Michigan Students Reprimanded for 'Distasteful' 9/11 Shirts

Source: ABC News

Arab-American Students Say Shirts Were Intended to Show Class Spirit, Not Threaten

A group of Arab-American high school students were reprimanded for wearing sweatshirts they made which school administrators said "distastefully" referenced the 9/11 terror attack on the World Trade Center.

Eleven boys from Edsel Ford High School's graduating class of 2011 inDearborn, Mich., wore hooded sweatshirts to school Monday depicting the numeral 11 with windows drawn on each digit, so they looked like towers. Alongside the towers is a thunderbird, the school's mascot, flying towards them. The text below the images read "You can't bring us down."

"The whole design gave prominence to the 9/11 tragedy, and of course was very upsetting to staff and students," said Principal Hassane Jaafar in a statement.

School officials said the boys intended the shirts to be displays of class pride and did not understand that they would be perceived as offensive.

"After talking with the students, it became clear that there were no intentions of harm, rather a very inappropriate and distasteful attempt to draw attention to themselves and to the class of 2011," said Jaafar.

The principal said the sweatshirts were confiscated, the students were reprimanded and the principal planned to meet with the students' parents.

Some 300 people showed up at a Parent Teacher Student Association meeting Tuesday night at which administrators discussed the incident. Some parents supported Jaafar's decision to confiscate the shirts, but not suspend the boys, while others believe disciplinary action should have been taken, said Jennifer Browne, president of the PTSA.



Read more: http://abcnews.go.com/WN/US/michigan-students-reprimanded-shirts-mocking-911/story?id=9491502

Bad taste shouldn't be punished. Take em away and move on.

I agree this is in bad taste, but free speech comes in many forms.

A) Only applies to Congress passing laws that prevent you from speaking your mind. Your boss can tell you to shut the fuck up about any topic that he desires - you have the choice to quit or comply.
B) Does NOT apply to situations that will inflame or incite people. This seemed to be one that may incite other people to become angry.

All that said...it is in poor taste, but I have no problem with it personally. Of course, I am not in charge of a 2000 kid school...

I detect snark in answer A, right? Sure a boss can tell you what you can and cannot say at a job, but this is kids at a public school, free to say what they want. Whether it is incitement or not is really in the eyes of the reader, right?

Again, I say its in bad taste, but it is free speech.

...I am RARELY 100% correct. In fact, one of my favorite lines is 'I am often wrong, but never in doubt'

No snark at all, really. But, in reality, schools are a world unto themselves in many respects and it has been shown (at least in legal cases - you are on your own to source that) that children are not afforded the same free speech rights as adults (topic for another time).

Free Speech ONLY applies to laws that Congress makes. Period. Everything else is debatable. You have the free speech to say what you want to say, but I have the free speech to say that you (no...not you personally, rd_kent) are an asshole. The only person that has NO say in what you say is Congress.

to me that the principal did the right in thing in this case, but I'm sure those on the right will use this as another item to help them prove (too themselves) that radical islam has reached our shores, lol.

...HAS reached our shores and IS a very big danger.

However, So is Radical Christianity and high cholesterol.....


No sense in being willfully blind to the obvious.

If they were not returned its theft. More and more educators are finding out that its not going to be tolerated these days as it was in the past.

At a back to school night a principal announced that "unapproved items" found in the possession of students will be taken and either returned at the end of the school year or destroyed at his choice. A parent stood up and asked if the district (and therefore the taxpayers) were going to be covering his legal expenses for such illegal acts. The bubba was stunned.

It is not as if they were promoting the destruction of the towers, or referencing them in any negative way. They were, in fact, doing just the opposite. They, in this scenario, were the towers - the 11 of the Class of 2011 - and they were standing tall, saying 'You Can't Bring Us Down'.

I don't see how that is inappropriate or in bad taste at all.

hoodies as supporting the attacks.

Does this mean that the Class of 2011 cannot have any depiction of their graduation year unless the full 2-0-1-1 is used?

What if their mascot was a wolverine (or some other midwest animal)? Would the offended think that they were pissing on the towers?

It all is a crock.

Without the free speech issue. With it, it is more than ridiculous.

It makes the designers of the shirts to be incoherent and self-contradictory in their message--if the message is as it was interpreted.

As they stated it, it makes sense. But not if the bird's going to knock down the "towers", but just was there because, well, it's their mascot. Possibly presented incompetently, but not incoherently. (A lot of things work that way--people insist on their interpretation of what others say at the expense of making the others both politically or morally offensive *and* utterly incoherent. A dead give-away that the interpreters are at fault. Most people really do try for basic coherence in their message--they may not achieve it, but they usually try.)

Gawd, what's next? Banning "Live Free or Die"?

Wake up teachers, you are getting bullied out of your salaries. Time to fight back with knowledge to crush the establishment.

consiracy theories...at least not in this specific forum.

take them off.

Just a guess.

Bad taste, but I think that the principal is overreacting. Making it clear that the design is not school sanctioned and banning it on campus would be appropriate.

If anything, the principal has now popularized the design.

Theft of private property. I presume they were returned to the parents.