Be seeing you
Posts Tagged ‘freedom of speech’
The Purpose of Freedom of Speech Is Primarily For Criticizing Government!
Posted by M. C. on January 7, 2023
Posted in Uncategorized | Tagged: Criticizing Government, freedom of speech | Leave a Comment »
What’s The Opposite of Freedom of Speech and Worse than Censorship?? – It’s The Coverup! – LewRockwell
Posted by M. C. on November 14, 2022
If this article looks familiar, well, there’s a good reason. Stick with me here – – –
What’s the opposite of freedom of speech and worse than censorship??
I won’t keep you hanging, it’s ForcedSpeak.
ForcedSpeak is when a so-called “Authority“ — nearly always a government entity — tries to force you to make a disclaimer or other statement against your will.
Sort of Orwell’s NewSpeak but, rather than the bureaucrats and their MSM newsy mouth-pieces — modern translation: “presstitutes” — YOU have to do it.
Sounds like a knock-off from an old anti-NAZI or anti-communist Korean-War-era Hollywood propaganda flick doesn’t it? Maybe The Manchurian Candidate.
But it’s not Manchuria, Germany, Russia, Korea – – – or fiction. It’s Canada.
It’s Pastor Artur Pawlowski who grew up behind the Iron Curtain. He designated his church in Canada as sanctuary from the seriously destructive COVID narrative and it’s negative and often murderous results.
So, in the true spirit of current Cancel Culture tradition – – – you know, using the Big-Tech/government complex, when you can’t answer someone with facts and logic, you shadow-ban, censor or otherwise disappear and thus “Cancel” them – – – Canadian Authorities arrested Pastor Pawlowski and closed his church.
But that was just the beginning. I think it’s better if Rev. Pawlowski briefly explains a few things, including ForcedSpeak, himself – – – except as you can see, YouTube cancelled him too – – –
So, YouTube claims, “This video has been removed for violating YouTube’s Terms of Service.” That happened after the clip appeared in the previous version of this article and got significant attention.
I’ve posted the exact same video clip on alternative video hosting site Rumble so you can decide for yourself whether YouTube should have “cancelled” it – – –
So, do you find this clip objectionable? Should YouTube “protect” you — or anyone — from seeing it? Or is the Big-Tech/government complex using this tactic to coverup previous censorship? This would by no means be the first time YouTube has been complicit in this way.
So not only does the Big-Tech/Government complex censor the truth these days, they coverup the proof they’re censoring the truth.
Pretty clearly, covering up evidence is fast becoming Big-Tech/government S.O.P. (Standard Operating Procedure).
I will no longer patronize YouTube. If you think the above evidence of dishonesty and arrogant, highhanded censorship on the part of YouTube warrants it — and if you don’t want to be subject to it yourself — well, maybe you’ll join me? Alternatives are available.
And BTW, how long till ForcedSpeak shows up here?
You can find the article as originally published on October 23, 2021, censorship and all, here — if they haven’t reinstated the clip because of viewer heat or removed the evidence entirely – – –
What’s The Opposite of Freedom of Speech and Worse than Censorship? – LewRockwell LewRockwell.com
Be seeing you
Posted in Uncategorized | Tagged: censorship, Coverup, freedom of speech | Leave a Comment »
Biden’s Disinformation Governance Board Suspended
Posted by M. C. on May 20, 2022
Martin Armstrong
Freedom of speech won this Wednesday after the Biden Administration suspended its controversial Disinformation Board. Former disinformation tzar Nina Jankowicz announced her departure today, citing an uncertain future, and, of course, disinformation. “It is deeply disappointing that mischaracterizations of the Board became a distraction from the Department’s vital work, and indeed, along with recent events globally and nationally, embodies why it is necessary. “I maintain my commitment to building awareness of disinformation’s threats and trust the Department will do the same,“ Jankowicz said.
