AG BEll Oral group encourages lying to Senators – not cool

ADDED: if you want to contact your Senators to support the CRPD ratification – CDR has a GREAT online auto system- very easy, fast, and secure:

Greetings all:
I call upon the AG Bell Association to issue a denouncement of Theresa Bulger’s unjust and unjustifiable attack on natural sign language, Deaf culture, human rights, the UN CRPD and the National Association of the Deaf.  Really uncool of her so the AG Bell Association better step up to the plate and issue a call for SUPPORT of the UN CRDP or else your mask is totally down and we completely see YOUR bias.

The UN Convention on the Rights of Persons with Disabilities (CRPD) has been ratified by many nations all over the world however the pro-Oralists in the U.S. are trying to flood US Senators inboxes with a bunch of lies saying that the convention is biased and trying to deny parental rights.  Geez they r so wrong.  Falsehoods and false prophecies seem to be old habits that are just really hard for them to kick – why? well because what they are selling does not work reliably or justly so they have to resort to deceit – geez that aint sweet.

Excerpts from Theresa Bulger’s War Against CRPD in support of the Oral / Aural Only industry
Bulger falsely explains the CRPD by saying “That means that as the USA comes into compliance with this convention – only sign language will be provided (funded) to children. NAD has made a strategic move to pre-empt dialogue re the ADA.”

She is full of crap folks – it doesnt say ONLY sign language – chill on the BS Bulger.

She goes on to say “Parents will have their choice removed. Statements that sign is the natural and preferred language of the deaf will allow states, school districts and others to support only sign. This is a deliberate and strategic move to undermine parental choice and listening and spoken language options for children.”

What is she saying that a parents’ desire to force their child to be raised oral / aural only and exclude sign language from their life should supersede the right of the child to a fully natural and accessible language – HUH?  WOW!

Her sample letter to the Senators is really biased and paints the NAD out to be exclusively ASL folks when many of their members are survivors of pure oralism.  She calls for the includion of access for non-signers and that is already put into the convention – READ THE WHOLE THING babe not just the parts about Deaf culture and sign language that you are NOW TRYING TO GET TAKEN OUT.
Who’s biased huh?  Who is militant in their feverish pitch for Oral / Aural ONLY and who has a bloody vested interest in the industry of Listening and Spoken Communication
So pretty please CALL and/or email every US Senator urging them to join the other nations in ratifying this right, just and good convention.  And after the Senate votes then start ringing AG Bell and telling them this is totally UNACCEPTABLE – how they are playing things – totally WRONG and UNACCEPTABLE this lame fear mongering and playing off the parents.

I can not tell you how many parents i have met who REGRET not learning sign language and there is nothing in the CRPD that says the parents must sign – they just shouldnt deny the child the right to a fully natural and accessible language because that is what all children are entitled to.  Many parents regret not learning to sign years later even if their Deaf child hears a plenty and speaks – why do they wish they had learned – well cuz its mighty handy to have sign language and sometimes the Deaf child (later adult) lingers longer at the table when signing is present and sometimes they bring home Deaf pals who sign and sometimes they fall in love with those Deaf pals and make more Deaf babies and then mom and dad really regret not knowing sign language and well just cuz its the right, just and good thing to do and the learning of signing does not pre-empt or exclude the ability to learn speech and/or use hearing devices etc.

Geez how the Oralists  spin and play things – that is just rude and nasty of u.  geez this one is much worse than the pepsi letter and the unwanted and offensive membership cards to teachers of the Deaf – three strikes and you out AG Bell / LSL center.  Ya better take a stand against this bs and for the CRPD

Now the AG Bell  Association might say they didnt have anything to do with this call for opposing the UN CRPD from Bulger; however, the call did go out on an AG Bell Deaf Adults list group and Bulger was a chair for a past AG Bell Convention and if they can denounce AFA before we even had our peaceful and 1st amendment sanctioned rally at their place in 2009, they can surely denounce Bulger’s unjust misrepresentation of CRPD

I’ve copied and pasted AFA’s  sample letter you can email the US Senators urging them to do the right thing and ratify the UN CRPD.

Audism Free America’s sample letter – Just add your name)

22 July 2012

Greetings Dear Senator:

We urge you to support the ratification of the United Nation Convention on the Rights of Persons with Disability (UN CRPD) because presently all over the globe Deaf children are denied what children from all walks are life are regularly given freely and openly: access to language and equality.  We most especially support the following provisions in the UN CONVENTION ON THE RIGHTS OF PERSONS WITH DISABILITIES:

Article 21 – Freedom of expression and opinion, and access to informationStates Parties shall take all appropriate measures to ensure that persons with disabilities can exercise the right to freedom of expression and opinion, including the freedom to seek, receive and impart information and ideas on an equal basis with others and through all forms of communication of their choice, as defined in article 2 of the present Convention, including by:
b. Accepting and facilitating the use of sign languages, Braille, augmentative and alternative communication, and all other accessible means, modes and formats of communication of their choice by persons with disabilities in official interactions;e. Recognizing and promoting the use of sign languagesArticle 24 – Education
3. States Parties shall enable persons with disabilities to learn life and social development skills to facilitate their full and equal participation in education and as members of the community. To this end, States Parties shall take appropriate measures, including:b. Facilitating the learning of sign language and the promotion of the linguistic identity of the deaf community;Article 30 – Participation in cultural life, recreation, leisure and sport4. Persons with disabilities shall be entitled, on an equal basis with others, to recognition and support of their specific cultural and linguistic identity, including sign languages and deaf culture.Thank you again for your attention to this important matter.  Every child deserves to have full and natural access to language.  A Deaf mind is a horrible thing to waste.

We hope the U.S. will join the other civilized nations of this world and ratify this important convention in a step toward guaranteeing the rights of ALL individuals that we, as Americans, have pledged to uphold.

Let Freedom Roll,


54 Comments (+add yours?)

  1. Paul Kiel
    Jul 25, 2012 @ 04:56:25

    Can we see the link of Bulger’s letter? thanks, Paul

  2. Ricky Taylor (@ridor9th)
    Jul 25, 2012 @ 06:30:16



  3. Daniel M.
    Jul 25, 2012 @ 15:01:37

    please include link and other evidence because right now you are just using hearsay. You’re a voice quacking in the dark. Please include Link so we can independently verifiy your claims. Otherwise, You’re running the risk of ruining your own word.

