U.S. Soccer's Athletes Council expels Seth Jahn
- by Paul Kennedy @pkedit, Mar 1, 2021
He was one of several federation members to speak in opposition of repealing Policy 604-1 requiring athletes and staff to stand respectfully for the national anthem. But his remarks, which lasted almost seven minutes, were quickly denounced by other members of the Athletes Council and by the federation, which in a statement on Saturday night termed them "offensive." (With more than 71 percent of the weighted vote, the policy was repealed, affirming the decision by U.S. Soccer's board of directors last June.)
Jahn's remarks addressed issues of police brutality ("a narrative with relatively zero data to substantiate it") and slavery of Blacks ("Every race in the history of mankind has been enslaved by another demographic at some point in time") and generally what he described as the "politicization of sport."
U.S. women’s national team captain Becky Sauerbrunn, one of 20 current and former players on the Athletes Council, issued a statement on Saturday night that the remarks made by Jahn “moved beyond a difference of opinion on policy, and into disinformation and offensive rhetoric."
The Athletes' Council expelled Jahn for violation of the federation's Prohibited Conduct Policy prohibiting harassment on the basis of race, religion or national origin. In the statement released by Athletes Council chairman Chris Ahrens, the body found Jahn had “violated the prohibited conduct's policy section on harassment, which prohibits racial or other harassment based upon a person's protected status (race), including any verbal act in which race is used or implied in a manner which would make a reasonable person uncomfortable. The Athletes Council does not tolerate this type of language and finds it incompatible with membership on the council. While the council understands that each person has a right to his or her own opinion, there are certain opinions that go beyond the realm of what is appropriate or acceptable.”
Statement from the Athlete Council regarding Seth Jahn. pic.twitter.com/lYhsdn9BZu
— Chris Ahrens (@chrisahrens) March 1, 2021
Jahn, 38, captained of the U.S. Soccer 7-a-side Paralympic team at the 2016 Rio Games and was elected to a four-year term on the Athletes Council by other athletes in November. He worked on security for the U.S. women's national team at the 2019 Women's World Cup in France and attended the men's national team camp in Wales in November 2020.
Jahn, a wounded veteran of 11 years in the U.S. Army, is former counterintelligence special agent and serves as an undercover counter-child sex trafficking operative in Central and South America.
Meet one of today's @ussoccer_PNT goal scorers Seth Jahn, and his teammates in #14Stories: https://t.co/uEcEWEPcH7 . pic.twitter.com/uqupwt1TAg
— U.S. Soccer MNT (@USMNT) September 12, 2016
The Athletes' Council consists of 20 players who have represented the USA internationally. By federal law, the Athletes' Council must represent 20 percent of the membership and hold 20 percent of the seats on the board of directors and federation committees. A new law, signed by President Donald Trump in 2020, will increase that percentage to 33.3 percent. Just how U.S. Soccer changes its voting structure is something it is grappling with.
With 20 percent of the vote, the Athletes' Council is a powerful bloc in U.S. Soccer politics. With 33.3 percent, it will become the dominant council.
66 comments about "U.S. Soccer's Athletes Council expels Seth Jahn".
Read more comments >
Next story loading 
It is shameful that people are not able to voice thier stand on any issue without being eliminated. There is some truth in what was said, and it should have been fully investigated prior to his elimination, instead of making a snap judgement because the majority disagree. This smacks of what was going on in the 40's in Germany, and continues today in some couintries.
you forgot to mention the Soviet Union, Communist China et al
One thing that unites Nazi Germany, the Soviet Union and communist China - under those regimes individual athletes had/have no choice about whether or not to stand for their national anthems.
Jahn's not expressing an opinion about police brutality, he's spreading false information. Opinions are something you disagree with, lies are something you sanction - that's something most crumb-covered kids get taught the first time they deny having raided the cookie jar. Meanwhile, dismissing slavery off-hand as 'just one of those things' is indefensible. Imagine telling someone who's family died in a car crash to get over it because thousands of people get killed in road accidents every year.
The decision to remove him is correct.