Jankowicz has a long history of spreading false news and gaslighting the public to believe that the Bidens are not a completely corrupt family. She firmly denied the existence of Hunter’s laptop, and perhaps it is no coincidence that the contents of that laptop are slowly being leaked to the public.
Although this Orwellian plan has been temporarily suspended, censorship will continue discreetly.
Be seeing you
Posted in Uncategorized | Tagged: Disinformation Governance Board, freedom of speech, Nina Jankowicz | Leave a Comment »
UK Considering Legislation That Would Imprison Internet Trolls | ZeroHedge
Posted by M. C. on November 8, 2021
https://www.zerohedge.com/technology/uk-considering-legislation-would-imprison-internet-trolls
by Tyler Durden
Authored by Brad Polumbo via FEE.org,
f you ever need a reminder of how important freedom of speech is, all you need to do is look across the pond…

The United Kingdom, which doesn’t have a First Amendment, has slowly seen citizens’ free speech rights eroded—and now may soon start imprisoning people for being trolls on the internet.
At question is pending legislation called the “Online Safety Bill,” which ostensibly punishes social media companies that allow harassment. Yet it may be expanded to include new criminal penalties for individuals who engage in mean speech online.
“Trolls could face two years in prison for sending messages or posting content that causes psychological harm under legislation targeting online hate,” the Times of London reports. “The Department for Culture, Media & Sport has accepted recommendations from the Law Commission for crimes to be based on ‘likely psychological harm.’ The proposed law change will shift the focus on to the ‘harmful effect’ of a message rather than if it contains ‘indecent’ or ‘grossly offensive’ content, which is the present basis for assessing its criminality.”
Social media users could face two years in prison for sending messages or posting content that causes ‘psychological harm’ under the government’s new online harms bill
Ministers are looking to include so-called Twitter “pile-ons” as a possible offence https://t.co/aXHNTfXaWQ — The Times (@thetimes) November 1, 2021
Other offenses will reportedly be created for “knowingly false communication,” applying to those who “send or post a message they know to be false with the intention to cause emotional, psychological, or physical harm to the likely audience.” The new offenses will also include punishment for social-media “pile-ons,” where groups gang up and are rude to people online.
Culture Secretary Nadine Dorries is reportedly planning on adding these provisions to the Online Safety Bill when it’s introduced in Parliament next month.
This blatant attempt at the censorship of online speech is deeply concerning. The government has absolutely no business punishing people for words that “cause others harm,” such a subjective and slippery standard that it beggars belief. This vague standard could be used to silence just about any speech that one finds offensive. And it surely stifles the free exchange of ideas that leads to social progress.
Ideas like allowing women to vote, ending racial segregation, and legalizing same-sex marriage were all once considered “harmful” by many. If subjectively harmful or disruptive speech is stifled, progress is drastically held back.
Moreover, the government punishing “knowingly false” speech is deeply disturbing. Firstly, it’s not a black-and-white matter to actually determine what is “true” and what is “false.” There are a million shades of gray and robust debates over factual reality across countless subjects. No one who values freedom should want a government Ministry of Truth determining what speech is “false” and punishing those who spread it.
And this would all have a chilling effect on speech that questions the status quo or the government itself. After all, free speech doesn’t exist to protect popular or uncontroversial speech; such speech is in little need of protection. It’s dissident voices and information that threatens centralized power that is crushed under the guise of “protecting people” from “harmful” speech.
The UK’s new censorship efforts are no exception.
“The laws are highly likely to be ineffective at keeping people safe, whilst actually restricting free speech considerably, as well as creating a chill by making people who don’t really understand the law feel too scared to actually say what they want to say,” said University of East Anglia Law School Professor Paul Bernal. “That’s the bottom line here: the main impact of laws like this will be to restrict legitimate criticism of people in power.”
Indeed they will. Americans should heed the sad example of the United Kingdom as a warning of what fate could await us if we don’t jealously guard our free speech rights.
