PS 214 Sec C - Group 4: "The Balancing Act"

PS 214 Sec C - Group 4: "The Balancing Act": As Celina had mentioned every group member covered that 60 people had been taken into custody because of terrorism acts out of 1000.

Kellie had mentioned a very good topic on the video that explained in order to arrest someone in all cases including terrorism there needs to be probably cause and there needs to be some correlation and connection between the suspect and the events. she also mentioned that authorities should be more definite and take more time in making the arrest.

Chris had brought up that the U.S. constitutes that all citizens have the right to a speedy trial and finds it interesting that the gov. can detain an individual without any evidence or the presents of a lawyer.

I believe that the government and authorities should look at the act of terrorism a bit more seriously cause it's tough to make out an actual terrorist from someone else who could have done it but didn't and I think you see a lot of that happening where they get the wrong group or people and that they should clean up there act and get things right cause its a pretty serious situation that they deal with considering it could affect the country.

"The Balancing Act"

For this weeks assignment, everyone that posted, focused mostly on the 60 people that had been taken into custody because of terrorism acts. I like how Kellie talked about the question of if we had the right to detain those 60 people, then explained how there needs to be probable cause and there needs to be some correlation or connection between the suspect and the events that occured in order to detain them.

Another good point that Kellie brought up was how we mistake innocent people for being terrorists, or being involved in terrorist acts just simply based on their ethnicity. She talks about a white American being capable of commiting the same crime. This is true, yet we would never suspect them of such an act simply because they are American.

I liked the quote that Chris put in, "you detain captured enemies not becuse they've committed a crime, but to remove them from the battle field." I think this statement is probably very true. The more enemies you have detained, then the less you have to worry about on the battle field. It creates less of a threat, and it gives the government more of a chance to pry answers out of the detained enemies.

I found this video interesting. The first segment of the video mentions the captures of 60 people who were taken in custody by the U.S. government after being lessened from a list of 1000. An interesting question that was asked during this segment was “is the U.S. a battle zone? If so is it okay to enforce military law? Juliette talked about the care of those people early in the segment she states “all we got is a piece of critical information of some guys who maybe fit the descriptions of the act.” Although Viet Dinh believes that’s a reasonable with the actions of the government he states “you can’t keep these guys in a whole forever and expect the public or constitution to ignore it.” In regards to that statement Joseph reply by stating “you detain captured enemies not because they’ve commit a crime but to remove them from the battle field.” Which is interesting because the government don’t have access to any solid evidence that’s indicates these people are enemies.
Later in the video they talked about the due process of law. According to the U.S. constitution all citizens have the right of a speedy trail. I find it interesting how the Gov. can detain an individual without any evidence or the presents of a lawyer.

Week 5 Blog

I found the video segments interesting because I always like to hear about things that are going on around us that maybe need a little more attention. The first segment explained terrorist acts such as injecting toxins in food in stores, and suicude bombings. It also stated that 60 people had been taken into custody in relation to terrorism acts, which is what much of this video was talking about.
One important topic that was brought up was the question of whether we had the right to detain those 60 people, and how did we narrow it down from 1000 suspects, to those 60? They explained that in order to arrest someone in all cases including terrorism, there needs to be probable cause, and there needs to be some correlation and connection between the suspect and the events. Innocent people may fit the characteristics of the guilty perfectly, and I think there should be more defined, specific characteristics that could tie someone to the event. I think the authorities should be definite and take more time in making an arrest. On the other hand, I think questioning a possible suspect is a good thing to take the correct precautions, especially with such a serious problem. The video also stated that we shouldnt hold people for longer than needed. For example, after someone is questioned and there is no evidence for probable cause, let them go, but be sure of that decision.
Another important point they touched on was the exaplme they gave of the man who went to a foreign country and came back and was immediately questioned because of a terrorist act that had happened. In that case, he may have just been in the wrong place at the wrong time. Ethnicity may have played a factor in the authorities suspicions, because many people put a face to people they think will commit these types of crimes, when in reality for instance, a white American is capable of committing the same types of crimes. I think we are too bias when it comes to placing people with certain crimes.