Ian, Yes, I do see a striking similarity about athletes in communist countries who had no choice of whether to stand or not and what is happening in our country with 'Cancel culture". The only difference is in degree of punishment between what Communist countries that dealt with those who didn't tow the line, and what is happening here. And that is very scary to me for it can get worse. Just think of what has happened with the PC culture that began in the 80's and what a monster it has turned into now.....Good luck with that.
I find those who are for Diversity tend to overlook Diversity of thought. No matter what one's feelings towards that person's ideas or opinions are as different to yours, punishment to correct this is a Neanderthal approach is not the way to go. Today, in a so-called modern society where now any difference of a opinion can lead on to be called a Fascist, homophobe, xenophobe, hater of women, you name it... See where I'm going with this. We can't be proud as part of humanity to act on one's feelings or OPINIONS toward someone else through punishment.
"Jahn's not expressing an opinion about police brutality, he's spreading false information". WOW! What a devil is this Jahn guy, immediately burn him with the rest of the witches.....Punishment.
And worse, " dismissing slavery off-hand as 'just one of those things' is indefensible". It is perhaps 'indefensible' to you, but that is his OPINION and certainly should not be punished for to what it causes to someone's feelings.
Interesting defense of vileful rhetoric and lies citing first amendment rights of free speech,
And before someone yells "hypocrisy" or "cancel culture" ... consider this .... The purpose of the vote was to rescind a policy statement made by the federation regarding free speech & peaceful expression of protest, not to defend it by perpetuating the indefensible rhetoric that demanded the policy be adopted in the first place ... the majority of which demanded that those that transgressed the policy should no longer be allowed to wear the NT jersey which impacted their livlihood ..... Funny how one's mind changes the discussion when the proberbial shoe is on the other foot ..
Michael, are you trying to tell me that someone's opinion, what is in his mind should be punished.
Jahn, did not interrupt the proceedings ,did nothing but follow the rules and only expressed an opinion and was punished because of hurt feelings....
How would you will feel if certain players on the NT are punished because of personal opinions they have even though they were standing for the flag, not kneeling, not breaking any rules and followed procedure . That ,I would say, is a good comparison to what happened to Jahn...
He had his 7 minutes of a long diatribe, which's a lot more than most of us get to express, The Athletes Council had their say, as this institution has its norms that are followed if you want to play for them. Nobody twisted his arm to play for this team.
**As I Predicted Yesterday...
Santiago 1314 replied,
February 28, 2021 at 10:12 a.m.
Jahn, ... "CANCELLED", IN 3, 2, ....
@Ian,... What was the False information Jahns was Spreading.???
To All;... I finally found the Audio, of Seth Jahn's "Speech" ... YouTube
U.S. Soccer Annual General Meeting
1:29:45
Kinda Rambling, but the facts he Quotes are FBI, He says
"Only .5% of Black Men killed by Police "Unjustified"
I couldn't find it on FBI site, but WAPO average is 12 per year.
what a weak excuse for expelling someone whose opinion you disagree with
I agree with Ian
Yep, Ian put it very well. The only thing I would add is that if Jahn truly wanted to "de-politicize" sport, he would be arguing that the national anthem should not be played prior to games, since standing obediently to honor a poltiical entity (the US) pretty much defines politicizing the issue (supported by the fact that the US Armed forces paid NFL teams to have fly-overs etc. that build their "brand"). If he were to do so, I wonder how many who now defend him would try to "cancel" him for being unpatriotic.
The council almost unanimously voted the opposite
4 years ago. But now politics say that opinion is
not only wrong but racist. Millions agree with Seth
The country is the best, police are good, being white
is not a racist. They are certainly our problems. And we can do better. But the woke crowd has lost their minds
@George I find your statement to be un-American. Real Americans know that America strives to be best, not that we "are the best". Cops aren't "good" - instead we work to ensure balance between the rights of citizens against government intrusion and the needs of a well ordered society.
You speak in absolutes, and yet nothing could be further from the truth. We started this country "in order to form a more perfect union" not that it was perfect, but that we would strive to constantly make it better.
To oppose the need to question, examine, and re-think is unAmerican.
George the very concept of "race" (based on skin color) is entirely an outdated cultural construct with no basis at all in science. So saying "being white [or insert any other color] is not racist" is acutally a racist statement.
@LJ... WE ARE THE BEST.!!! Who's Better.???
