of home confinement for faking his own disappearance, has violated his bail conditions and will now be monitored for the next 45 days via global-positioning system to ensure he obeys a curfew that bars him from leaving his home between 10 p.m. and 6 a.m., reports The Associated Press. Dodds, who had been allowed remain at liberty until while he appealed his conviction, was subjected to the more restrictive conditions after his wife reported that he had moved out of their home and had thrown her to the floor during an argument.