2/8/11

According to the Declaration of independence all men are created equal, that they are endowed by their Creator with certain unalienable Rights, that among these are Life, Liberty and the pursuit of Happiness. — That to secure these rights, Governments are instituted among Men, deriving their just powers.
Both Brandon and Jess talked about the religious aspect of Law as Jess stated “Everything that is written in this time period has religious influences in it”. He then went on to ask If God should be in involve in government?
Kellie brought up these interesting facts which I found interesting.
1. "He has compelled her to submit to laws, in the formation of which she had no voice.”
2. "He has made her, if married, in the eye of the law, civilly dead.”
3. “He has denied her the facilities for obtaining a thorough education- all colleges being closed against her.”

Declaration of Sentiments

This weeks assignment was about women's rights, and specifically the Declaration of Sentiments. Brandon listed the reasoning's for the Declaration of Sentiments such as life, liberty, and the pursuit of happiness. He also talked about the religious aspect of the Declaration, and how women felt "aggrieved, oppressed and fraudulently deprived of their most sacred rights."

Kellie found it interesting how it explained that women didn't have equal rights and how men used to be superior to women. She listed three facts that she found important. One being "He has made her, if married, in the eye of the law, civilly dead." She also talked about how she couldn't imagine living in a world where those kinds of things happened to her. I agree with her on that, I couldn't imagine living in a world like that either.

Lastly, Jesse talked about the incorporation of religion in the sentiments, and stated that everything written in that time period had religious influences. He too listed the same quote as Brandon about life, liberty, and the pursuit of happiness. He also listed a link to a good website about referring to God in the government.

I think the most important part of this Declaration of Sentiments is the quote "all men and women are created equal" This was the whole reason for this Declaration, and for women fighting for equal rights. If everyone is created equal, then women should have the same rights as men. No questions asked.

2/4/11

I believe an important piece of information that is mentioned throughout these sentiments and resolutions is the incorporation of religion. Everything that is written in this time period has religious influences in it. "We hold these truths to be self-evident: that all men and women are created equal; that they are endowed by their Creator with certain inalienable rights; that among these are life, liberty, and the pursuit of happiness; that to secure these rights governments are instituted, deriving their just powers from the consent of the governed." This is just a small piece of the many references to God and a "higher power". I have found a website that has some good points when referring to God in the government. Click Here to go to that link.

Declaration of Sentiments

One part of this that I found interesting was how it explains how women didn't have equal rights and then it goes on to explain how men used to be superior to women. It explains "the history of mankind is a history of repeated injuries and usurpations on the part of man toward woman, having in direct object the establishment of an absolute tyranny over her." Many facts were stated below this quote. For example, three that I found important were as listed:
1. "He has compelled her to submit to laws, in the formation of which she had no voice.
2. "He has made her, if married, in the eye of the law, civilly dead.
3. He has denied her the facilities for obtaining a thorough education- all colleges being closed against her.
I cant imagine living in a world where these things happened to me. I'm sure they still happen in some places around the US and definitely in other countries where women cant even show their faces. The following link shows a timeline of the women's rights movement:
http://http://www.infoplease.com/spot/womenstimeline1.html
The next link that I have posted is a website providing some facts and history of women's rights in the United States and how it has evolved over the years.
http://http://www.america.gov/st/peopleplace-english/2007/February/20070226171718ajesrom0.6366846.html

I think if more women felt that they were able to speak up, this would'nt have been an issue for so long, and wouldnt still be an issue. I know if I were being discriminated against I would definitely speak up for myself. I think some of the statements in this reading however are aiming at men being the cause of this. To a certain extent I think that's true because men took advantage of women's "roles" back then, but again, if the women were to speak up, it probably would have been stopped sooner.

PS 214 Sec C - Group 4: There were 2 main topics that were discussed this ...

One thing that I found important in the Declaration of Sentiments was what was said."We hold these truths to be self-evident: that all men and women are created equal; that they are endowed by their Creator with certain inalienable rights; that among these are life, liberty, and the pursuit of happiness; that to secure these rights governments are instituted, deriving their just powers from the consent of the governed. Whenever any form of Government becomes destructive of these ends, it is the right of those who suffer from it to refuse allegiance to it, and to insist upon the institution of a new government, laying its foundation on such principles, and organizing its powers in such form as to them shall seem most likely to effect their safety and happiness." I find it interesting cause it pretty much cuts to the chase for the reasoning of the Sentiments.