Yeah Santiago that is why the MNT wears all those stars above the badge on their shirts. /end sarcasm
Bob, I meant THE Women's National Team.!!!... OBVIOUSLY... JAJAJA ... Actually, I think he was Talking about "The Country"... That was my understanding of his comment, and what I Meant... USA is the BEST Country in The World.!!! Kinda Heading Downhill, according to both Sides of the Political Spectrum.
The point I was trying to make indirectly was that any comparison and ranking depends on what basis the comparison is made on. Your comment about the WNT shows that you understand my point.
It is so nice to have a conversation with respectful people. Too many adult children posting on social media. Always enjoy reading what you have to say.
Assuming that the Athletes Council is a representative body, I don't see any problem here -- folks get tho decide who their representatives are, and if those representative advocate views they abhor, by all means they should replace their representatives.
Cerrtainly the reasoning behind tthe announement has problems
So Ian, please inform us all on what disinformation he stated! Don't let the facts get in the way of your story.
We don't have slavery, because we had aCivil War, so I'm not sure where your car accident analogy fits...everyone could rant about a slave past that was his point. Not that he's dismissing it in any way.
Did every group of people at some point experience slavery? Yes! Unfortunately in the U.S. unlike other instances in history. The crime did not end with the Civil War. There was Jim Crowe laws that were passed. There was the unjustified imprisonment of citizens of the south particularly of a certain race without due process. Do you know what they did with those prisoners? They used them for more free labor! So from 1865 onwards that was your new method of getting free labor. What about those who faught in the Wars? Well when other veterans qualified for the GI Bill after the War those of a certain race again were denied that opportunity despite having faught and risk their lives just like everyone else. Well about housing? Clearly money is money right? Wrong! People of a certain race for a long time were not given the opportunity to take loans out to buy homes just like everyone else and when they were it was at much higher rates. The studies have been done. Even when you account for job and credit score historically those of a certain race were charged more. So yes every group has been enslaved but not every group had rounds of unfair tactics used against them even after their enlsavement. To make the topic just about slavery is either historical ignorance or intellectual dishonesty. You pick. Do I think Ian should have been releaased? No. However if he is a representative of the organizational body and the body does not feel his views points or opinions adequately reflect their message, it is within their right to look for a replacement.
Elvin, I assume that Jahn's is an amateur athlete who represented the USA in an amateur international competition. He speaks for his own viewpoint as an amatuer athlete. While USSF sets up the "athlete" council as a "representative" of amatuer athletes that is inconsistent with the Ted Stevens Act with requires a council of amatuer athletes to advise USSF on their views. So what you had was a bunch of professional and former professional athletes expelling one of the few amatuer athletes advising USSF because he didn't say the same thing that they did.
I don't agree with with Jahn's views, but I think USSF's illegal actions are much more serious than my disagreement with Jahn.
Have you ever seen players from another country kneel while their national anthem is being played? If you can't respect our flag and our anthem, get the f$&@ out.
As retired military, I find support for disrespecting our flag repugnant, and am feeling agrieved by this microaggression ... do my feelings count for this offensive behavior? Where is my voice against these spoiled brats who get to "play" for a living? Tell it to the soldier overseas getting shot at ... What tripe to pass this rule 4 years ago, and now rescind it under pressure from the woke crowd. I refuse to watch any more US games where kneeling occurs, and count those who kneel as enemies of our militay and veterans, and of AmericA. It has nothing to do with police misbehavior - and where is the outrage when police officers get assassinated? Does anyone bemoan that to the same degree? I find the statements by Becky Sauerbrunn and others of her ilk to be perfectly Orwellian, demanding groupthink compliance from the teeming masses, bowing at the altar of Big Brother. Isn't there anyone in U.S. Soccer with an ounce of courage to stand up to the bullying from the left?
Were you equally as agrieved when the "freedom fighters" raided Capitol Hill for the alleged fraudulent election? Did you post your disgust for how that officer was assasinated at that event? Were you moved by the gallows that were erected with the federal building as a backdrop? What about your fellow citizen with his Camp Auschwitz sweat shirt and the logo "Work Brings Freedom." Of all the things that could be looked at as disrespect to our country and to our flag do you really think kneeling quietly should elicit the level of emotional repsonse that it has?
