Showing posts with label NewJerseyLibraryAssociation. Show all posts
Showing posts with label NewJerseyLibraryAssociation. Show all posts

Tuesday, August 13, 2013

How State Library Associations Endanger Children; NJ Libraries and You: Not Perfect Together

Children throughout New Jersey are endangered by the New Jersey Library Association [NJLA] and the New Jersey State Library [NJSL].  NJSL provides training for all members of library boards of trustees.  NJLA delivers significant portions of that NJSL training.  NJLA teaches that NJ libraries are open public fora where anything goes so they may not block pornography as that would violate First Amendment freedoms.  That is 100% opposite of the law.  As a result, some boards of trustees oppose filtering out porn, thereby harming children statewide, let alone leaving librarians exposed to sexual harassment and municipalities exposed to such lawsuits.  NJ libraries and you: Not perfect together.

The New Jersey State Library history is interesting:

The New Jersey State Library dates its official inception to 1796 when, for the first time, the Legislature assigned responsibility for its collection of books to an individual, the Clerk of the House.  But the origin of the State Library is actually much earlier.  It began as a collection of books maintained by the New Jersey Assembly when New Jersey was an English colony.  Over time this collection of books grew until it became a reference collection used by members of both houses of the legislature. Eventually New Jersey became a state and the collection came to be called the State's library.   
Source: "The Origins and Early Years of the New Jersey State Library," by John Shaw, New Jersey State Library, 10 September 2010.
NJSL, a state entity since colonial times, now provides training to all NJ library trustees, likely using NJ tax revenue.  Here's one announcement:
That training includes misinformation about public library law that misleads trustees into acting against the interests of their own patrons and library employees.  Specifically, the training includes that public libraries are public fora for ideas.  For example, here is NJSL-provided training from NJLA Executive Director Pat Tumulty:



Source:  "New Jersey Public Libraries:  A Manual for Trustees, Revised Edition," NJ State Library, NJ State Library, October 2005.  I confirmed this training is current as shown above to the present date.

The training is now facilitated by the American Library Association [ALA] for NJSL, still using Pat Tumulty's false legal advice:
The problem is, the US Supreme Court shows what the NJSL is teaching to library trustees and what the ALA is facilitating is not true.  Rather, it is legally false.  And it's the key to any library's excuse for allowing porn despite the law, despite community standards, and despite common sense.  Combine that with people thinking librarians must know the law and it's easy to understand why communities are tricked into allowing porn in their libraries.  Library trustees are trained in something the opposite of the law.

It is not true that a "[p]ublic library is a public forum for ideas," as shown in the NJSL/NJLA/ALA training.  That is false.  The US Supreme Court found the exact opposite.  The Court specifically addressed that issue and decided one way, and the NJSL/NJLA/ALA is intentionally teaching the opposite.  We are all here discussing porn in public libraries because they intentionally teach the opposite of the law.

The US Supreme Court said, "Internet access in public libraries is neither a 'traditional' nor a 'designated' public forum."  "Internet terminals are not acquired by a library in order to create a public forum for Web publishers to express themselves."  See United States v. American Library Association, 539 US 194 (2003).  In other words, a public library is NOT a public forum for ideas—and pornography is not "ideas" anyway.

And here's something ALA/NJSL/NJLA does not teach.  US v. ALA held, "The interest in protecting young library users from material inappropriate for minors is legitimate, and even compelling, as all Members of the Court appear to agree."  But they don't, so they don't teach that.

The key here is that if you claim despite the law that a public library is an open public forum where anything goes, then you may not block pornography since that is "constitutionally protected material" and anything goes.

So NJSL is teaching something completely the opposite of the law, and using our tax money to do it.  That thereby empowers library trustees to think pornography may not be blocked from public libraries.  Essentially, NJSL misleads library trustees into thinking the opposite of the law, then those library trustees mislead your community into allowing porn on computers in your public libraries.