Another important part in the Sentiment delt with religious degradation and the work force."Now, in view of this entire disfranchisement of one-half the people of this country, their social and religious degradation,—in view of the unjust laws above mentioned, and because women do feel themselves aggrieved, oppressed, and fraudulently deprived of their most sacred rights, we insist that they have immediate admission to all the rights and privileges which belong to them as citizens of these United States.
In entering upon the great work before us, we anticipate no small amount of misconception, misrepresentation, and ridicule; but we shall use every instrumentality within our power to effect our object. We shall employ agents, circulate tracts, petition the State and national Legislatures, and endeavor to enlist the pulpit and the press in our behalf.We hope this Convention will be followed by a series of Conventions, embracing every part of the country."

There were 2 main topics that were discussed this week by our blog members. The first was that at this point in time, African Americans didn't have the right to vote, and they should according to the constitution. President Johnson pointed this out in his speech and mentioned that by trying to to limit people from voting was unconstitutional. This is a very good point because it is absolutely true! The constitution and bill of rights say that everybody has a right to vote and should have a say in what happens where they work and live. This topic was reflected on in everyones blogs. The second big issue was that the issue being addressed (the violence in Selma, Alabama) was not just an issue there, not just an issue in the south, but an issue in the United States as a whole. This is a very good point, because this was at a time in the US where there was a lot of controversy between different states and sections of the US.

"We Shall Overcome" Lyndon B. Johnson

Lyndon B. Johnson's "We Shall Overcome" speech had many important points. The part of the speech that really stood out to me was the section about how we have been been fighting for equal rights for 100 years, and still it is lacking. The statement below is a quote directly from the speech that explains this:
"A century has passed--more than 100 years--since equality was promised, and yet the negro is not equal. A century has passed since the day of promise and the promise is unkept. The time of jusitce has now come, and I tell you that I believe sincerely that no force can hold it back." This statemtne goes on to say:
"How many white children have gone uneducated? How many white families have lived in stark poverty? How many white lives have been scarred in fear because we wasted energy and our substance to maintain the barriers of hatred and terror?"
I think this was an important piece because, it shows how long we have been fighting for equal rights, and even though today the United States says everyone has equal rights, there is still discrimination. I think this is an on going battle in this country and in other countries as well. Lyndon B. Johnson's speech I think opened many eyes about the ongoing problem we had then, and still have today. The link I have provided just tells a little about the civil rigths movement and what steps were taken. http://http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/African-American_Civil_Rights_Movement_(1955%E2%80%931968)
The quest for equal rights has produced some famous names that will be remembered for a lifetime. This shows how important this is to everybody.

“We shall overcome” speech contains several key points however I believe the most important points this speech contain are:
“There is no cause for self-satisfaction in the long denial of equal rights of millions of Americans. But there is cause for hope and for faith in our Democracy in what is happening here tonight. For the cries of pain and the hymns and protests of oppressed people have summoned into convocation all the majesty of this great government--the government of the greatest nation on earth.” This is important because this occurred during a time when this nation’s government failed to enforce equality among its citizens. This began a changing point towards the act of voting in this country.
“There is no Negro problem. There is no Southern problem. There is no Northern problem. There is only an American problem.” The first step of making a change is observing the wrong and looking at it as a whole. As the quote states, “there is only an American problem”. This was the first step of moving away from discrimination.
“We have all sworn an oath before God to support and to defend that Constitution. We must now act in obedience to that oath.” This quote speaks for itself.