Elvin: yes. Those folks that stormed the capital are criminals and should be punished accordingly. The do not represent the U.S. military, or the U.S. flag, and if you think otherwise, you need to go to a local VFW and have a chat with some vets who may not still have all their body parts. I don't see the comparison. Your intentions for supporting the kneelers' demonstration do not equal my interpretation of what's I'm viewing. If I am aggreived, then I'll say so. They can kneel all they want, but condoning it just stokes anger and resentment and does nothing to further their "cause," which I do support. Therefore I will not watch, support, or otherwise engage with U.S. Soccer until they change. U.S. national team members who kneel during our anthem at international matches further degrade themselves and the U.S. If that intention is to mock the military and the flag and the U.S., then mission accomplished every time they kneel. I choose other means to approach possible solutions to the problem, live in a multicultural neighborhood where my neighbors of color fly the U.S. flag, and we discuss solutions that don't shout insults in each others' faces. Maybe you should attend the funeral of an assassinated police officer to see that this problem has multiple sides.
John, your assumption is that I could not possibly ask that question if I had any association to military or law enforcement. I have family who have served in every modern US war since North Korea. And yes, I have a steady constituent of law enforcement friends from local departments all the way up to secret service. You see, what I ask is not based on a lack of familiarity. I just don't see the same reaction to the other types of imagery and actions that are on display on a regular basis. Kneeling may not be something I am inclined to do but it also doesn't generate any visceral reactions out of me either. Maybe on the international stage I might have a different opinion.
By the way, John thank you for your previous service to our country.
Elvin, thank you for your remarks, with which I agree. I have a whole other dialogue on this subject that probably wouldn't fly here (trying to solve spiritual problems with secular solutions), but the division is getting uglier and I just don't see how kneeling is going to do anything positive. Shutting down dialogue certainly does nothing to advance the discussion. I pray for our country and world.
There are ways to deal with someone who's information is wrong or misleading, which is often the case in any human endeavor or especially in an organization with a membership as widespread as U.S. Soccer. It certainly requires special handling, but it can be done without knee-jerk votes in the heat of the moment. No one is perfect and any experienced person in a leadership position knows that everyone who opens his/her mouth in a public forum might not be entirely accurate or soothing to the ear. I find what transpired over the weekend to be troubling in that it appears that if a board member or other meeting participant expresses an opinion where accuracy, tone or sensitivity is questioned, it's ground for explusion from the group. Is that really what the current leadership of the federation wants?
I did not hear the entire 7 minute speech but I agree with you in priniciple. More could have been done before a unilateral action was taken.
The federation's Prohibited Conduct Policy prohibits harassment on the basis of race, religion or national origin. This includes "any verbal, written or physical act in which race, religion, or national origin is used or implied in a manner that would make a reasonable person uncomfortable in the work environment or which would interfere with a person's ability to perform the job."
I think just getting consensus on what defines a "Reasonable Person" and "Uncomfortable" in today's society is too tall of a task.
USSF has released the Kraken.
@R2,... Think Lowest Commom Dinominator ... SNOWFLAKE, Boom your Cancelled.!!! at the Slightest "Offensive" comment... That's what this Country has Sunk To.!!!
Interesting, that while a number of these comments defend Mr Jahn's right to his opinion expressed in his comments to the Council, Mr Kukitz responds with the 21 century version of "love it or leave it". Personally, I see the mass hypocrisy of a large segment of our population, in that during my many decades of watching and attending sports events, I have seen literally tens of thousands of people totally ignore the anthem. They have been too busy eating, or talking, or ( more recently) checking their phones and NOBODY said a word about it until one particular athlete decided to kneel as a way of expressing his opinion. As to Mr Jahn's opinion.... How far is the expression of that opinion allowed to vary from the values of the Athlete's Council? What if he had said that the problem is there are too many nonwhite and/or LGBTQ athletes representing the USA? Ok, because it's his "opinion"? Where is the line drawn? These are not easy questions, but Mr Kukitz response, to mandate our freedom of response to national symbols, especially because other countries do it, is not answer that fits American values, despite the fact that many in our country seem to have forgotten that.
That is the truth. They run to the restrooms, go to the beer stand, or just sit in their seats and talk figuring that lines will be shorter during the anthem.