  4. handeyes
    Jul 25, 2012 @ 18:52:17

    Daniel – ya might want to demand verification and proof from AG Bell of “independence through listening and talking” and all their other propaganda – ya know what with speaking of quacks and all

    much peace


  5. Joseph Pietro Riolo
    Jul 25, 2012 @ 21:50:07

    For me, I don’t think it is wise to support the treaty.

    The phrase “the best interests of the child” that occurs three times in the treaty is ambiguous and the treaty does not tell how the interests are determined. Section 4 in Article 23 could give the social agencies an additional legal tool and more power to force cochlear implant on deaf children against their parents’ wish. We know that what the social agencies think are the best interests for a deaf child is not always congruent with what the parents think. As cochlear implant is getting better and better and is becoming more effective, the social agencies will not hesitate to ask courts to force cochlear implant on deaf children if their parents decide not to put cochlear implant on them. This will lead to the extinct of deaf children who do not have cochlear implant.

    I personally think that it is best not to support the treaty until it is revised extensively to ensure that the deaf children will not be forced to receive cochlear implant or any new hearing technologies.

    Joseph Pietro Riolo

    Public domain notice: I put all of my expressions in this post in the public domain.

  6. Tina M.
    Jul 25, 2012 @ 23:47:22

    The venom and hate you perpetuate here is a far worse offense. The approach you’ve taken on this matter is very unprofessional and sickening. We need to embrace and accept all methods off communication, and give respect to all the options.

  7. David Bourne
    Jul 26, 2012 @ 01:04:46

    All we ask is that the parent(s) and families of a deaf child be given the choice of how to live their life! This choice can be to either provide ASL to a deaf child or technology that enables access to sound. This choice should not be curtailed in any way by either national law or international treaties. Any treaty should support the rights of parents and families to make this choice.

  8. handeyes
    Jul 26, 2012 @ 02:37:18

    heye joseph – wow long time no see. you are aware that Deaf children have already been implanted against their parents wishes in this country? 2 separate cases that i know of of Deaf fathers not wanting their Deaf child implanted but the Hearing mother going ahead with it. One case of a Hearing mother not wanting her Deaf child to be implanted because she was worried about the affect of the anesthesia – the child already had some cognitive challenges and Mayo clinic study has shown increase in learning problems in children who have had 2 or more surgeries with anesthesia – other family members got the court to take the child away from the mother and they had him implanted. a LSL specialist testified against the mother’s ability to do what is needed to keep up with all the CI appts follow up therapy sessions etc. Fortunately on appeal the mother won back the right to her child but he had already been implanted.

    So its nice of you to worry about some how the UN CRPD MIGHT be twisted to force parents to accept their child being implanted against their wishes but IN FACT t is already a reality in the US and the provisions of the CRPD actually protect the child and the parents for healthy living

    Re: revisions – that is not how it works – trains already left the station.

    Ya might want to take a look at this map and see how many other nations have joined the civilized nations in wanting to protect and honor Deaf folks and differently abled folks.

    Me looking forward to seeing the US join these other nations otherwise we’s looking pretty primitive and disrespectful



  9. handeyes
    Jul 26, 2012 @ 02:41:40

    Tina M

    We the truthseekers are well aware of the venom and where hence it comes from.


    re: unprofessional and sickening – please see Theresa Bulger’s letter

    re: respecting all methods of communication – what Bulger is pushing is NOT RESPECT of all methods of communication. not at all

    perhaps i misunderstood you and you are responding to Bulger bs and not my entry exposing Burgess’ ill-intent and unjust actions. If i have misunderstood you – my apologies.

    If your comments are an attempt at projection – no worries we aim to cast a light on such pathetic patterns at deceit.

    Much peace


  10. handeyes
    Jul 26, 2012 @ 02:45:29

    David – i see you are swallowing a bit of the “parental choice” at risk hysteria too. that is a bit.

    Nothing in the UN CRPD says folks can’t use technology. Nothing in the UN CRPD says ASL ONLY – like Bulger falsely tries to claim

    IN FACT *gasp that durr always coming out with the facts* the only ones saying ONLY anything are the “option” “oral education” “AG Bell Folks” and that is obstructing choice

    And no worries cuz even if the US dont ratify this convention which they totally SHOULD – there are three other International Documents attesting to the Deaf child’s right to a natural sign language and Deaf culture.

    Geez i honestly am appalled that any of you have the audacity to advocated for language deprivation – WOW. so sad

    much peace


  11. independentminded
    Jul 26, 2012 @ 03:11:42

    If you are not biased why don’t you ask the Senators to add AVT or oral to CRPD? Why don’t you contact Theresa Bulger and ask her if she will work together with you to include ASL and oral?

  12. Joseph Pietro Riolo
    Jul 26, 2012 @ 09:09:22

    I don’t think that it is a reality that the courts have the power to issue orders that a deaf child must have cochlear implant.

    The deaf biological father that you mentioned abandoned the hearing biological mother when she became pregnant. That deed alone was enough to deprive or greatly limit the father’s rights to raise their deaf daughter. It was not through the court that the deaf daughter obtained cochlear implant. It was only the mother’s decision to put cochlear implant on their daughter, unfortunately without the input from the deaf father. It was only during the custody dispute that the court entered the picture. If you have facts that show otherwise, please point me to them.

    The mother was in very vulnerable position that she lost the custody of her deaf child and people exploited her vulnerability to put cochlear implant on the deaf child. It ain’t cool. It is evil. But, the fact that she won during the appeal shows that the court still recognized her right to raise her deaf child in the way that she thinks is best for the child. If the treaty were ratified before she appealed the lower court’s decision, the treaty would greatly decrease or eliminate the mother’s chance to win at the appeal.

    So, it is not a reality yet.

    It is your business to weigh the benefits against the risks of treaty and arrive at a decision that you think is best for you. I personally that the risk of letting social agencies having more power over the deaf children greatly outweighs the benefits that comes with the treaty. I personally think that it is not cool to see the deaf children without cochlear implant to become extinct, thanks to the treaty.

    Joseph Pietro Riolo

    Public domain notice: I put all of my expressions in this post in the public domain.