* * *
Like this story? Click here to sign up for the FEE Daily and get free-market news and analysis like this from Policy Correspondent Brad Polumbo in your inbox every weekday.
Be seeing you
Posted in Uncategorized | Tagged: First Amendment, freedom of speech, Internet Trolls, UK | Leave a Comment »
What’s the Opposite of Freedom of Speech and Worse than Censorship? – LewRockwell LewRockwell.com
Posted by M. C. on October 24, 2021
I won’t keep you hanging, it’s ForcedSpeak. That’s when a so-called “Authority” — nearly always a government entity — tries to force you to make a disclaimer or other statement against your beliefs and will.
Sort of Orwell’s NewSpeak but YOU have to do it.
What’s the opposite of freedom of speech and worse than censorship?
I won’t keep you hanging, it’s ForcedSpeak. That’s when a so-called “Authority” — nearly always a government entity — tries to force you to make a disclaimer or other statement against your beliefs and will.
Sort of Orwell’s NewSpeak but YOU have to do it.
Sounds like a knock-off from an old anti-NAZI or anti-communist Korean-War-era Hollywood propaganda flick doesn’t it? Maybe The Manchurian Candidate.
But it’s not Germany, China, Korea – – – or fiction. It’s Canada.
It’s Pastor Artur Pawlowski who grew up behind the Iron Curtain. He designated his church in Canada as sanctuary from the seriously destructive COVID nonsense narrative and it’s negative and often murderous results.
So, in the true spirit of current Cancel Culture tradition — you know, when you can’t answer someone with facts and logic, you disappear them — Canadian “authorities” arrested Pastor Pawlowski and closed his church.
But that was just the beginning. I think it’s better if Rev. Pawlowski briefly explains a few things, including ForcedSpeak, himself – – –
How long till ForcedSpeak shows up here?
HERE For updates, additions, comments, and corrections.
AND, “Like,” “Tweet,” and otherwise, pass this along!
Be seeing you
Posted in Uncategorized | Tagged: censorship, ForcedSpeak, freedom of speech | Leave a Comment »
Biden and power by force, by Thierry Meyssan
Posted by M. C. on January 14, 2021
https://www.voltairenet.org/article211917.html
by Thierry Meyssan
The seizure of the Capitol by supporters of President Trump is presented as an attempted coup, while he is still in the White House. On closer inspection, it could be the other way around. Freedom of speech has been confiscated by an illegitimate power in favour of Joe Biden.
The Usual hype
For “The West Australian”, for his last days, Donald Trump, like Adolf Hitler, wishes for “the twilight of the gods”.
In every presidential election in the United States, we are told that the incumbent was a monster, that we are sorry for the crimes he committed, but that a new day is dawning for humanity with the rise of a new leader. The only exception is the election of Donald Trump in 2016. At that time and even before he was sworn in, we were told that this billionaire was elected following a regrettable mistake, that he was misogynistic, homophobic, racist, that he did not embody the “country of freedom”, but the supremacism of the “little whites” and the interests of the rich. For four years, we were constantly being convinced that this diagnosis was right. He was called a liar and his ideas and achievements were ignored.
This time, the insurrection on Capitol Hill allowed the dominant news agencies to add a layer to it. The outgoing president, Donald Trump, is unanimously accused of destroying democracy, which the incoming president, Joe Biden, will of course restore. Are those who remember the elections of George H. Bush, Bill Clinton, George W. Bush and Barack Obama ready to be fooled again?For “Milliyet” (Turkey), the virtuous America has gone mad.
Yes, because the shock caused by the capture of the Capitol is such that one is willing to believe anything. If the United States is inexorably heading towards civil war [1], what will become of us Westerners?
This is why we did not want to see the crisis that is beginning to unfold. Only a few Greek newspapers had recently explained the reasons for the anger, which we have been dealing with for five years already (i.e. before Trump’s election).