I didn't think the news from the weekend could get worse, only to wake up to this. So much "Unity" from supposed leadership in this country. But don't worry, Becky, the woke alligator will eventually come for you, too.
I have no problem with Mr. Jahn publicly defending his opinion that athletes should stand during the anthem. I happen to disagree with that opinion, but expressing the idea that athletes should be expected to stand for the anthem in order to show respect to the country they have been selected to represent is within the bounds of reasonable debate.
But Jahn loses me with nonsense like this from his speech (and this is just one of many instances like this),
Even if it were true that the US is the only country to fight a war to abolish slavery, all this means is that the US is the only country where slavery was so deeply entrenched that it took a war that killed 400,000 people to eliminate it. And half of those deaths didn't come from Americans dying to abolish slavery. Half of those deaths came from people dying while committing treason in defense of slavery. Of course, just abolilshing slavery through the bloody Civil War didn't come anywhere near to eliminating racial injustice in this country. And the cherry on top of this ridiculousness is that the term "stars and bars" never refers to the American flag. It is used essentially exclusively in reference to the first flag of the Confederate State of America.
We can debate whether Jahn's comments were insultingly racist or just a person expressing his opinions. But there is no doubt that his comments were wildly ignorant, and you don't want to be represented by ignorance either.
Victor.... so true.
Sadly tell a lie enough times and loud enough...
And just look at how many people will follow
Victor , you're right 400,000, didn't die fighting slavery. So lets say 200,000 did, which is nothing to sneeze at either for after all how many actually died in total fighting in WW1 and WW2 . And as far as I know there is no other country in the world that fought to abolish slavery and killed so many of their own people , unless you can name one.
And to say so many died in this war shows you how entrenched slavery was in America , has to be 'qualified' by saying only certain States supported slavery, but not the whole country, which is something often forgotten when talking about slavery in the US. Therefore ,I think you missed the point , I find what America did to fight slavery as an admirable trade in our culture for we are basicly 'first' in many things ,even having the first black president. Your quote of Jahn's statement ,I don't find rediculous, for after all, name me another country that fought the battle over slavery. Please enlighten me on that....
And surely, like you state, racial injustice did not go away, as promulgated by the likes of the KKK ,that hung slaves and even republicans alike, Jim Crow laws ,etc..... Again lets qualify it by saying, racial injustice was heavily supported going deep into 20th century by the same party that supported slavery, the Democratic Party...
And your statement, " his comments were wildly ignorant, and you don't want to be represented by ignorance either." Although you find his statements wildly ignorant, fine, but many statements made by our leaders today in government are characterized daily as being ignorant. So it is up to the people when voting whether they want to be represented by this person....
@Victor,... If I Prove that you are the Ignorant one, Can we "CANCEL" You.!?!?!? ...
Union dead:
364,511
(The Ohio State University-Dept of History)
Santiago, technically the Civil War was not fought to abolish slavery. It was fought to resolve the issue of whether states, after ratifying the US Constitution, retained the right to leave the Union. That issue was resolved by conflict. The conflict did not resolve the issue of slavery. Slavery was legal in the US. Lincoln freed the slaves in the rebel states using his authority as commander in chief. He had no authority to amend the Constitution or change laws in the other states. This is perhaps offensive to some who may consider it politically incorrect, but his legal authority as commander was dependant on the theory that slaves were property which he "liberated" in a manner of speaking. The treason of the Southern States gave an advantage to the abolitionists to push though constitutional amendments that otherwise would have been opposed by the former rebel states. It was the 13th Amendment of course that made slavery illegal in the US.
I only make this point because I thought it would interest you.
Technically correct you are, Bob
Victor is right, and Bob does a good job explaining why. The idea that the "good white people of the non-slave holding states saw slavery for the evil it was and made great sacrifices to eliminate it" is implied by Jahn's pride in claiming that the US was somehow superior to other nations because we sacrificed so much to achieve this obvious good (abolition) is dangerously wrong. As Bob says, the war was fought to preserve the union (Lincoln explained his goals: "I would save the Union. ... If I could save the Union without freeing any slave I would do it, and if I could save it by freeing all the slaves I would do it; and if I could save it by freeing some and leaving others alone, I would also do that." Abolitionists were very unpopular (even in the north), the capitalist elites in NY city were so afraid of losing their supply of cotton (and shipping) that they considered breaking away from the state of NY. The draft riots of 1863, in which black residents were targeted by the rioters (mostly Irish immigrants who didn't want to fight in the war to free people who they saw as competitors for jobs), demonstrated the strong feelings some had against fighting a war to free the slaves.