PS 214 Sec C - Group 4: "We Shall Overcome" Speech

PS 214 Sec C - Group 4: "We Shall Overcome" Speech: "


The speech given by Lyndon B. Johnson was on Monday, March 15, 1965, a week after deadly racial violence had erupted in Selma, Alabama, as African Americans were attacked by police while preparing to march to Montgomery to protest voting rights discrimination. Civil rights leader Rev. Dr. Martin Luther King and over 500 supporters had planned to march from Selma to Montgomery to register African Americans to vote. In his speech towards the end he brought up the civil rights bill and I thought this was a very important part of the speech that gave all races and citizens privileges. "The bill im presenting to you will be known as a civil rights bill. But in a larger sense, most of the program I am recommending is a civil rights program. Its object is to open the city of hope to all people of all races, because all Americans just must have the right to vote, and we are going to give them that right." He also went on and stated,"All Americans must have the privileges of citizenship, regardless of race, and they are going to have those privileges of citizenship regardless of race." Right there I thought was very strong words on Lyndon's part and made a huge impact on all citizens of the country. I like the fact how Johnson had stated throughout his speech about what the African Americans have done for the country and what and who they represent in the United States. They are like any other American in this country and "WILL" be treated like any other person. After two attempts at marching into Montgomery, on Sunday, March 21st 1965, the march to Montgomery finally began with over 3,000 participants.

"We Shall Overcome" Speech

This speech given by former president Lyndon B. Johnson on March 15th, 1965 was about the killing of a man in Selma, Alabama because of the African Americans trying to march for the right to vote. Johnson talks a lot about the Constitution and our rights as Americans. He also talks about Democracy quite a bit as well. Johnson thinks it's unfair to keep African Americans from voting because our rights as American citizens allows us the right to vote. He states "The Constitution says that no person shall be kept from voting because of his race or color." Johnson stresses the fact that by not allowing the Negros to vote, Americans are disobeying the Constitution and everything the country stands for. At the end of his speech Johnson informs everyone that he is going to issue "a law designed to eliminate illegal barriers to the right to vote." Which means that after the bill has gone through Congress and been passed, African Americans will then have the right to vote.

Week 2 Summary

Chris Brought up a very good point to start off the week. He talked about how the man involved with the shooting in Tucson was mentally ill and how as citizens of the United States we have a right to health care for these issues. He brought forward the question of whether or not Arizona did anything to help this man with his illness and this whole situation could have been avoided.

Celina then talked about how there isn’t much known about the shooters motive yet, so we don’t have a lot of information on him. As for our Governors comment made toward the NAACP she mentioned how unprofessional it made him look and it also reflects on the citizens of Maine because we elected him.

Brandon brought up a very good point about the shooting in Tucson: the state of Arizona didn’t have good security for these representatives. Anybody can have a gun and walk around with it, even a mentally ill person, so they should have better security protecting officials like this. Brandon also brought up a very good point on the comment of our governor to the NAACP. He brought to everyone’s attention that the governor had already made plans for something very important that day and had repeatedly declined the NAACP’s offer, but they wouldn’t leave him alone so he reached a breaking point and just snapped. This was very good information to bring to the groups attention.

Following these interesting points Kellie mentioned that she doesn’t think that shootings like what happened in Tucson can’t be 100% preventable because people can always find ways around security and some people just aren’t good citizens sometimes. Kellie agreed with Celina’s comments about the governors comments making him and us as Maine citizens look bad. She raised the question that his comment may make people wonder when it comes to his comments to certain things and people.

Week 2 Blog: Two Important Events

1) Brandon made a good point about the security for the state of Arizona, but I'm not convinced that it definitely would have prevented the shootings. Although there is a better chance that it would have been prevented, I think these types of things can never be 100% preventable. People always know how to get around security. I also agree with Celina's comment about the shooter not being a good citizen. Someone who is going to shoot another person, especially a congress woman, obviously isnt too concerned about the well being of others or respecting the laws of this country. The questions asked by Chris are good ones to think about. We wonder what Arizona did as a precaution to prevent something like this from happening, if anything at all. I think the shooter being mentally challenged doesnt make this any less of a crime, but I definitely think people should be given more help in these types of situations.

2) Celina's comments about the governor I think were stated very well. I think his comments made him seem careless and ignorant. You're suppose to be representing people, and his comments made us look bad. He is expected to be more professional than that. Maybe he should have taken the time to explain himself. This may make people question him when it comes to his committment to certain things and people.

Two important events occuring in the last week for thinking about citizenship

Both Celina and Chris made good points regarding both questions but you have to look both them differently as well.