  13. handeyes
    Jul 26, 2012 @ 09:44:04

    independent minded – i never said i was not biased. I am biased towards justice and equality. aint gonna change that cuz i got me independent mind a working

    re: “why dont i ask the senate to add AVT and LSL …” well cuz 1. its too late in the process for adding WAKE UP darling and 2. BECAUSE AVT and LSL are jealous mistresses that ban signing from the hands of the wee things. It is still happening in the US of A. they told me Oralism was a thing of the past that they didnt rap wee children’s hand with rulers no more, that they didnt punish or isolate for signing no more but i am learning from the young folks that it is still a goin’ on so NO NO NO i will not advocate for AVT and LSL. i certainly will say it is fine to provide clinical services of speech and audition if someone so desires it but NEVER if it requires the banning of visual acuity (see the fan they use) and natural sign language and especially if it is a JEALOUS MISTRESS that requires the EXCLUSION of what comes naturally to the child

    Can you not see your own unjust bias when u advocate for AVT and LSL – wow!

    RE: “why dont i contact theresa bulger…” ya all are VERY obvious when u try to put the burden upon the oppressed to “reach out” to the oppressor

    in fact what i am doing now via this blog enter and via direct peaceful confrontation IS A FORM OF REACHING OUT TO HER. she knows where to find us if she wants to issue an apology

    im all eyes

    and now u might want to return to the blog entry and examine your choice of defending the Oralists conduct while trying to chastize me

    wow – u r just priceless in your deception and dysfunctionality there

    no worries – i still love ya

    much peace


  14. handeyes
    Jul 26, 2012 @ 09:51:16

    Good morning Joseph

    1. WOW how you are derailing this tread off the topic of how WRONG Bulger’s actions were to be about your misconception of the potential misuse of the CRPD

    2. im waiting to see u make a firm statement admonishing Bulger’s conduct and calling for the AG Bell association to say and do something about this matter cuz it is not cool at all

    3. u REALLY oppose the ratification of the UN CRPD – really?

    im waiting Joseph and what u decide to say next will speak volumes

    im all eyes and heart in fact

    my next comment will be responding to ur comment re: CI and parental rights but really – this comment here is all i care about right now re: US – meaning me and u joe

    i aint playing and u r too good of a person to be coming off like someone who does not care about the plight of differently abled folks all over the globe – children who are left in back rooms, children who are denied ANY form of education simply because their eyes, ears, limbs, brains, etc work differently than others?

    these children are often targeted for abuse at a higher rate at a horrific amount and you have the audacity to say – i dont support the UN CRPD because someone might use it wrongly when IN FACT a parent cant get out of a hospital room (and now a home birth) without being beaten over the head with glossy CI brochures

    really joseph?


    the truth and nothing but the truth please

    that is all i ever ask

    we aint dancing friend

    much peace


  15. handeyes
    Jul 26, 2012 @ 10:18:26

    here is my reply to ur comment re: CI and parental rights but again – i will NOT tolerate this blog entry thread becoming about how folks interpret or dont interpret the CRPD because the TOPIC at hand and HEART is Bulger’s action and AG Bell’s in action in condemning her bs

    eyes on the truth folks

    Joseph the III wrote: I don’t think that it is a reality that the courts have the power to issue orders that a deaf child must have cochlear implant.

    PATTI writes: See the Idaho judge that issued the “all her waking hours” order against the wishes of a Deaf father

    re: all you wrote about the one case – you have your facts wrong. The father did want to have involvement with the baby even though the pregnancy resulted by accident and he and the mother never were a couple even though they coupled. The father feels he was duped into approving the first implant and the 2nd one he was not even aware of. He is still the dad Joseph. If you want to pass some kind of regulation that a man looses all his rights to his child because he does not marry the woman he impregnates well shutgun weddings here we come.

    I never said the court ordered the implanting in that one case – i said that parental rights are already being denied in this country re: CI implantation. I cant direct u to more details on that case because the mother wants info on the details of the case erased from public knowledge and the judge has kinda endorsed that to protect the child’s privacy etc.

    the court DID intervene and regulate parental rights when they ordered that the child must have her cochlear implants ON all her waking hours regardless of the father’s wishes. Last i heard she was court ordered “allowed” to have it off a max of 2 hours a day if desired

    there is another Deaf father who was married to a Hearing woman and while they were having troubles in their marriage (not divorced yet) she went and had their Deaf child implanted without the father’s consent and against his wishes.

    So my point remains – parental rights in the US – is bogus and in favor of the dominant cultures paradigm of “make ’em Hearing” CRPD does not undermine parental rights

    parental rights is already undermined in this country

    ya can spin parental rights, choices options but it all adds up to endorsing and enabling language and cultural biogtry and oppression and this is why Theresa Bulger does not like the CRPD – cuz the CRPD says NOT COOL. and THEY ARE RIGHT

    re: what you wrote about the Hearing mother who’s child was implanted against her wishes – THANK YOU for acknowledging that was VERY wrong.

    You wrote: “If the treaty were ratified before she appealed the lower court’s decision, the treaty would greatly decrease or eliminate the mother’s chance to win at the appeal.”

    Joseph- really im surprised at you. Did you not read the convention????? It would have helped the court rule PROPERLY during the first custody case and ensured the child stay with his mother and honor her wishes NOT to implant. wow Joseph – how could you possibly interpret the CRPD otherwise. geez what are you reading all those bs blogs out there painting CRPD bull#hittingly. Read the actual document brother.

    Joseph you wrote: “I personally think that it is not cool to see the deaf children without cochlear implant to become extinct, thanks to the treaty.”

    WHAT – really gosh – this is already happening. the CRPD is a wee bit of a possible stop gap in the huge rush to implant and mandate oral / aural only without any conscience or examination of the right just and good thing to do. for you to have twisted the convention to be a conduit for cultural and linguistic genocide when IN FACT it has actual languagae that calls for cultural and linguistic PROTECTION – wow … careful cuz kokonut might be having another orgasm over your public domain comments.

    If crdp was gonna allow for mass CI – u can bet that bugler & Oralist co. would be calling for its ENDORSEMENT not its denial of ratification.

    u really are too smart for this so my red flags are a flaring joseph

    and im a waiting on how you respond to my comment above

    truth and nothin’ but it



  16. ASLElla
    Jul 26, 2012 @ 16:42:43

    Just want to drop a line to say that you, Patti, are so good, so brilliant and I’m so glad u are here on Earth (and yes Eyeth too) with your brilliance and stand for truth. Thank u!