Jahn's statement about all races being subject to slavery is similarly dangerously ignorant. No other race experienced slavery on the scale (and with the horrific conditions) that black Africans did. Whites were enslaved in ancient Rome and Greece (Slavs were a ready source, and the source of the name), and Africans enslaved their fellow Africans, so sure, it existed. But before Europeans came to Africa, slavery was much less pervasive and less onerous (slaves were often not slaves for life, they often lived with the families and could be treated as family members). The development of slave labor for sugar (and cotton, coffee, cacao and a few crops) created an insatiable demand for slaves that became race based and on a scale unimaginable in previous world history. Conditions were worse for the slaves in Latin America (the life expectancy for slaves on sugar plantations was something like 3 yrs once they got there).
Having Jahn express such inaccuracies justifies his removal.
@Kent, could the Slavery of Black Africans Occurred without the Help of Other Black Africans.??? Did White People go into the "Bush" and Take Blacks Prisoner.???
The article is inaccurate in describing the federal law's requirement. The athlete's council is a subterfuge through which USSF avoids the federal requirements for it to be the US governing body for amatuer soccer. Merely having an athlete's council composed of professional athletes, even if they are given voting power in annual meetings, does not satisfy the acts requirements. All decision making bodies whether they are called boards or committees or something else, must be composed of current amatuer athletes numbering at least 1/3 of the voting power. What is an amatuer soccer player is defined by USSF's rules (i.e. someone who is not a professional player). Players who represented the US in past amatuer international competitions count as current amateur players.
The USSF does not meet the most basic requirement of the act, i.e., having the promotion of amatuer athletic competition as an express purpose of the organization.
Ian Plenderleith is exactly right.
The article covers well what brought about Jahn's downfall. The rules are that no one make exercise their First Amendment rights to refer to race, expressly or otherwise, in a manner that would make a reasonable person "uncomfortable". That everyone else besides the putative one person is comfortable with the statement is not a defense. I doubt that this rule would be found constitutional since USSF enjoys a quasi-governmental status and is not acting as a private organization.
But it is what it is. Myself, I think a 30-second unemotional statement would have been given a hall pass. This was way past that. USSF is all about promoting the business side of soccer, and an unpopular public statement is a sin to business interests, regardless of what they think.
1) Politics (ie differing opinions) will always be a part of the governing process, especially as it relates to important topics. Statistics and statements used to justify a position will often be differed by another set of statistics and statements used to justify an opposing position, even when discussing the same issue or proposed solution.
2) If we struggle to unify around the respect for a flag representing our country (past, present and future) so maybe we try to unify around the game which is what US Soccer desperately needs to also do in a dramatic way. Where are we on reducing pay to play barriers to open up more access for those to play? Where are we reducing coach education fees to increase access to coaching education? Where are we at developing the next generation of players (following this great group coming thru right now, must have done some things right)? Where are we at ... on the game issues to do more, better or differently to enhance the game?
Good point. I cannot imagine any real conversation about protests against racial discrimination that won't mention race, and, on such a heated topic, someone was bound to be made "uncomfortable".
The application of the USSF policy was entirely one-sided. I am sure Jahn and others were made "uncomfortable" by the statements of the speakers for majority position too. After all the purpose of political protest is to make reasonable people unconfortable.
In essence Jahn was angered by discussion of a heated issue and then expelled because he lost his temper. Seems a bit unfair to me.
All of these opinions are things that make this country the greatest...we have freedom of thought and choice. We will never agree on everything, but let's not dismiss that person because of something that the person says just because it offends you. We all have our own individual opinions, but at the end of the day (even if we vehemently disagree) we should still be able to go have a drink afterwards.
Freedom of speech is decisive for working people. It's was correct to repeal the order to stand quietly for the national anthem. I remember as a youth, the Afro American atheletes who courageously raised their fists in the air at the Olympics. They did this at a time of ferocious government repression against a section of the leadership of the Black community. This included the assination of Malcolm X, leaders of the Black Panther Party and ultimately Martin Luther King,jr.
I am also opposed to the liberal attacks on history and culture under the guise of political correctness. Franklin Delano Roosevelt the darling of the liberals sent Japanese Americans to concentration camps, looked the other way as anti Black pogroms were organized in city after city, turned away people of the Jewish faith fleeing for their lives from the furnace of the Third Reich, sent labor and sociallist leaders to prison under the Smith Gag Act, did not prosecute the racist mobs targeting Mexican Americans in the Zoot Suit riots, etc.
the best way to confront Jahn ideas is by confronting them with facts - while it may not change his mind it can influence others.
Athletes representatives are elected (hopefully) and not appointed. This means they can be subject to recall by the membership they represent or not be re-elected. Removing someone by fiat only confuses the issues.
Working people have the strongest interest in defending freedom of speech because regardless of who the original target is - the restriction will be ultimately used against us.
The sad truth is that there is so much hypocracy among everyone it really is true about the old saying, opinions are like assholes, everyone has one. Hypocracy among us really became evident when most Christians vote for a man that bragged about grabbing certain female body parts. Then all the beer drinkers that continued to get drink their beers while the National Athem played became offended when others kneeled to the song that they were drinking too. Then we have a man sitting in the council offending other council members, such as Becky and others who probably voiced comparably offensive statements to friends and family sometime in their life, I'm sure because no one is perfect. See my point? I'm sure my point just offended someone ON BOTH SIDES! The hypocracy among us and all the comments I'm reading is making my head spin! We are all hypocrites...every last one of us. So before we point the blame on anyone, we all need to dig deep in ourselves, try to understand how the other person is thinking (not feeling) and make a change for the greater goal.
It's unfortunate the Athletes' Council doesn't have a measure akin to Censure. Keeping Jahn in the US Soccer family long enough to have an information-based discussion might cause him to moderate his statements.
Exile is just throwing him into a camp that gets louder as they falsely claim First Amendment privileges. He served as a representative and I can't help but think he didn't run these remarks by his constituency. It would be disservice not to consult that constituency before chiming in on a volatile issue.
Is there anything else to report on from the AGM other than this?
It interesting that a man who put his life on the line countless times defending this country, a wounded veteran, is cast aside for voicing an unpopular opinion, an opinion that was defeated by vote. But the vote defeating his side on the subject is not enough, he must be punished for the oppoistion alone. A wounded veteran who deployed countless times, is expelled because he has a strong opinion on a matter that hye believes is intensely relevant to his service and the service of his friends who came home in boxes under the American flag.
Not surpirising, but interesting.
Well said, Seth.
@Seth,... Jahns also states that he is a (as Cher put it, "Halfbreed") ... Cherokee... Can a Minority BE RACIST.!?!?!?
Ditto Bob re Seth - public flogging of a war hero doesn't make many friends ... I hope no U.S. military ceremonial details are allowed to support US soccer or any other events that disrespect the flag. Let them recruit some of the players to carry the flag and sing the anthem ... or not.
Now that all the dust has settled down, and I finally read in the news what Jahn had stated, since previouisly I only supported him for his right to have his opinion stated without punishment. I'm asking what is all the fuss about. He's right on target. And to boot he has character for he stands behind what he believes in.... He has backbone,how refeshing is that when there are so many snowflakes around....THANK YOU FOR YOUR SERVICE TO OUR COUNTRY.....
This is the kind of person who has character, not afraid to express his opinion, and won't waver, to be voted in as president of the USSF....I can only imagine the reduction of BS in that organization.
"Scent of a Woman" character Frank. Al Pacino. Forget the name of the school, great movie-message. Flame thrower.
Thanks Ships ,I will check it out.....
Ships, Baird Academy. Absolutely incredible movie and Pacino's best work ever in my opinion.
Seth , I will check that out too....Thanks....
Love it when the SA bigoted apologists creep forth in their dingy, shady, angry droves! Fine bi-products of criminal 45 Dumptruck, unchecked social media, and their own unprocessed anger/naivete/ignorance. Think critically...and it's never too late to get some psychological help!