NJSL accomplishes this by using Pat Tumulty, the Executive Director of the NJLA, to teach that false lesson shown above.  Pat Tumulty essentially says NJ libraries must carry porn.  Got that?  Let me show you a news broadcast about a child allegedly viewing porn in the Roxbury Public Library in Morris County, NJ.  You will see me and Pat Tumulty.  You'll also hear about library attorney Ann Grossi, but I'll get to her later.  For now, watch Pat Tumulty approve pornography in NJ public libraries, and remember, she's teaching library trustees for the NJSL and the ALA:

As Walt Kane said: "Pat Tumulty is the Executive Director of the New Jersey Library Association.  She says that towns and libraries simply cannot censor what people watch.  [Pat Tumulty:] 'It is a public place and I think people have to recognize that again, public dollars don't necessarily mean I can proscribe what you see and you can proscribe what I see.'"  Compare that to the training she provides for the NJSL saying, "Public library is a public forum for ideas."  Here she says, "It is a public place and I think people have to recognize that...."  It's essentially the same thing, only you can see her saying it in the context of enabling porn in NJ's public libraries.

And I responded to her publicly when a local radio host discussed the Roxbury matter.  Let's go back in time to hear what I said:
  • "The Joe Crummey Show," Joe Crummey, WABC 770AM, 27 June 2011.  [The full excerpt is 47:59-54:11 & 56:01-1:03:31.  I appear at 56:48-58:21.  Note frequent/popular caller "Greg from Chatham" calls Pat Tumulty a "liberal, progressive, socialist."]

That's Pat Tumulty, the Executive Director of NJLA, using her position to promote her law-defying ideas that result in more porn harming more people in our communities.  She even advises the NJ Office of Legislative Services on porn in NJ public libraries:
Pat T. reported that she had a call from the Office of Legislative Services regarding pornography in public libraries as a result of the News 12 NJ story involving a complaint by a patron that her child saw “pornography” at a local library.  Eileen P. has done some research and found that 25 states have legislation addressing access to content in libraries in some way. Pat commented that is a complicated issue, made especially difficult when the term “pornography” is used to frame the debate. (Pat prefers the term “adult content”.  Eileen P. suggested that Public Policy discuss the issue at an upcoming meeting.  The board agreed.  

And that's NJSL using our tax dollars to push porn in our communities.

Now let's look at Ann Grossi.  She's the library attorney in Roxbury and also Montville.  How does she fit into the picture?

Ann Grossi uses her position as library attorney to ensure Roxbury and Montville citizens comply with Pat Tumulty's law-defying diktat as promulgated by NJSL/ALA.  Both those communities asked me to assist them in removing porn from their public libraries.  I did, but in the end, they believed they were forced to listen to the attorney's advice because they paid for it.  And they paid for it alright.  Their community libraries remain infected with pornography.


Remember in the video when Ann Grossi was quoted as saying, "if the library attempts to restrict access, regardless of how offensive, it would be a violation of the First Amendment of the Constitution of the United States"?  Well that's false.  The US v. ALA case decided the exact opposite, in the very first sentence of the case so you can't miss it: "public libraries' use of Internet filtering software does not violate their patrons' First Amendment rights...."  It's the exact opposite.  And Roxbury and Montville are following the exact opposite of the law.

Remember how she said she was reviewing the policy after it was challenged?  Remember how Walt Kane asked if I was satisfied with that?  I said, "well, if she's the one who's doing the review, then it won't make a difference."  And indeed, after the review, the policy is essentially the same and the library still allows porn despite the law.

Ann Grossi
I have filed an ethics complaint against Ann Grossi and the case is under review so I am not at liberty to discuss the details, but here is my initial filing:


What about NJ schools?  Any problems there?  Well, yes.  Get this.  The Rancocas Valley Regional High School had a book featuring two people having anal sex.  When an effort was made to review the book for compliance with school book selection policy, the school librarian went over the head of her principle and jumped straight up to the American Library Association.  ALA brought all guns to bear on the school, something it does in community after community nationwide.  Fortunately, this community did not buckle and the book was removed from the school:

Listen to this, because of my involvement in that matter, I attended an NJLA conference to hear the book's author speak about its having been "censored."  Coincidentally, the author had just been featured by the ALA on its annual list of the top ten most challenged books.  At the end of her talk I asked a softball question, how did she feel about being on the ALA's new list.  Well, the author gushed with enthusiasm and excitement as she explained how excited she was.  She said she asked the ALA how her book got to be in the top ten list.  She said the ALA responded that other books had in fact been challenged more than hers, but because hers dealt with homosexuality and was actually removed, ALA decided to push the book higher up the list.  In other words, the ALA faked the list!  And the author admitted essentially that in response to a question I asked.  And I recorded her response and placed it on my blog for all to hear.  No wonder the ALA lists me as its top opponent!  Have a listen:

The question is, given the ALA influence in our public schools and our public libraries, given NJSL and Pat Tumulty and Ann Grossi are all marching to the same porn-pushing tune, who is playing that tune?  It's the American Library Association and the American Civil Liberties Union whose Illinois state board member joined the ALA and changed forever how librarians approached children:

That was over four decades ago but librarians are still talking about it to this very day:
  • "Sunday Meditation: Are We Still Endowed by Our Creator with Certain Unalienable Rights?," by Will Manley, Will Unwound, 11 August 2013, No.823, emphasis added:
    What I found was that up until the mid 1960s there was a clear consensus that one of the main objectives of the children's department was to provide wholesome materials that would build "character."  This goal was clearly rooted in the Judeo Christian principles upon which America was founded.  That all changed in the turmoil of the 60s when "intellectual freedom" now became the value the library profession was rooted upon.  My research revealed that with each passing decade the profession's definition of intellectual freedom became more and more of an "anything goes" proposition.

    By the turn of the century, librarians were even vehemently espousing their right to provide pornography on the internet to children.  At that time I was a lone wolf speaking out in favor of children's room filters.  I have been universally condemned in the profession for taking that position.

    I wonder if there are any limits to library intellectual freedom in libraries today.  Clearly the idea of the library as a place to build character by providing wholesome materials to children would be laughed at today.  But on the other extreme are there any boundaries to intellectual freedom in libraries?  Is the whole notion of morality obsolete and are our public institutions no longer rooted in the same religious principles that can be found in the Declaration of Independence?

Will Manley.  He's the same gent who revealed that "the library profession is the only profession in the world that wants children to have access to pornography":

But what is the ALA to which key people in NJ communities are so in thrall that entire communities are misled into thinking they must allow porn?


ALA allows itself to be used as the pretty face to cover up George Soros's getting access to American school children and his using American libraries as distribution points for his propaganda:

ALA even brags what it can do with Soros's Open Society Institute millions given there are more libraries than there are McDonald's Restaurants (and one of its speakers, Cory Doctorow, advises children to bypass parental Internet filters, jailbreak electronic locks on devices, etc., and says (14:35) "and frankly, you can't say bad things about a librarian without sounding like some kind of a jerk, so you folks are really well positioned to carry this banner"):

ALA, supposedly opposed to the "censorship" of keeping children from inappropriate material, itself uses censorship to promote radical Islam.  You have to read these to see how misguided is the American Library Association and keep it in mind when ALA comes to your town to promote its worldview about censorship:

ALA even works underhandedly in a number of ways, all with the intention of misleading local communities into thinking what the ALA wants them to think, much like the false training for the library trustees.  That way communities make decisions they think are their own but are really manufactured by the ALA; where the ALA has no power to force a community to do anything, if it can get the people to think the way the ALA thinks, the community will do what the ALA wants.  For example:
Letter from anti-filtering advocate to library director about $1,000 grant from ALA.
That sounds pretty underhanded to me.  But what else has ALA done that our leading librarian at NJLA, a library attorney running for Morris County Clerk, and our tax-support NJSL finds so alluring that they need to mislead people into following:
That's the ALA.  That's what NJSL, NJLA, and a politically-active library attorney push?  The underhanded ALA that anonymously edits Wikipedia, outs marital infidelities of baseball players, and slips walking around money quietly to its acolytes.  The ALA that misleads a third of American communities and is one of the nation's leading porn purveyors and contributors to the sexual exploitation of women.  One begins to understand why communities need to be misled into following ALA diktat.  One sees why outright lying is needed to mislead people into doing what the ALA/NJLA wants.