The first question has to deal with the recent Tuscon shootings. I believe that this could have all been some what avoided if the state of Arizona would have had a much stronger security system set up for those U.S. Representatives when out and about. Instead an individual that was supposively "unstable" had a gun and just went on a shooting spree for no apparent reason and due to the fact people were severely injured and killed. All inocent lives when the state could have avoided it. Now that it has all happened and the state has found the man who did it they are trying to say that he is menatlly unstable and thats the reason he did what he did. But you know what if you know to take a gun load it and shoot people with it you are capable of doing the crime abd should be punished just the same as any other criminal that has done a severe crime.


The next question was the remarks that our current govenor had made to the NAACP. Yes the comment that he had made wasn't the right way to answer the group. I do believe he could have gone another direction with the answer but the day of the NAACP's annual meeting that they were having govenor Lepage already had planned on attending a state troopers funeral in Vasselboro and he had told the NAACP repeatedly that he wasn't gonna be able to make it to there meeting and dinner in Portland. The group continued to ask him about going and attending and after telling them over and over again that he couldn't attend he had said some words that probably shouldn't have been said but the NAACP wouldn't listen to him the first time he answered them so Lepage hit a breaking point. Obviously his answer was alittle harsh and could have been handled better. Now that Lepage didn't attend the meeting they are applying that hes a racists when he is clearly not cause he had a previous commitment before that event.

Two important events occruing in the last week for thinking about citizenship

1. The Tucson Arizona shooting of January 8th was very tragic. There is very little know about Loughner's motive, and nothing has been identified yet. He is being charged with many federal charges, such as one count of attempted assassination. Commiting this crime isn't a very good example of being a "good" citizen.

2. Governor Paul LePage's "tell them to kiss my butt" comment to the NAACP on January 14th didn't make himself look very good. It made him sound ignorant and maybe even slightly racist. It was also disrespectful to not only african americans, but also to the celebration of Martin Luther King day. It makes him look unprofessional and it also reflects badly on Maine people and Maine as a state. Its a poor example of a "good" citizen as well, especially of a governor.

We've had two important events occur in the last weeks for thinking about citizenship -

1) the tragic shooting in Tucson on 1/8

What comes to mind when considering the shooting in Tucson Arizona? First thing you have to consider is the fact the crime was committed by a mentally challenge individual. Under the bill of rights Citizens of this country have the right of a health. Over the past several years this country has slack on providing mental challenge patients the proper healthcare needed. Yes a crime is a crime and people should be penalize for their crimes but in this situation you have to ask yourself if the state of Arizona did anything to prevent this from happening.

2) the much less tragic, but still newsworthy comments by our governor on 1/14
I’m not quite sure what happened on 1/14 I haven’t keep track of Maine’s governor

PS 214 Sec C - Group 4: Week 1 Blog

PS 214 Sec C - Group 4: Week 1 Blog: "There were many main points in this article, but one important one was Martin Luther King and his followers wanting to take a stand and figh..."

All three of our group members had some very good points in the article. Peasley had started this weeks article with a main point of Rosa Parks protesting on the bus in Montgomery and seeing that she was the perfect person for it cause of her belief in god and the good citizen that she is and her take in society. He had also brought up the fact that the speech wasnt illegal in any way and that they weren't there to advocate and violence, but to get there point across and what they believe is right in society.

Chris also mentioned how Martin Luther King had thought that Rosa Parks was the perfect person in the protest because of her social status and her integrity because of her strong beliefs in god and her moral rights. With her standing up for everyone during that incident she has changed history and soon after people looked at things differently and to that day things were different. Without Rosa's protest to this day negros might not have had the rights that they have in this day and age which would have changed society dramatically.

Celina mentioned that there was no reserved section for seating for negros and that negros should have been able to sit wherever they wanted without any trouble. But, due to the fact that the whites over powered the negros back then it didn't really matter whether there was a law or not they still enforced it.

All three are very good points and I agree with them. In my opinion it seems that with Rosa standing up for everyone it has changed the way society is today along with Martin Luther King. Just think of all the racial problems back then with the bus seating and schools back then. Without what Rosa and Martin Luther King had done we as a country and society today could still be having these same peoblems maybe worse. What those two have done was history and people thank them for that. That was what really gave negros rights the same as whites.