This is also why we don’t want to look it in the face and we are satisfied with the blind comments that this shameful episode will not have a tomorrow. But who can believe it? It is true that things will calm down for a while and the repressive machine will crush the January 6 demonstrators, but it will only be a postponement and the civil war will not be long in coming.
Non-Westerners have already understood that the United States has such internal problems that it will no longer be able to set itself up as a model for the world, let alone give lessons in democracy to those it wants to subjugate.
Undemocratic elections
According to “La Razon” (Spain), the insurgency in the United States was the Trumpeters taking Capitol Hill.
In the 2000 presidential election, the bewildered world watched as the Supreme Court chose to ignore the recount of the Florida ballots. In accordance with the Constitution, it declared that it had no business interfering with a state’s ballot and was constrained only by Governor Jeb Bush’s decision that his brother George W. Bush had been elected by his constituents. Twenty years later, the world is watching the dismissal of 60 appeals filed by Donald Trump alleging massive fraud in many states.
As I wrote earlier, from a US legal perspective, Al Gore and then Donald Trump lost. But from a democratic point of view, they probably won. To tell the truth, it is impossible to know exactly, but given the results of the other elections that were held at the same time, there is little doubt about that. The only thing that can be said is that there is nothing democratic about this election: the counting of the votes is done by the governors, who in many federal states choose the civil servants or private companies that will do the counting. On the contrary, if the system were democratic, the counting would be done by citizens in public. Everyone could see ballot boxes being taken from the polling stations to a counting centre where officials opened them and then closed the curtains to prevent citizens from finding out more. No one can question the sincerity of these officials, but no one can guarantee it either. A democratic election can only exist in transparency. Therefore, this election is legal under US law, but simply not democratic.
Turnarounds
According to the “Corriere della Sera” (Italy), Trump’s fury is the assault on the Capitol.
To understand the events, we must observe two reversals of the situation that preceded the attack on the Capitol.
In mid-December 2020, President Trump organised a meeting at the Oval Office with the participation of General Michael Flynn. Flynn outlined his idea of martial law for transparent elections [2]. Most of the councillors present were opposed, despite the change of leadership in the Pentagon. Two weeks later, on 4 January 2021, the 10 former defence secretaries still alive signed a brief op-ed in the Washington Post [3]. They assured that all those who tried to introduce martial law would have to answer to the Justice Department. The unanimity of the former Secretaries of Defense attests that martial law was feasible and real. According to the Post [4], which reconstructed the meeting on the basis of the confidences of the former defence secretaries (who did not attend but were informed), President Trump never contemplated staying in power through the use of violence. On the contrary, he filed complaints and supported various legal actions to have the election annulled. He was preparing to campaign to return to the White House in 2025 [5].For the Hindustan Times (India), the states of the Americas are no longer united, but on fire.
Vice-President Mike Pence, who was under heavy pressure from the Jacksonians, made his position known on January 6, the day the two congressional assemblies met in joint session [6]. He noted that his role as presiding officer was purely ceremonial and that it was not his job to decide the dispute, even though a certain reading of the Constitution theoretically gives him the right to do so. He therefore deferred to the parliamentarians. To do otherwise would have opened the smouldering civil war. At times like these, everyone knows what he or she can lose, and few people, particularly among the notables, are willing to take such a risk. As soon as this position became known, several important members of the Trump team resigned. The Jacksonians experienced these reversals as cowardice and betrayal of their ideals and their homeland.
A few hours later, Donald Trump held a meeting, not far from Congress, to denounce once again a “stolen election” and announce his return for the 2024 campaign. He never called on his supporters to take Capitol Hill, although some may have understood it that way.
Taking the Capitol
According to “Dawn” (Greece), “Trumpism is here and it threatens us”.
Some groups that were marginalized during the meeting tried to enter the Capitol. According to the videos, the Capitol police let them in without any real resistance. The demonstrators initially behaved deferentially in this place, which is sacred to them. However, they had been infiltrated by a group of Antifas. Without knowing why or how, things suddenly got out of hand. The hemicycle was invaded and parliamentarians’ offices were ransacked.