  17. David Bourne
    Jul 26, 2012 @ 17:29:44

    Ms. Bulger has advocated for ASL in FLA and elsewhere but not at the expense of parental choice. I don’t think I have the right to say how your child(ren) should be raised and neither do you have the right to tell me how to raise my family! If I want to raise MY deaf child with ASL first; so be it. If I want to raise my deaf child assisted by technology; so be it! Can you show me one quote from Ms. Bulger to the contrary? Probably not! Treaties override State law explicitly. We should all be on guard since they take away our freedoms as US Citizens!

  18. Da'Shia
    Jul 27, 2012 @ 02:26:11

    I really love for my son to be able to speak to some of these Senators. Then see is they think this treaty should or shouldn’t have AV or LSL. A almost 6yr old, who I, as a baby/toddler would over and over forced him to sit through sign classes/lessons since he was born Profoundly deaf AND WOULDN’T SIGN. Yes it is genetic and he is NOT the only deaf person in our family! Though us, them, the professionals couldn’t for the life of us get this child to sign. He would read out lips and SAID the words and push OUR hands DOWN. So at almost 3yrs of age he was implanted. Let me ask you, “How was I (by making him sign) NOT doing the same thing you claim others are doing with CI?” This treaty is bias!!!! Let them hear a child who has gone through this tell them how he felt, what he wished, and what made him happy. Because what he had to say out of the blue to us, and teachers may shock the Heck out of them and change a BUNCH of minds. I know it did to my husband, friends, and those in our family!

  19. DE
    Jul 27, 2012 @ 02:44:45

    Patti, echoing Ella! Your blogs is what passes as investigative journalism for me… I enjoy your amazing ability to stay focused on the prize no matter what dumb crap comes ur way or gets in ur way. Thank you for spreading the truth, and instilling courage in us. Don’t let some armchair commenters here twist ur words or project their knee-jerk Deaf-against-Deaf (programmed) habits on u. ILY

  20. handeyes
    Jul 27, 2012 @ 10:29:04

    ASLElla – well brilliant – im not so sure about some days for me smile. but if u mean we all who STAND for the truth are brilliant in our shine – yes surely. Let there be light!

    too many lies for too long and folks start to believe the BS. there is NOTHING in the Convention that says technology is abolished or speaking and listening skills are prohibited – oy how they spin (they the folks who MAKE PARENTS SIGN contracts that they will not use sign language with their Deaf children – YES some CI surgeons in the US have already made “parental rights null and void” – where is THEIR (the Parental Rights outraged folks) outcry against that. oy they think we is Deaf & Dumb. Ya basta with the bs folks)



  21. handeyes
    Jul 27, 2012 @ 10:31:26

    David Bourne –

    since knowledge is power – how about you show us exactly where in the CRPD it says your child can NOT have technology? And while you are at it can you show me where and when Bulger has advocated for ASL in Fla. We are all eyes.

    thanks – alot of stuff is getting illuminated



  22. handeyes
    Jul 27, 2012 @ 10:44:17

    DE – ohhh that is what they r playing at. thanks i was wondering what was up with that. they keep ranting the same broken record without any proof that the convention really does as they “fear” when IN FACT the exact thing they say they fear is already happening here yet no outrage oy. and yeah this constant – dont deny my child speech and technology, when IN FACT the convention does not do that, is a major red flag about who is really behind this.

    its mighty interesting how desperate they are becoming and cruel. Seriously i think it is VERY inhumane to play the parents against a just convention for industries (CI and LSL) personal gain. Not to mention all the differently abled children all over the globe who would be denied rights and equality of condition just cuz the ORALISTS want to strike out Deaf and Sign Language from the conventions.

    its horrifying on so many levels. Some countries still see differently abled folks as diseased and a curse and do horrible things to them and the ORALISTS, using AG Bell list servers, send out alarmist, false, and unjust calls to get the US Senate to NOT ratify the UN CRPD – well its just shameful and dismaying.

    Compassion with our passion is what we r called to do. They are showing ZERO compassion for the Deaf children all over the globe who are physically punished if they do not adhere to the ORALISM properly, they are showing ZERO compassion for the parents whose hearts want to gesture or use pictures or show a sign language video to their child but are told NO – you will destroy them if you do that etc, they are showing ZERO compassion for the blind child with cerebral palsy in Kenya and the child with one leg in Cambodia and the developmentally disabled child in Mongolia and more.

    this kinda fanaticism is simply not cool

    advocating for the rights of natural sign language & cultural identification and access to the dominant culture & language for children who can not hear does NOT prohibit the use of speech and listening YET since the 1880 and before ORALISM has been the jealous mistress – biased and unbalanced in the most vicious and destructive way – leaving in her wake a league of language deprivation learning disabled byproducts.

    A govt should never endorse nor finance such fanaticism.



  23. handeyes
    Jul 27, 2012 @ 10:57:44

    Da’Shia –

    I am sorry you are being so sorely misinformed about the UN CRPD. I do hope you will take the time to read it and see that it does NOT prohibit you from giving your child speech lessons and listening devices if that is what BOTH you and your partner want for your child. Nor does it say that every child must be subjected to cruel and unusual punishment.

    You do realize that MANY nations of the world – developed and developing alike – see map – have already ratified this Convention. They have lawyers and specialists and policy makers go over it with a small tooth comb so “IF” this thing really was a gateway drug to take away parental rights – someone would have caught it before the tea party know nothing folks and the pro-Oralist AG Bell associated extremists started all their false claims that it would take away your right to have technology for ur child or that u must raise your child ASL only.

    Geez the crap u folks spin. Im left thinking either:
    1. folks are much more extremely bigoted than i realized
    2. folks are lacking critical thinking skills if u can swallow the crap they sold u so easily
    3. folks are not even who they are claiming to be but rather some paid hired hand to litter up the blogsphere with imaginary scenarios to keep us off track of the issue in this blog which is…….
    Theresa Bulger’s biased, unbalaned, untruthful email and sample letter which got distributed via AG Bell related list group and AG Bell has not posted any denouncement of such bigoted and unjust and FALSE rhetoric on Bulger’s part

    Bulger has a financial interest in the government financing oral / aural ONLY services and this is what she is afraid of. Hence we see the irony of her email casting suspicion by saying the NAD only supported the UN CRPD so they could promote sign language due to the VR industry. Really – just amazingly obvious, wrong, and unjust of her.

    it appears as if for her it has NOTHING to do with the children and everything to do with profit, false prophecies, the need to be needed, and a missionary zealousness.