In reality, you can stop this.  You are now armed with information to counter the misinformation you will hear from the pro-porn, anti-filtering advocates.  You now see this is a battle with an underhanded organization that will stop at nothing to achieve its goals.  You now see how key people in key positions can mislead people by the hundreds, like with NJSL teaching all library trustees that libraries are open public fora where anything goes and porn may not be blocked.

It is up to you to go back to your communities and keep your newly trained ears open for people trying to push themselves on your children and your community.  As soon as you see it, find out what's going on.  If you determine a response is needed, get educated then take action.  For example, here's a protest by a Florida public school teacher who walked her third grade class across the street for a public library tour only to have her kids see xxx porn, and the library refused to stop it:

Basically, the key is to educate people about the issues so they can make informed decisions for themselves.  Show exactly where the pro-porn, anti-filtering advocates are misleading, and back up your statements with reliable sources, like the US Supreme Court, the author of the Children's Internet Protection Act, even your local library law.

As to NJSL using our taxpayer money to teach all library trustees something that's legally false so as to mislead them into excusing porn on the computers in our public libraries, that is something about which we should educate Governor Christie.  In a nutshell, NJSL teaches that libraries are open public places where anything goes, including Internet porn, but that has been shown to be legally false by the US Supreme Court that held that libraries are not and that governments may block out porn as they have since libraries started.  As a result, the very people in key positions to control local libraries have been indoctrinated to act against the law in a manner that seriously harms communities.  Is this insidious or what?

As to the ALA teaching all library trustees library law it knows to be false, that's just another in a long line of reasons why it's time to stop thinking of ALA as authoritative on libraries and time to start restoring local control to our local libraries.



Note:  The above is approximately the text of a speech given to a New Jersey audience, however, library associations nationwide likely mislead similarly, particularly because ALA sets the tone.


Posted by at 3 comments:
Labels: , , , , , , , , , , ,

Wednesday, February 6, 2013

Violent Video Games in the Paterson Free Public Library and the NCAC/ALA Attempt to Mislead Another Community

Cindy Czesak, Director
Members, Board of Trustees
Paterson Free Public Library
250 Broadway
Paterson, NJ 07501
February 6, 2013

Dear Ms. Czesak and Library Trustees,

I am writing regarding the Paterson Free Public Library "banning" violent video games and the false claims made by the National Coalition Against Censorship, et al., in their letter dated February 1, 2013, and published by the NCAC here:
http://www.ncac.org/Paterson-Library-Board-Votes-to-Allow-Banning-Patrons-From-Playing-Video-Games

The NCAC has absolutely no power over you except the power you give it.  So when you are evaluating what weight to give the letter from the NCAC, please consider evaluating the NCAC itself.  Please consider that the NCAC is an organization that promotes pornography [N 1], openly pushes pornography on public libraries [N 2], and supports censorship with double standards and made up facts [N 3].  It makes statements such as "porn is NOT connected with violence against women, child molestation, or divorce." [N 4]

Lest you think it is not possible the NCAC could be misleading communities, think about how the author of the Children's Internet Protection Act requiring filtering in public libraries has revealed that the American Library Association is intentionally misleading American communities to the point where a third have been misled into not using legal means to protect their children from harm [N 5].  And the American Library Association is a silent signatory of the letter as well, as I explain below.

So those are the organizations now pressuring you to do as they say.  Let's look specifically at the NCAC letter.

"Video games are protected speech under the First Amendment and, as such, cannot be regulated or restricted by public officials in response to concerns about their message or content."  Similarly, pornography is protected speech under the First Amendment, yet the US Supreme Court found public libraries could legally suppress it using Internet filters because a public library is a quasi public forum, not an open public forum [N 6].  The Court explained, in words that may be applicable to violent videos in public libraries, "The interest in protecting young library users from material inappropriate for minors is legitimate, and even compelling, as all Members of the Court appear to agree."

The NCAC goes on to cite an impressive legal case to support its position.  But the case does not apply to public libraries, and another US Supreme Court allowed libraries to curtail pornography.  It is a bully tactic to use a case that does not really apply.  Read the case, but notice how it applies to commercial businesses, not quasi public fora like public libraries.