Anyone who has lived through a civil war knows that this is the worst thing that can happen. Like the English philosopher Thomas Hobbes, who lived through the first English civil war, they all believe that it is better to suffer a tyrannical state than to be deprived of a state (The Leviathan [7]). Taking the Capitol and eventually overthrowing the US “order” is an act with terrible consequences. It has not gone that far. The police who had allowed the demonstrators to enter the building suddenly and successfully pushed them back.
President Donald Trump himself called for calm, but without his wife. According to the US national religion, God’s blessing – and thus peace and prosperity – must descend through the president and first lady [8] on the “chosen people”. By choosing to speak on his own, Donald Trump has challenged the national religion.
Reactions in the US
According to the “Daily Mirror” (UK), now in the United States, it is now government by the mob.
Democratic congressmen, led by House Speaker Nancy Pelosi, immediately accused President Trump of having launched his troops on an assault on Congress. They proposed to impeach President Trump, even though he had only 13 days left in his term, through the 25th Amendment, paragraph 4 of the Constitution. This move, which they had previously discussed, would remove his right to stand for re-election.
However, the text invoked should not apply in this case: it concerns a disability attributable to the health of the President. The debates at the time of its adoption concerned the heart attack which prevented President Woodrow Wilson from fulfilling his duties at the end of his term of office (2 October 1919 to 4 March 1921) and the stroke – less serious – of President Dwight Eisenhower (24 September 1955 to 20 January 1961) which temporarily deprived him of some of his faculties and led him to share his powers with his vice-president Richard Nixon.
The ruling class felt the wind of the cannonball blowing. Whether the capture of Capitol Hill was a failure of its police force, as they try to persuade us, or whether it was organized under a false flag by Donald Trump’s enemies, those who conceived it have the capacity to overthrow institutions and sack their entire staff.
Reactions abroad
For the “Boston Herald” (USA), this is chaos.
After a century of US domination, the rest of the world still doesn’t know what they are. It doesn’t know that the Constitution was written to establish a regime inspired by the British monarchy and that it was rebalanced by 10 amendments that guarantee people’s rights. The country that Alexis de Tocqueville describes in Democracy in America [9] is the country of this compromise, a country of freedom, but this balance was upset during the Obama years. Blinded, the rest of the world did not see that the United States has reverted to what it was in the first four years of its foundation: an oligarchic system, this time in the service of a class of international billionaires. It deliberately ignored the plight of the former middle classes, the grouping of the population by cultural affinity and the preparation of two-thirds of the population for civil war.
The Chinese media cannot help but notice the double standard when comparing photos of the Hong Kong assembly being taken by a high-voltage crowd with those from Washington. While the Russian media, busy with the Orthodox Christmas party, smiled disillusioned at their historic rival on land.
For their part, the Western media have embraced without reservation the neo-Puritan “cancel culture” that destroys all republican symbols and replaces them with others glorifying minorities, not for what they do, but because they are minorities. In doing so, they have identified a little more with the ideology that oppresses “America” [10]. As submissive vassals, they presented the US election as if their readers were going to participate and Joe Biden as their new master. The “Chicago Tribune” (USA) does not denounce sedition, but sees insurrection.
Reacting to the events on Capitol Hill, European leaders are taking their dreams for granted: German President and former head of the secret service, Frank-Walter Steinmeier, said that armed pro-Trump protesters had taken Capitol Hill; while the French President and former secretary to a well-known philosopher, Emmanuel Macron, denounced an attack on the fundamental principle of democracy “One man, one vote”.
No. With few exceptions, the Capitol demonstrators were unarmed.
No. The U.S. Constitution does not provide for equality among citizens of any state.
Yes. It is the US ruling class that despises democracy and the Jacksonians who defend it.“God help us! “proclaims the Philadephia Daily News (USA). “The non-civil war has come to this point: rioters have taken the Capitol”.