    Not cool. Not cool at all

    we aint playing and we will not be played

    the mask is down and we see you



  24. Tina M.
    Jul 27, 2012 @ 14:40:01

    What’s the big deal? This is NOT against sign lanugage. It’s about asking for some words to be included in the CRPD. Let’s be proactive and make sure both are included. That’s it. Why is that so difficult? What’s being planned behind closed doors to exclude the other half of the deaf community? Blowing up and bashing this matter and Theresa Bulger makes me think you’re being fed a load of crap and are sorely misinformed. I don’t see the oralists blogging hate. Yes, they might comment on it here and there, but they would not stoop to this bitter level. Good for Theresa Bulger for standing up for the underdogs. I now have a new hero.

  25. Mark M
    Jul 27, 2012 @ 22:36:39

    Thank you for your STAND with your firm love and what you have is passion with action!
    That’s how I see you in your heart! I agree with what Ella said, happy you are with us on earth and eyeth!I understand your meaning behind what oralists think of us, as Deaf and Dumb. That ain’t cool. That how we are raised, the way we’ve been treated, as dumb even though we are brilliant. I believed I was dumb growing up, but I am not dumb anymore and it makes the professionals nervous. Why? They make their money off Deaf children and take advantage of families.

    Hey, Tina M. what the hell are you talking about??!! Wow, I am amazed at what you’re saying and I see the colonization is successful for you. Did you read Bulger’s letter to US Senators about CRPD? Your hero is not Bulger, your hero is the oralist system of specialists’ philosophies. Your remarks are encouraging the colonization of Deaf people, especially children, around the world.

  26. Candy
    Jul 28, 2012 @ 00:24:16

    AGBell supports CRPD, fyi. They have since before the vote yesterday.

  27. Mark M
    Jul 28, 2012 @ 01:07:17

    Candy, So tell me what role is AGBell playing toward us? They do not completely support CRPD. Here is the link to their position statement, where they choose their words very carefully. They say “choice” but actually in Florida they advocated for the new law to require a listening and spoken language professional at all IEP meetings.:

  28. Candy
    Jul 28, 2012 @ 01:50:34

    AGBell supports CRPD and they have recommendations also. I thought I saw several proposed amendments from the Foreign Committee on their (Foreign Committee) site and one of them has to do with clarifying parental rights being intact. I scanned it quickly so, you’d have to take a look at it yourself. One of the articles cover “best interest of child” and we have seen how that can hurt the deaf culture community in the past, for example, LRE is considered “best interest.” In the treaty it states that best interest of child is priority. So, if treaty says to respect sign language, yet best interest is priority, that could spell trouble. I think home school organization’s concerns should be deaf culture’s concern as well. The home school organization isn’t okay with CRPD. Their concern has to do with the way the treaty is written to mean that best interest of child could mean government can dictate to parents where their child can go to school and it is of a great concern to them, they saw that the treaty (the way it was worded) could essentially mean all children and not just disabled children.

    AGBell along with others such as NAD and etc have all supported CRPD. See this letter:

    Be sure to look at the left side of the letterhead on that PDF by the Deaf and Hard of Hearing Alliance. Look and see who all supports CRPD.

    I have a feeling amendments will be made to satisfy all interested organization, including the home schooled organization.

  29. Candy
    Jul 28, 2012 @ 02:02:13

    I really think it’s such a beautiful thing to see how Deaf and Hard of Hearing Alliance exists and is actually working together. Look at all the organization that is part of DHHA, wow.

    We know Ron Stern’s view when he started Child First, he then changed his strategy based on realities, right? Ron Stern said in his presentation, “We have met the enemy and they are ‘us'”, also he said something along the lines of “be careful who you point your fingers at, there will be many pointing back at you.” In other words, it pays to work and collaborate with everyone even if it means we all do not have the same goals, mission, or vision.

    I just wanted to share the fact that AGBell supports CRPD, I’m sure one can find more information online or by contacting DHHA. Ciao~

  30. handeyes
    Jul 28, 2012 @ 02:56:47

    Tina M
    Theresa Bulger’s email is actually a form of hate because it is anti-Deaf and anti-natural sign language. Bigotry is not cool. if this is the kinda hero you want – best wishes and good luck trying to get the word changes she has called for after so MANY MANY MANY nations all over the globe have already ratified the CRPD. Re: crap and misinformed – it seems you may be the one who needs to be careful where they walk – i think ya got some of that stuff stuck to the soles of your shoes. Heroes should tell the truth, yes?

    Much peace,


  31. Candy
    Jul 28, 2012 @ 03:18:26

    The CRPD resolution was amended, see the amendments:

    And, they covered best interest of child clarification in one of the amendment:

    Which is better, we can’t have government or any parties telling parents where to send their child to school, what language/communication a child should have, etc. So, this is GOOD. Like I said, I would not be surprised if we see more amendments in the Senate before it is ratified.

    Hope this is clears some of the misunderstanding. I don’t think Theresa represents AGB and I believe that with the ‘best interest of child’ clarification, it further reinforce parental choice being intact in decision making by the parents. Hope this makes sense.

  32. handeyes
    Jul 28, 2012 @ 03:31:17

    Candy – its contrary for u to say that AG Bell supports the CRPD while saying “I think home school organization’s concerns should be deaf culture’s concern as well” cuz this actually makes AG Bell look bad ; )

    Re: this blog entry is about Bulger’s unjust call for folks to oppose the UN CRPD to advance the oral / aural ONLY agenda. Bulger was a convention chair for an AG Bell convention, she has run oral education school(s) and her unjust letter was distributed via AG Bell list group.

    and AG Bell Association is silent re: Bulger’s actions and use of their group – hmmm

    Re: the AG Bell Associations “support of” of the UN CRPD – is very SELECTIVE. Just like with the ICED 2010 New Era Agreement – they just pick through what they can use to their favor – saying they support some of the articles & sections that they can use for their advantage and go on to wave the “its a CI + oral / aural only Brave New World” banner to tell STATES that they should implement legislative and administrative initiatives to suit the AG Bell AGENDA of advocating independence through listening and talking.

    this means that:
    – they cant accept the treaty assuring that Deaf children get what Hearing children get every day – natural and fully accessible language and exposure to their culture

    they also neglect to highlight all the great parts of the treaty for Deaf adults in terms of freedom to receive and express themselves in a naturally and fully accessible language

    So Candy i aint surprised to see you dragging in the DHHA letter in defense of the AG Bell – IN FACT it is fascinating how you work so hard to find the weest thing to try to protect them while simultaneously searching for the weest things to discredit others. Seems i recall you going nuts over my chatting with a Deaf student at a 4201 rally in Albany once. The time you spend on the web trying to praise and protect AG Bell & co. while trashing the truths seekers is very illuminating.