"The library has not offered any sound justification for removing access to specific games.  Instead, according to published reports, librarians are taking this action to 'prevent our kids from learning these behaviors.'  This assumes that viewers will simply imitate behaviors represented in fictional settings without any independent mental intermediation, a proposition that is palpably false and that the library implicitly rejects by offering access to all sorts of internet sites and maintaining a varied collection of books, magazines, videos and other materials."  Remember, this is from the organization that said "porn is NOT connected with violence against women, child molestation, or divorce."  Now it is essentially saying violent video games are "NOT connected with violence."  Are you convinced?  And notice how the NCAC uses the library's having apparently been misled by the American Library Association into allowing porn on its computers [N 7] as a reason why the library should now also allow the NCAC/ALA to mislead it into allowing children to play violent video games.

"It is no more acceptable for a library to ban access to certain kinds of video games than it would be to selectively remove other lawful materials."  Okay, just remember the US Supreme Court allows libraries to filter out lawful porn.  So "selective removal of other lawful materials" is done in public libraries nationwide everyday, and with US Supreme Court approval, let alone library selection policy that filters out much more than the library collects.

"Library officials attempt to justify their decision by claiming that they are acting in parens patriae.  However, librarians are not baby-sitters, and they have no way to know that their views correspond with those of parents or guardians."  So, you have no way to know whether your views match those of your community, you are told, but you are supposed to align your views with the NCAC.  Clever.  Let's agree librarians are not babysitters.  But that is not the issue.  A babysitter would welcome a child playing a video game to make his job easier.  Further, regarding library officials not acting to look after children like all other public employees do, that is a made up rule from the American Civil Liberties Union that the American Library Association then forced on libraries [N 8].

"As public officials, library administrators are barred from removing materials merely because they dislike them or find them offensive."  Correct, but that is not what you are doing and I bet you do not appreciate the implication that you are.  Further, the US Supreme Court, as I explained above, ruled that public libraries are quasi public fora where public officials have every right to remove certain material, such as Internet pornography.  The NCAC goes on to cite another impressive legal case that yet again has little to do with the issue of violent video games in public libraries.

"Those who do not wish to play video games do not have to, just as those who do not wish to read a particular book or magazine do not have to."  That is the old "avert your eyes" excuse for not using legal Internet filters to block pornography [N 9].

"The role of libraries is not to police the use of a perfectly legal form of casual entertainment, whether the user is a teen or any other patron."  This from the organization that says libraries should start stocking porn and that, in this very letter, implicitly mocked you for having a library policy that allowed porn.

As you are the trustees for your community library and not for the NCAC/ALA's own agenda, you get to decide whether violent video games should be prohibited in your library.  It appears it would be perfectly legal to do so, especially in light of the recent school shootings in Newtown, CT.  The question is, should you bend your will to the NCAC's and not do what is right by your community and its children just to avoid the implicit legal threat?

I am Dan Kleinman of SafeLibraries and I am based in Chatham, NJ [N 10].  I will be happy to speak with any of you or even to appear before the library board to explain the above and more in person, as I have in other communities.  Watch me on News 12 New Jersey calling out Pat Tumulty, the President of the New Jersey Library Association, for excusing why NJ libraries should supposedly allow Internet pornography to prevent "censorship" [N 11].  And my footnotes mainly link to my own writing, but the reliable sources contained therein is the main attraction; my using my own links is merely a convenience for everyone.

Purported Judith Platt signature from  August 18, 2011
Purported Judith Platt signature from February 1, 2013

By the way, see that signature for Judith Platt, director of a section of the Association of American Publishers?  She is also a director at the American Library Association's Freedom to Read Foundation [N 12].  The ALA claims it is "censorship" for libraries to keep children from R-rated movies [N 13], and, as I mentioned above, even the author of the Children's Internet Protection Act called out the ALA for misleading communities [N 5].  And I exposed the ALA for faking its annual top 10 most challenged books list [N 14] after I attended a New Jersey Library Association convention and recorded an awarded author admitting as such.  So how likely is it that organizations that promote porn in public libraries and R-rated films for children by misleading communities would provide accurate information to the Paterson Free Public Library on public libraries making violent video games available to children?  And the "signatures" on the letter you received are merely graphics (compare slide 14 [N 15]); they don't even have the courtesy to sign the letter you are supposed to be cowed by, if indeed they even read it.