Already the very great fortunes that stand behind Joe Biden have seized power. They have put an end to freedom of expression. They “preventively” closed the Twitter, Facebook, Instagram, Snapchat and Twitch accounts of the White House, President Trump and his supporters in order to “prevent them from calling for further violence” (sic). In doing so, they have arrogated to themselves the powers of Justice and have escaped the Trump decree of 28 June 2020 enjoining them to choose between the status of neutral carrier of information or that of committed producer of information [11].Thierry Meyssan Translation
Roger Lagassé
[1] “Civil war becomes inevitable in the USA”, by Thierry Meyssan, Translation Roger Lagassé, Voltaire Network, 15 December 2020.
[2] “General Flynn, QAnon and the US Elections”, by Thierry Meyssan, Translation Roger Lagassé, Voltaire Network, 1 December 2020.
[3] “The time for questioning the election results has passed”, Washington Post (United States) , Voltaire Network, 4 January 2021.
[4] “Trump’s final efforts to overturn election create discomfort for the military”, Paul Sonne & Missy Ryan & Ellen Narashima, The Washington Post, January 6, 2021.
[5] “‘I’ll See You in Four Years’: Trump and the Ghost of Grover Cleveland”, Peter Baker, The New York Times, January 3, 2021
[6] “Mike Pence letter to Members of Congress”, by Mike Pence, Voltaire Network, 6 January 2021.
[7] Leviathan or the matter, forme, & power of a common-wealth ecclesiastical and civil, Thomas Hobbes, 1651
[8] Contrairement à une idée reçue, la fonction de «Première dame» n’est pas cérémonielle, mais religieuse. Elle incombe à l’épouse du président et, s’il est célibataire, divorcé ou veuf, à une femme de sa famille qu’il désigne.
[9] De la démocratie en Amérique, Alexis de Tocqueville, Gosselin (1re partie 1835, 2ème partie 1840.).
[10] Les Occidentaux sont persuadés que les Noirs et les Hispaniques ont tous voté contre Trump. En réalité ses électeurs comptaient 18 % d’Afro-Américains et 37 % de Latinos selon les instituts de sciences politiques.
[11] “Executive Order on Preventing Online Censorship”, by Donald Trump, Voltaire Network, 28 May 2020.
Thierry Meyssan
Political consultant, President-founder of the Réseau Voltaire (Voltaire Network). Latest work in English – Before Our Very Eyes, Fake Wars and Big Lies: From 9/11 to Donald Trump, Progressive Press, 2019. Biden and power by force Sheikh Rohani stirs up trouble in the Middle East Arbitrariness and censorship are back in the West Who is Destroying Lebanon and Why? Civil war becomes inevitable in the USA This author’s articles To send a message
Be seeing you
Posted in Uncategorized | Tagged: Biden, Capitol Hill, freedom of speech, illegitimate power | Leave a Comment »
Open Borders – LewRockwell
Posted by M. C. on September 17, 2018
https://www.lewrockwell.com/2018/09/lew-rockwell/open-borders-are-an-assault-on-private-property/
Whether we’re talking about illegal immigration from Mexico and Central America, or birthright citizenship, or the migrants coming from the Middle East and Africa, the subject of immigration has been in the news and widely discussed for months now. It is an issue fraught with potentially perilous consequences, so it is especially important for libertarians to understand it correctly. This Mises Circle, which is devoted to a consideration of where we ought to go from here, seems like an opportune moment to take up this momentous question.
I should note at the outset that in searching for the correct answer to this vexing problem I do not seek to claim originality. To the contrary, I draw much of what follows from two of the people whose work is indispensable to a proper understanding of the free society: Murray N. Rothbard and Hans-Hermann Hoppe… Read the rest of this entry »
Posted in Uncategorized | Tagged: freedom of speech, open borders, private property rights | Leave a Comment »