    And perhaps we all could use this moment to remember that it was you who have repeatedly discredited ASL – questioning if it was even a language or rather just some crazy hoax put forth by Dr. Stokoes at Gallaudet.

    No wonder u think AG Bell is doing fine. You still don’t think ASL is a language and the few times you concede that it might be you have pretty much regulated it to the illiterate or uneducated. How can we possibly expect you to see value in bilingualism when you have a clear bias towards all things English.

    Psst – we Deaf not Dumb

    Much peace,


  33. Paul
    Jul 28, 2012 @ 03:36:05

    I am now wondering if Candy is the victim of Stockholm syndrome.

  34. Candy
    Jul 28, 2012 @ 03:49:24


    I love it when you put words in my mouth. What can I do? Nothing really. I don’t think ASL is a non-language. I don’t work hard at anything. I just read stuffs and gain knowledge, pretty straight forward. I don’t believe everything I read. I listen to all sides. I’m pretty open in my view and thinking. I think sometimes some people’s view are based on emotions rather than logic or facts. Just throwing what I see as facts here (DHHA’s letter and links to amendments) and if you don’t like it, well..that’s your prerogative.

    As for home school’s view, their concern is valid. However since the amendment clarifies “best interest of child”, i wonder if they have changed their support at this point. I don’t see how it makes AGB look bad.

    Patti, I don’t think you ever understood why I did these ASL posts. I think you cherry pick things in my post without ever understanding why I did it. I never saw ASL as being bad. I see all communication methods – both signed or spoken as being “language” whether it is official or not. I’m really wasting time going over this. I’m more keen on discussing the topics instead of getting personal. Like I said, I just wanted to share the fact that AGB supports CRPD. Clear up any misunderstanding that was in this post. Likewise, I don’t think Teresa speaks for AGB as you can obviously see the contradiction between them two in their stance on this treaty. Have a great weekend. 😉

  35. handeyes
    Jul 28, 2012 @ 03:53:38

    Candy –
    link re: “best interest” thingy – this is what the CRPD &7(2) refers to
    “2. In all actions concerning children with disabilities, the best interests of the child shall be a primary consideration.” the amendment / modificaiton simply says US law defines “best interest of the child”

    hopefully that will make the tea partying home school folks comfortable

    thanks for the links and re: your hope and clarity. i got my reading glasses on so i’ seeing pretty clearly

    Paul – u can wonder all u want. Id rather we focus the issue and not individuals



  36. handeyes
    Jul 28, 2012 @ 10:29:59

    Candy – i think ur last comment came in while i was addressing the links u sent and then i went to bed and computer didnt refresh to show u had another comment in so now i see it and this is what i have to say:
    1. as always i love ya. seriously there are some characteristics that i really adore and i have told u this before

    2. re: Bulger and AG Bell having contradictory statements – well not really. not fundamentally they do not. they both aggressively and vehemently endorse Oral / Aural ONLY to the detriment of the greatest good for the greatest number.
    We know what Oral / Aural ONLY has reaped on the children then and now and it is not cool

    3. re: my understanding you – i actually DO understand you candy. And i actual see what you have been doing. I love ya enough to show u. u can try to spin and twist it as much as u want but truth and love win – think of it always said gandhi.

    go back and re-read your posts questioning if ASL is a real language. go back and re-read my post addressing ur question and comments here and there

    4. re: the CRPD – look at the UN map and u will see some countries are BLUE meaning they have ratified the CRPD and see the ORANGE countries meaning they have ratified the CRPD with the Optional Protocol

    the fact that the AG Bell endorses the Optional Protocol actually causes a red flag for me.

    i support the CRPD

    the optional protocol looks like wiggle room for Oralism to try to rear their ugly head but no worries cuz if the senate goes for the CRPD with that tacked on opitonal protocol – it does not nor will not override the overriding doctrine that Deaf children shall not be denied a natural sign language and Deaf culture.

    AG Bell is just trying to make due with what they can

    AG Bell denounced AFA in 2009 for nothing more than exercising Deaf & Ally folks’ first amendment rights (which the CRPD treaty protects for differently abled folks) yet AG Bell is silent about Theresa Bulger – one of their chief supporters and propagators of Oral / Aural ONLYism and the AG Bell sends NOTHING out on that list server saying “we dont support this email and sample letter devaluing Deaf beings, Deaf culture, and natural sign languages.”

    If AG Bell wanted to do RIGHT – it would do the RIGHT thing and issue such an email. its the very least they could do

    5. re: you and where u stand – you have spent more time and energy defending AG Bell and attacking Deaf culture and social justice than u have spent defending ASL+English and Deaf culture. this is the truth. it is time for you to start standing for that which is just, right and good. Until u do all the rest is smoke and mirrors

    i share this because i care about u and because i adhere to peaceful direct confrontation.

    re: great weekend – thank u for that wish. it has started nicely. I arrived home to find the sabbath candles almost out and so much love that i almost wept.

    life is good

    some day may we sit down for a good ole chat.

    and i too wish you a great weekend.

    much love and peace


  37. Ricky Taylor (@ridor9th)
    Jul 28, 2012 @ 14:02:45

    Gina, some old things never change. So full of malice. So full of misinformation, don’t you love it? Not.


  38. Candy
    Jul 28, 2012 @ 15:09:35

    LOL, Ricky (I would have used your handle.l..but since you used my first name – courtesy dictates that I should do the same).. Pray tell, point out the malice (I used that word first!!!) lol and pray tell, point out the misinformation. I dare you! 😉 (There is no malice or misinformation, duh) It’s funny…I wonder, what if one day I share something that you all support and hold dear in your hearts, will you oppose it because I support it? It will be too funny… Y’all need to look at the message, not the person. Ricky, pay attention to the road!! And, take care of your mom! Show her a good time (that is a sweet thing you are doing, you will always cherish that memory), that’s probably the one honorable thing you did! I’m impressed.