Week 1 Blog

There were many main points in this article, but one important one was Martin Luther King and his followers wanting to take a stand and fight for their rights as fellow citizens. The Negros just wanted the right to ride the busses in peace, just like all the white citizens. Martin Luther King states in the article, "We are here in a general sense because first and foremost we are American citizens, (That's right) and we are determined to apply our citizenship to the fullest of its meaning." (MLK Online)


A second important point in the article was, the fact that the reserved sections on the busses for the Negros was never clearly stated by the law. So there technically was no reserved section and the Negros should have been allowed to sit wherever they wanted, just as the whites could. As Martin Luther King addresses in the article, "....but i want you to know this evening that there is no reserved section. (All right) The law has never been clarified at that point. (Hell no) ....The law, the ordinance, the city ordinance has never been totally clarified. (That's right)" (MLK Online)

As Peasley mentioned in his earlier post "Martin Luther King States (MLK Online) '…I’m happy that it happened to a person like Mrs. Parks, (Yes) for nobody can doubt the boundless outreach of her integrity." The why I believe this is important is because if we take a deeper look in history you will in fact notice that Ms. Parks was not the first person to resist or perhaps refuse to give up her sit on a bus. away from the speech, the reason why people admire her is because of the bus driver she rebelled against.

one thing i like about the speech is Dr. Kings emphasis on the rights of citizens as he went on and states "just last Thursday to be exact, one of the finest citizens in Montgomery (Amen)—not one of the finest Negro citizens, (That’s right) but one of the finest citizens in Montgomery—was taken from a bus (Yes) and carried to jail and arrested." he then went on to talk about equality and justice.

one main point of this speech is when Dr. King states "You know, my friends, there comes a time when people get tired of being trampled over by the iron feet of oppression."

Week 1 Blog (MLK)

This speech addresses a couple main points. The first is Mrs. Rosa Parks protesting on the bus in Montgomery. Martin Luther King states how good it is that Mrs. Parks was the one to protest because of her commitment to God and being such an outstanding citizen. It was good that she did it rather than a different person who might not have been such a good role model in society. Martin Luther King States (MLK Online) “…I’m happy that it happened to a person like Mrs. Parks, (Yes) for nobody can doubt the boundless outreach of her integrity. (Sure enough) Nobody can doubt the height of her character. (Yes) Nobody can doubt the depth of her Christian commitment and devotion to the teachings of Jesus. (All right) And I’m happy, since it had to happen, it happened to a person that nobody can call a disturbing factor in the community.”

The second main point of his speech is that the protest isn’t illegal or bad in any way. The group isn’t there to ”…advocating violence.” in any way. They are simply there to prove what should be right and just. Martin Luther King States “My friends, don’t let anybody make us feel that we are to be compared in our actions with the Ku Klux Klan or with the White Citizens Council. [Applause] There will be no crosses burned at any bus stops in Montgomery. (Well. That’s right) There will be no white persons pulled out of their homes and taken out on some distant road and lynched for not cooperating. [Applause] There will be nobody among us who will stand up and defy the Constitution of this nation. [Applause] We only assemble here because of our desire to see right exist.” (MLK Online) Kind didn’t want African Americans to break laws and hurt more people to show how they (as a race) felt. He wanted them to just protest and show that they were the “better” people because they weren’t going to stoop to the levels of other groups and organizations.

PS 214 Sec C - Group 4: What comes to mind when you think of the word citi...

PS 214 Sec C - Group 4: What comes to mind when you think of the word citi...: "Dave Doe, Christopher Jean-Michel -Freedom -loyalty -birthplace -taxes -voting"

-Rights
-Respect
-Freedom
-Opportunity

What comes to mind when you hear the word "citizenship"?

-Acceptance

-Rights

-Opportunity

We chose these three words because they directly relate to citizenship: acceptance is once you achieve citizenship, you get rights once you achieve citizenship, and opportunity is available when you are a citizen of the United States

What comes to mind when you think of the word citizenship

Dave Doe, Christopher Jean-Michel

-Freedom
-loyalty
-birthplace
-taxes
-voting