Thank you very much.  Like the NCAC, I too look forward to hearing from you.  And I hope you make the decision that is best for Paterson, not that is best for the NCAC/ALA.


NOTES

[N 1]  http://safelibraries.blogspot.com/2009/11/ncac-promotes-porn-says-keeping.html

[N 2]  http://safelibraries.blogspot.com/2012/06/ncac-pushes-porn-on-libraries-fifty.html

[N 3]  http://safelibraries.blogspot.com/2009/11/ncac-supports-censorship-with-double.html

[N 4]  http://ncacblog.wordpress.com/2009/10/30/plaid-ribbons-for-pornography-awareness/

[N 5]  http://safelibraries.blogspot.com/2012/02/cipa-author-exposes-ala-deception.html

[N 6]  http://laws.findlaw.com/us/539/194.html

[N 7]  http://www.patersonpl.org/3adultpolicy.html

[N 8]  http://www.eagleforum.org/educate/1996/feb96/focus.html

[N 9]  http://safelibraries.blogspot.com/2012/04/avert-your-eyes-jane-light-got-220983.html

[N 10]  http://tinyurl.com/AboutDan

[N 11]  http://dl.dropbox.com/u/32156878/DanKleinman-KaneInYourCorner-News12NJ-5Nov2011.wmv

[N 12]  http://www.ala.org/groups/affiliates/relatedgroups/freedomtoreadfoundation/ftrforg/ftrfboard/ftrfboarddirectors#directors

[N 13]  http://safelibraries.blogspot.com/2011/06/keeping-r-rate-films-from-children-is.html

[N 14]  http://safelibraries.blogspot.com/2011/09/banned-books-week-is-gay-promotion.html

[N 15]  http://tinyurl.com/SaferLibraries


NOTE ADDED 8 FEBRUARY 2013:

Possibly as a result of my involvement in this matter the previous day, the American Library Association's so-called "Office for Intellection Freedom" has proclaimed libraries do not have the intellectual freedom to decide for themselves whether or not to remove violent video games in the wake of the school shooting in Newtown, CT:


Note the ALA/ACLU also proclaimed libraries may not filter the Internet.  They were wrong then with filters as they are now with violent video games; they lost big in the US Supreme Court on filtering.

This is interesting, and it is from a local source:



And from that same source comes the following:






URLs for this post:  
http://safelibraries.blogspot.com/2013/02/ViolentVideoGames.html
http://tinyurl.com/NCACGames

Posted by at No comments:
Labels: , , , , , , , , , , , , ,
Location: Paterson Public Library, 250 Broadway, Paterson, NJ 07501, USA

Monday, September 26, 2011

Banned Books Week is Gay Promotion? Author Admits ALA Faked 2010 Top 10 Challenged Book List

A recording I made of an author essentially admitting that the American Library Association's [ALA] Top 10 challenged list is faked and used to promote a political agenda has become the subject of an exclusive, top billed report on WorldNetDaily:


I am just the messenger.  I am just reporting what author Amy Sonnie said as to why her book placed #9 on the ALA's 2010 list of challenged books.  Actually, Amy Sonnie is reporting, and I merely have a tape recording of what she said at a New Jersey Library Association meeting that I attended.  The story is big because the ALA faked its top 10 list, one of the listed authors essentially admitted as much and the admission was recorded, and the list is promoted and taken as the truth nationwide.

Go read the WND report to see for yourself.

The ALA faked #9 and awarded school librarian Dee Venuto for LGBT-related reasons (archive link), a librarian who admitted in a New Jersey Education Association publication that she cannot bring herself to read racy material for children so she lets her students read it for her.

Might the ALA have faked #1, And Tango Makes Three, also about the same "big deal"?  Well, it was challenged only four times yet it is supposedly #1.  We are talking about an organization that used plagiarism to promote Banned Books Week, after all.

The story is an exclusive, and it headlines WorldNetDaily!