  39. Candy
    Jul 28, 2012 @ 15:20:14


    I don’t see attacking anyone (including organizations) will do any good. Not at all. Which is why I was impressed when Ron Stern finally saw that. Its not gonna get us anywhere. I think people need to be careful assuming things and there’s a lot of that going around. That is all I have to say, I don’t want to waste my precious energy on something trivial. Do continue to have a great weekend, I’m looking forward to it too.

  40. handeyes
    Jul 28, 2012 @ 15:28:18

    While im sure watching a battle of who gets credit for being the first would be very entertaining – we have more important things to attend to like:
    1. getting the CRPD ratified
    2. exposing how Oralist agenda goes against 4 international documents

    and candy yes u do have misinformation in ur comments here and hence my detailed replies to u

    re: when and if u support that which is right just and true – i have stood with u and would do so again so no need for u to wander wondering along “what if” cuz those days have come and past a few times before. Come to the light Candy – it will warm ya up a bit. And dont worry about all the folks that will nash their terrible teeth – all that counts is truth and love

    re: ricky’s ride with his mom – news to me but interesting to see you follow him. Seems ya got an admirer, ricky

    re: the “one” honorable thing…” wow such hubris u have

    now back to the point of this blog – AG Bell what ya gonna do do about Bulger’s bs being linked to ur name and ur members / supporters?

    happy trails all

    much peace


  41. handeyes
    Jul 28, 2012 @ 15:41:37

    Candy –

    we aint attacking – we is illuminating. ahhh perhaps u forget all the attacks u have launched at me and others while rushing to the defense of others with words of “forgive” and “move on” and “its a small world after all”

    re: trivial – nope i dont consider the UN CRPD to be trivial at all – nor does the…/UNCRPD_Issue_Brief_June_2012.pdf (from june but good)

    nor does the International Council on Disabilities

    nor does ADAPT;&sort=D

    we have seen the war against women – attacks at women’s right to control their own reproduction via the right wing and we see how they have been playing it to be about “parental rights” and “home schooling” for the CRPD

    Candy in the past you screamed about how folks should do shout outs when folks do wrong by someone and you have not made any admonishment to Bulger’s unjust statements or to them getting distributed by an AG Bell Chapter Communications director rep via an AG Bell list group

    Bulger’s statements were bigoted and THAT is misinformation & malice.

    I got no problem with u liking what Stern had to share. many folks prefer diverse approaches.

    Peaceful direct confrontation got England out of India and Black folks on the front of the bus.

    if u prefer the path of just sitting quietly and raising ur hand to wait to be called upon and think that is gonna change anything – enjoy.

    we on the move. U can stand up and catch up or you can continue with the same ole.

    looking forward to seeing the letters u sent to your senators supporting the ratification of the UN CRPD as well as you tweeting and fb etc to get others to do the same

    ya know so ur energy is invested in the vital

    be well

    much peace


  42. Candy
    Jul 28, 2012 @ 17:13:23

    Ahh, there you go again, Patti…assuming things. I’m not even going to go there, defending myself. Life is too short for that. I’m going to let you assume things as it is. Ciao

  43. David Bourne
    Jul 28, 2012 @ 17:31:28

    The only goal was to ADD language to CRPD that is inclusive! That’s it. No one (especially Ms. Bulger) was advocating deleting references to sign. Why is it important to ADD language to CRPD that includes technology based access to sound? This logic is clear!

    Technological solutions do not work well unless they are done in the first few years of life. Furthmore, if that avenue is chosen sign interferes with the learning process. After spoken language is mastered then sign can be learned as any second language is learned with no problems. Note that this same phenomena happens with children trying to learn English and Japanese in early life (language here is also considerably delayed!). A good Japanese friend of mine tried to teach their child both and the child didn’t really say anything until 4 years old! The child is now grown and is very intelligent … this is the way the brain works for all people.

    If sign is forced on 0-5 kids as part of the “best wishes and plans” of CRPD then it excludes the technology alternative. It simply doesn’t work after that to any acceptable level. Therefore, the language in CRPD needs to represent both options according to parental/family wishes.

    If you are really about parental-rights-first, then there should be no argument. To be clear, signing should be one of the choices in CRPD and elsewhere.

    You are certainly right to express that deaf and other people with disabilities in various parts of the world are at a huge disadvantage. It would be great to level that playing field with a modified CRPD. Ms. Bulger has been doing just that as her life’s calling. She should be thanked and not tormented for her tireless work. You should talk to her yourself… if you believe something different! I think you may be afraid that you are pointing the finger in the wrong direction! Send her an email and ask her if she wants to get rid of sign language! I know her answer is NO.

  44. Mark M
    Jul 28, 2012 @ 22:12:45

    Candy, you have said “I’m really wasting time going over this”…”I’m more keen on discussing the topics instead of getting personal”… “waste my precious energy”…. “I listen to all sides”….. “I’m pretty open in my view and thinking”…. “I think sometimes some people’s view are based on emotions rather than logic or facts”… “Hope this makes sense”… You should revisit what you’ve said because there are some conflicts here.

    David Bourne, many hearing parents say what you said, “you have the right to tell me how to raise my family?” Are you supporting them for what they say? All I can say is we don’t own Deaf babies, but we owe Deaf babies to tell the truth and work for their better future.

  45. Candy
    Jul 28, 2012 @ 23:12:28

    Mark M

    That is why it dangerous to look at certain words or sentence without looking at the whole context of the message, which is what you did in your comment to me. You want to cherry pick things and use it to attack a discussion, you just proved my point why it is a waste of my time. Fact remains: AGB supports CRPD. That’s all. Patti wanted to focus on personal level rather than the topic, clearly I must have pissed her off. Fact is Theresa does not speak for AGB, she is not AGB’s spokesperson, period. It’s really sad how discussions have to be like that. There’s no war, folks. Since I already said what I wanted to say: AGB supports CRPD, there is no need for me respond to any more silly comments that serves no purpose.

  46. Mark M
    Jul 29, 2012 @ 00:35:32

    Candy, Cleverness to change this world… that won’t be successful or progressive. Only wisdom from the inside out, one person at a time. That will change the world.

