Tom,<br> <br> I am not sure where we are disagreeing, unless you think attacking an ROTC building is fine and dandy.<br> <br> You wrote:<br> "The issue that should have been addressed immediately and without hesitation should not necessarily have been the act of burning the flag as much as the statement behind that act."<br> <br> It was, but mostly it had to be behind closed doors because of University Policy and State law protecting the guilty parties.<br> <br> _DJA<br><br><b><i>Tom Hansen <thansen@moscow.com></i></b> wrote:<blockquote class="replbq" style="border-left: 2px solid rgb(16, 16, 255); margin-left: 5px; padding-left: 5px;"> Burning the flag, as despicable an act it may be, is protected by the first<br>amendment.<br><br>Reasons for burning the flag are numerous. <br><br>Those Iranians who burn the flag today, as they did in 1979 (when American<br>Hostages were taken at our embassy in Tehran), do so as an act of defiance<br>against who they
perceived to be the great infidel (the US).<br><br>The anti-war protestors who burned the flag during the mid- to late-sixties<br>did so as an act of defiance against what they perceived to be our<br>government's unethical participation in the Vietnam conflict.<br><br>There are a variety of other instances of flag burning, each possessing a<br>reason unique in and of itself.<br><br>So, you see, Arnold. Burning the flag, as deplorable in my opinion as it<br>is, is simply making a statement, a statement very important to the person<br>burning the flag.<br><br>Arnold goes on to say:<br><br>"So yes, I think someone that burns a US Flag should be watched more<br>carefully . . . "<br><br>They were watched back then and (more than likely) are watched today.<br>Whether it was the Students for a Democratic Society (SDS) on the UC<br>Berkeley campus in 1968 or the Weathermen in Columbus, Ohio in 1970, they<br>were being monitored by illegal wiretaps and unlawful searches of
private<br>property conducted by the FBI.<br><br>Concerning the desecration of the GSA club flag here on the UI campus: In<br>my opinion that was an act of ignorance committed against gay students of<br>the University of Idaho. The issue that should have been addressed<br>immediately and without hesitation should not necessarily have been the act<br>of burning the flag as much as the statement behind that act.<br><br>Tom Hansen<br>Moscow, Idaho<br>UI '96<br><br>"Implicit in the term 'national defense' is the notion of defending those<br>values and ideas which set this Nation apart. . . . It would indeed be<br>ironic if, in the name of national defense, we would sanction the subversion<br>of . . . those liberties . . . which makes the defense of the Nation<br>worthwhile."<br><br>- Chief Justice Earl Warren (1967)<br><br><br><br>=======================================================<br> List services made available by First Step Internet, <br> serving the communities of
the Palouse since 1994. <br> http://www.fsr.net <br> mailto:Vision2020@moscow.com<br>=======================================================<br></blockquote><br><p> __________________________________________________<br>Do You Yahoo!?<br>Tired of spam? Yahoo! Mail has the best spam protection around <br>http://mail.yahoo.com