Think about it.  If the top book challenged in the USA was challenged only four times in a year, obviously there is no crisis that the ALA keeps shouting about.  If the ALA has to artificially push LGBT material higher on the list, obviously there is no crisis about the "big deal."  Even progressive critics of the ALA decry the ALA's use of BBW as "propaganda."

Can anyone ever trust the ALA for anything ever again?  Really, I mean it.  Faked lists.  Plagiarism.  Political agenda.  Propaganda.  So much more I'm leaving out for brevity.  Is there no limit to the ALA's dishonesty?

See more on National Hogwash Week here:

NOTE ADDED 6 OCTOBER 2011:

Remarkable.  The ALA posted a YouTube video of author Amy Sonnie speaking in support of Banned Books Week.  I "favorited" the video and left a comment in favor of the author but critical of the ALA.

The ALA removed the comment!  The self-arrogated freedom of speech advocates deleted my free speech!  I'll take that as further evidence of guilt.

Here's what I said, followed by a graphic of what it looked like online with "All Comments (1)" before the ALA deleted it:
I really admire Amy Sonnie.  I spoke with her for a half hour at a New Jersey Library Association meeting and saw her speak there. 
That said, her book has not been banned and the ALA admitted to her that in truth her book was not the 9th most challenged of 2010.  See "Is Library Association's 'Banned Book Week' Really 'Gay' Promotion?; Critic Calls Event a 'Hoax Perpetrated on the American Public Since 1982,'" by Dave Tombers, WorldNetDaily, 25 September 2011. 
So the ALA top 10 list is faked.

Comment supporting Amy Sonnie but criticizing
ALA's faked top 10 list

And here is what it says now in bold, red typeface with "All Comments (0)" when I tried to repost the comment:

You have been blocked by the owner of this video.


So much for freedom of speech.

I'll be posting soon about how the ALA has tacitly admitted it plagiarized a low quality "censorship map," exactly as I said about a year ago.  I'll point out that plagiarism violates its own code of ethics and I'll demand some action be taken, else the code is mere window dressing.  Let's see if/how the ALA will block me on my own blog.  We already know the ALA has gotten me blocked on Wikipedia.  So the free speech people got me blocked from Wikipedia and now from YouTube.

So much for freedom of speech.

Remarkable.


NOTE ADDED 9 APRIL 2012:

In what I view as a major if tacit acknowledgement by the ALA that it fakes the annual top 10 challenged book list to use the LGBT community to promote the ALA's own interests, after claiming And Tango Makes Three is in the annual challenged book list "for the past five years," and after I exposed the fraud used to promote that work and another, the book has disappeared from the 2011 list:
Indeed, "homosexuality" as a reason to remove material is entirely missing from this year's list.  So the very two books I pointed out were falsely promoted by the ALA, the only two claiming "homosexuality" as the reason they were on the list, even one being persistently on the list, have been removed, and there are no others under the "homosexuality" category to replace them.

Listen to the 2010 award-winning author admitting the ALA faked the list to promote her LGBT book, starting at about the 45:13 mark, as reported in the WND piece above.

As research shows faking claims of LGBT harassment results in increased, not decreased, LGBT harassment and suicide, I am very happy that I have, it appears, stopped the ALA from faking claims about LGBT community harassment that harms the LGBT community while helping the ALA.  Yes, the ALA harms the LGBT community, and faking the 2010 list was just one way.

I'll never hear from any in the LGBT community who have not been harassed as a result of stopping the ALA from making false harassment claims that thereby harms the LGBT community, but I still feel good that I may have contributed even a little to improving the lives of those in the LGBT community who may have been targeted as a result of the ALA false harassment claims.


NOTE ADDED 22 JUNE 2015:

Here is further evidence ALA fakes data used to create its annual "banned" books fraud:

NOTE ADDED 3 NOVEMBER 2017:

Dropbox dropped all the URLs, so I think this one is now correct, to hear the awarded author admitting ALA faked the list to promote her LGBT book, starting at the 45:13 mark:

NOTE ADDED 6 JANUARY 2018:

I added the link to the recording of the author admitting ALA fakes it annual banned books list to some of the text above. and checked all the links for currency.  Changed some links to archive links.

Posted by at 6 comments:
Labels: , , , , , , , , , , , ,
Subscribe to: Posts (Atom)