  47. Brian Riley
    Jul 29, 2012 @ 02:36:29

    Here is a screenshot part of the forward of Bulger’s letter that was sent to the DHHS-SpeakUp Yahoo group (which, as a forward, contains some garbled characters):

  48. Mark M
    Jul 29, 2012 @ 02:52:42

    Thank you Brian!

  49. David Bourne
    Jul 29, 2012 @ 03:09:29

    Mark: “Own deaf babies?” No one owns anyone — at least not in this country! That would suggest that you could sell your children, which is unfortunately true in some countries! Parents are profoundly responsible for their children… at least for a while 🙂 A key priority of this responsibility is to enhance the communication between child and parents and child and family. The parents are in the best position to make the determination on how this can be best accomplished. Obviously, there are terrible cases where the parents have passed in a car accident and are not available or they are in the middle of divorce or a spectrum of other life-challenges. In these cases, the court system should rapidly clarify the lineage of responsibility and that lineage should be respected by society. I am surprised to find that this position is controversial.

  50. handeyes
    Jul 30, 2012 @ 02:45:50

    Candy – i’m sorry but u gave me a good chuckle there with ur spin – wow wee. when u go off u go OFFFFFFF.

    I have called upon the AG Bell to denounce Bulger’s email, her sample letter, and the AG Bell PA Chapter communications director who distributed it on an AG Bell list – the DHHA – Speak UP open forum

    ive been very clear

    and i aint pissed off at u at all. in fact im quite happy u keep making it clear how you operate

    clarity is VERITY (curse my reversals) VERITY is clarity

    much peace


  51. handeyes
    Jul 30, 2012 @ 03:05:27

    David Bourne – u might need to get ur eyes checked and re-read Bulger’s email and sample letter.

    its nasty and unprofessional and riddled with in accuracies about what is and isnt and should be in the CRPD. my goodness – if she is so good as u claim – why didnt she read the whole thing in full first and see the AG Bell Association’s support of the treaty with optional protocol


    re: “nobody owns Deaf children” well pls read what mark wrote – he said we “OWE Deaf babies” and we do owe them the truth. they have the right to know that it is ok and fine and dandy to have natural sign language and its dandy to be Deaf. ya wanna add all that other stuff too – nothing in the treaty says you can not unless u say it must be oral /aural ONLY cuz that is NOT true. And the whole thing about it must be oral / aural ONLY for the brain to work right is a complete falsehood and really really really wrong of you to be propagating propaganda.

    Nothing in the CRPD says no technology or no speech – just cuz the Oralists are exclusionary and extreme does not mean that the world has to be that way cuz it is NOT that way. sooner or later most of the babies grow up and find their way to doing the thing that comes naturally – being a person of the eye hand and they a wee bit upset that they were denied this and they gonna be more so to learn that 4 international documents said they shall not be denied this.

    the facts and nothing but the facts

    re: the controversy – it is not about who is a parent – it is about programs, schools, systems denying Deaf children the right to a FULLY NATURAL and ACCESSIBLE language – cuz that there is a crime against humanity.

    Language Deprivation leads to Learning Disabilities. Starve a child’s brain of a fully natural and accessible language is like intermittently denying them oxygen.

    There is ABSOLUTELY NO HARM in giving a Deaf child ASL + English. there is MUCH HARM in denying ASL + English. So dont worry your technology and speech are safe under the CRPD. it is just saying chill on the extreme exclusionary excesses. ya know in the name of dignity and integrity and JUSTICE for the differently abled person – they have rights too!

    much peace


  52. handeyes
    Jul 31, 2012 @ 01:41:58

  53. Jeffrey A. Roberts (@DeafJeff)
    Aug 01, 2012 @ 23:21:59

    Spin Doctors: See how they run….
    Heh. Busted!

  54. handeyes
    Aug 07, 2012 @ 13:14:52

    Jeffrey –

    yep. ¡Ya basta!

    seems AG Bell even got some criticism from within and without (see below from their communications director and see see what they be be communicatin’)

    spin… dat bottle agb. Weeeee

    geez if only they could get with the 21st century and know it aint cool to deny a child a fully natural and accessibly language. oy bigotry and prejudice. crud even the chimp in the zoo is allowed to sign “get me outta here! open the latch – its right there. use ur hands”

    ohhh just learned at ole St. Joseph that the Indiana pro-Oralists endorse – kids had to write HUNDREDS of times “I will not use my hands.” when they were caught signing. Geez – writing out “I will not use my hands.” involves USING YOUR HANDS. geez the nuns makin’ ’em lie in written English too. And meanwhile baby signs for Hearing babes all the rage and Michael Jackson could even sign with his chimp but for the Deaf babies NO NO NO it is verboten.

    ….. “won’t you help me sing these songs of freedom….”

    Date: July 31, 2012 8:55:41 PM CDT
    Subject: [DHHS-SpeakUp] Do You Know the Facts on CRPD?

    The United Nation’s Convention on the Rights of Persons with
    Disabilities (CRPD) has generated controversy among families,
    individuals with hearing loss and the professionals who serve them. For
    those who have criticized AG Bell for our position you have been heard.
    Rest assured that AG Bell continues to advocate for the rights of
    families and individuals who choose listening and spoken language and
    has worked collaboratively with other organizations to establish
    effective policies that support individuals with hearing loss. AG Bell
    supports the right of each family to choose the language outcome that
    best suits their needs and we remain a strong resource for families who
    choose listening and spoken language through providing financial aid,
    programs and the Listening and Spoken Language Knowledge Center. AG Bell
    believes in the right to express and share differing opinions through
    respectful discussion on our forums.

    As with most public policies, CRPD is a complicated topic. We invite you
    to get a better understanding of CRPD with this Fact Sheet
    that describes this treaty and its current status as well as its
    relationship to U.S. laws. AG Bell supports the ratification of CRPD

    as part of the Deaf and Hard of Hearing Alliance, a coalition of 14
    other national organizations representing consumers who are deaf or hard
    of hearing, educators and educational administrators for children who
    are deaf or hard of hearing and the professionals that support them. Our
    position statement on CRPD
    was developed in
    accordance with our organization’s procedures on public policy
    position statements.



    Susan Boswell
    AG Bell Director of Communications

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in: Logo

You are commenting using your account. Log Out / Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out / Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out / Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out / Change )

Connecting to %s

%d bloggers like this: