Category: Free Speech

Nov 10 2019

Authorities Strong-Arm Katie Hopkins

Looks like countermoonbat Katie Hopkins may soon follow Tommy Robinson into prison, and for the same thought crime — drawing attention to the Pakistani gangs that make sex slaves of underaged British girls on an alarming scale:

It could not be more obvious that the liberal ruling class is profoundly hostile to the British population, and that only one or the other can prevail.

Via Vlad Tepes, on a tip from Dragon’s Lair.

Nov 04 2019

Suppression of Political Ads on Social Media

Mark Dice stops guffawing at moonbats long enough to make serious points regarding the suppression of political ads on social media:

Liberals loves free speech, so long as it works in their favor. That a moonbat like Jack Dorsey would ban political ads on Twitter indicates that it is not working in their favor. Free speech will need defending like never before.

On tips from KirklesWorth and Kate P.

Oct 31 2019

Greta Thunberg Calls for Social Media Censorship

Radical environmentalism is a totalitarian ideology, so no one should be surprised to read that the world’s most sinister 16-year-old, progressive demigoddess Greta Thunberg, is not a fan of free speech. In this Facebook post, she calls on the moonbat masses to rise up and impose censorship on social media:

I am, like many others, questioning whether I should keep using Facebook or not. Allowing hate speech, the lack of fact checking and of course the issues of interfering with democracy…are among many, many other things that are very upsetting. The constant lies and conspiracy theories about me and countless of others of course result in hate, death threats and ultimately violence. This could easily be stopped if Facebook wanted to.

All Zuckerberg would have to do is post a new rule: No saying anything Greta doesn’t like.

I find the lack of taking responsibility very disturbing. But I’m sure that if they are challenged and if enough of us demand change – then change will come.

More disturbing is the reflexive demand that other people’s freedom be curtailed. If she doesn’t like what people are saying on Facebook, then she should follow her own suggestion and stop using it.

On a tip from Stormfax. Hat tip: Big League Politics.

Oct 25 2019

Left Comes After First Amendment

It isn’t just the Second Amendment that they want to gut or render meaningless. Progressives are coming after the First Amendment too. Generations of dominance over education and the media have produced enough PC pod people that they may soon achieve a critical mass of public support. Mark Dice sounds the alarm:

Needless to say, the definition of “hate speech” can be easily adapted to ban any speech that is undesired. To say we have freedom of speech except for whatever the authorities choose to call “hate speech” would be absurd. Either we have free speech or we don’t.

The most fundamental liberties that separate America from tyrannical regimes are under serious, immediate assault from the Left.

On a tip from KirklesWorth.

Oct 25 2019

Rich Lowry Finds His Own Medicine Tastes Bitter

What goes around comes around. Rich Lowry, who has policed the boundaries of permissible dissent on behalf of the liberal establishment, has received a wooden shampoo with his own thought cop night stick.

From his National Review:

The editor of New York University’s independent student-run newspaper, Washington Square News, pulled an advertisement for National Review editor Rich Lowry’s upcoming book from the paper because exposure to the ad may have “marginalized people of color,” according to a statement released Thursday.

Lowry bought the ad to promote a talk he was scheduled to give at NYU last night to push his forthcoming book The Case for Nationalism: How It Made Us Powerful, United, And Free. When they killed the ad, his only notification was a refund of his payment.

After he publicly complained,

[T]he Washington Square News editor explained that she had unilaterally decided to pull the ad in order to shield “people of color on campus” from exposure to the phrase “Nationalism is a good thing,” which, in keeping with the book’s topic, was placed prominently at the top of the page.

Nationalism and racism obviously are not the same thing — except when antinationalist moonbats proclaim that they are.

The editor is never named in the National Review source article. She must be Woman of Color Sakshi Venkatraman. Ms Venkatraman barks the following:

“The word ‘nationalism,’ as it exists in today’s political lexicon, connotes xenophobia and white supremacy, and printing it in large letters on the back of our paper would have marginalized people of color on our campus and our staff.”

If it “connotes” something liberals don’t like, it can be banned. That’s why Nike nixed a line of sneakers with the Betsy Ross Flag. The original flag of the USA was proclaimed by Colin Kaepernick to connote racism.

Sakshi reassures her fellow snowflakes not to worry; they will be safe from the word “nationalism” in the future:

“[W]e have put practices in place to ensure that an ad of this nature does not again get so far along in the process before being canceled.”

“But… but……,” gasps Lowry.

Lowry responded to the statement on Twitter Thursday afternoon, arguing that the editor’s contention that nationalism is inherently linked to “xenophobia and white supremacy” represents a “lazy misunderstanding” and, ironically, illustrates the book’s relevance to the contemporary political environment.

Lowry can still try to explain himself on Twitter for now, but not in the pages of the Washington Square News, from which he has been deplatformed.

Speaking of deplatforming, Lowry would be a more sympathetic character if he had not pulled something far worse on John Derbyshire, a former National Review regular who was piously fired by the pearl-clutching Lowry for a valuable piece he published elsewhere that was deemed racist by politically correct information gatekeepers.

Turns out that feeding the totalitarian crocodile people to your right does not guarantee that it won’t eat you too.

On a tip from Varla.

Oct 23 2019

Tracked Down, Arrested for Racial Slur

A warning to those who might find themselves in Connecticut. The state is apparently no longer subject to the US Constitution. University of Connecticut Police arrested two men on Monday for uttering a racial slur, apparently to no one in particular, after someone took video of them from an apartment window.

After the video made the social media rounds, the NAACP demanded that the police investigate. The utterers of the forbidden word were hunted down and arrested under a state statute that criminalizes “ridicule.”

Via Campus Reform:

The two men arrested were identified in a police report obtained by Campus Reform as Ryan Mucaj and Jarred Karal, both 21. The police report states that Mucaj and Karal “played a game in which they yelled vulgar words” after leaving an area business.

Arrest them for disturbing the peace if you like. But for the content of their speech? I thought this was America.

UConn President Thomas Katsouleas gives the bust two thumbs up:

“It is supportive of our core values to pursue accountability, through due process, for an egregious assault on our community that has caused considerable harm. I’m grateful for the university’s collective effort in responding to this incident, especially the hard work of the UConn Police Department, which has been investigating the case since it was reported.”

An egregious assault caused considerable harm, necessitating a major police investigation. You would think some actual violence had occurred. But I’m forgetting; speech that melts snowflakes is now regarded as violence.

Too bad the US Constitution is not supportive of their core values. It is living on borrowed time, if colleges are any indication of the future.

Here’s video of the crime that supposedly warranted the hard work of the police (the third guy apparently didn’t say the bad word):

Too bad for them they didn’t just break into a few cars instead. The odds of the police launching a major investigation would have been minimal.

On a tip from Bluto.

Oct 16 2019

Liberal Information Establishment vs Free Speech

The recent revelations by Project Veritas regarding bias at CNN is only the tip of the iceberg. The entire liberal information establishment has become weaponized on behalf of the Democrat Party and its radical agenda. This includes not only the “mainstream” media but also Big Tech.

Black Pigeon Speaks sounds off on the threat this poses to freedom of speech:

On a tip from KirklesWorth.

Oct 01 2019

Fakebook Unpublishes Elizabeth Warren Wiki Page

A helpful source for documentation of the outrageous fraud perpetuated by faux Indian Elizabeth Warren to enable her rise to power is Elizabeth Warren Wiki, launched by William Jacobson of Legal Insurrection. There used to be a Facebook page affiliated with it, but the tech giant has unpublished it on the absurd grounds that it violates a proscription against impersonation.

The page explicitly states that it is not affiliated with Fauxcahontas or her alarming campaign. Yet it was taken down without warning, probably because a Warren supporter complained to Fakebook.

Legal Insurrection’s YouTube page was also killed without warning, although it was later restored.

Legal Insurrection is not a controversial website, unless by “controversial” you mean “right of center.”

It is already obvious that the 2020 election will not be fought on a level playing field where Big Tech has a say in the matter.

On a tip from Dragon’s Lair.

Sep 28 2019

Illegal to Call an Illegal Alien an “Illegal Alien” in NYC

New York City has an update for the Newspeak Dictionary that is more than a suggestion. It is literally illegal now to call an illegal alien an “illegal alien” in this surreal moonbat dystopia.

Via the New York Post:

It’s now against the law in New York City to threaten someone with a call to immigration authorities or refer to them as an “illegal alien” when motivated by hate.

Whether something is “motivated by hate” will remain subjective until Big Government has the technology to read our minds. In practice, this provision means authorities will prosecute you for it if they don’t like your attitude. This is the purest essence of a thought crime — the sort of crime that would be inconceivable in a free society.

The restrictions — violations of which are punishable by fines of up to $250,000 per offense — are outlined in a 29-page directive released by City Hall’s Commission on Human Rights.

As Canadians can tell you, tyrannical repression as an end in itself finds its purest expression in human rights commissions.

“‘Alien’ — used in many laws to refer to a ‘noncitizen’ person — is a term that may carry negative connotations and dehumanize immigrants, marking them as ‘other,’” reads one passage of the memo. “The use of certain language, including ‘illegal alien’ and ‘illegals,’ with the intent to demean, humiliate, or offend a person or persons constitutes discrimination.”

Of course illegal aliens are the “other,” to use the terminology of Ivory Tower moonbats. That’s why the Cultural Marxist authorities side with them against us, forcing us to turn our country over to them, to pay for their healthcare, to provide them will all manner of services and benefits, to throw our laws and our national integrity out the window on their behalf, and even to sacrifice the core principle of free speech lest they be offended.

Meanwhile, actual crimes like drug use, prostitution, public defecation, turnstile jumping, et cetera are deliberately ignored, and the streets are unsafe for law-abiding citizens. NYC features what they call “anarchotyranny” — the worst of both worlds situation where you have the disadvantages of both too much government and no government at all.

On tips from Sean C, Varla, Dragon’s Lair, and Stormfax.

Sep 25 2019

James Flynn Book on Free Speech Is Suppressed

Intelligence researcher James Flynn wrote a book about the value of freedom of speech in higher education entitled, In Defense of Free Speech: The University as Censor. It was scheduled for publication by Emerald Press. From the synopsis in their catalog, via Quillette:

Freedom to debate is essential to the development of critical thought, but on university campuses today free speech is restricted for fear of causing offence. In Defense of Free Speech surveys the underlying factors that circumscribe the ideas tolerated in our institutions of learning. James Flynn critically examines the way universities censor their teaching, how student activism tends to censor the opposing side and how academics censor themselves…

Publishing companies do the same thing. Emerald canceled publication on the grounds that someone might be offended by a book defending freedom of speech.

From the letter they sent Flynn informing him that his book had been canceled:

By the nature of its subject matter, the work addresses sensitive topics of race, religion, and gender. …

There are two main causes of concern for Emerald. Firstly, the work could be seen to incite racial hatred and stir up religious hatred under United Kingdom law. Clearly you have no intention of promoting racism but intent can be irrelevant.

If a leftist might find it “offensive,” then you can’t say it, or you might get arrested in the land George Orwell called Airstrip One.

Secondly, there are many instances in the manuscript where the actions, conversations and behavior of identifiable individuals at specific named colleges are discussed in detail and at length in relation to controversial events. Given the sensitivity of the issues involved, there is both the potential for serious harm to Emerald’s reputation and the significant possibility of legal action.

Flynn asserts that “every reference to a person is documented by citations of published material or material in the public domain.”

However, it is true that quoting thought criminals like Charles Murray could hurt Emerald’s reputation among the militantly conformist liberal intelligentsia.

Click through for Flynn’s description of his book. It sounds good and certainly deserves to be published.

Flynn sums up the situation:

Discussing why free speech should extend to questions of race and gender necessarily involves presenting views (such as those of [Arthur] Jensen, [Charles] Murray, and [Richard] Lynn), if only for purposes of rebuttal, which upset those who believe that racial and sexual equality is self-evident. If upsetting students or staff or the public is a reason for banning speech, all such discussion is at an end. I end the book by quoting from George Orwell’s original preface to Animal Farm, which was itself rejected by Faber and Faber for being too critical of Stalin: “If liberty means anything at all, it means the right to tell people what they do not want to hear.”

You can have liberty or you can have political correctness; you can’t have both.

On a tip from Steve T.

Sep 11 2019

Papa John’s Pizza Still Unholy Due to Incidental Blasphemy

If a totalitarian society becomes sufficiently fanatical, it is not enough to erase thought criminals. Anything associated with them must also be erased. An example is John Schnatter, former CEO of Papa John’s.

From State College, Pennsylvania:

For the second consecutive year, pizza from a local Papa John’s franchise won’t be on the menu in State College Area schools following the use of a racial slur in 2018 by the national corporation’s founder and former CEO John Schnatter.

The school board voted 6-3 on Monday night to reject the bid from Bajco Global Management, which operates the State College Papa John’s franchises, to be the vendor for elementary and middle school pizza days, a role it previously held for 15 years.

The author is careful not to mention what the “slur” was, probably for fear that he might get unpersoned like Papa John. The forbidden word is the ultimate blasphemy in the liberal religion; even the daring reference it only obliquely as the “n-word.” However, persons of politically preferred pigmentation are allowed to use the word in its entirety, as some do in nearly every sentence.

Schnatter resigned from the company in July 2018. He retained Papa John’s stock but has been selling it off this year and is now estimated to have a 19 percent stake in the company.

Schnatter did not call anyone the n-word. On the contrary, he accused other people of using the word. But in denouncing them, he spoke the word himself, thereby committing blasphemy. This is why all ground where Schnatter has stepped must be regarded as unholy and sown with salt.

Context counts for nothing with the thought police. When Mary Beth Maxwell of the ultra-PC Human Rights Campaign spoke the blasphemous n-word while “describing an external situation that [she] found horrifying, in which racial and homophobic slurs were used,” she lost her job. A true moonbat, she accepted the absurd punishment as just.

When we inevitably transition from a soft to a hard tyranny, unauthorized incidental utterers of the forbidden n-word like Papa John will be executed, along with anyone reckless enough to say, “Hey wait a minute…”

Dominoes got the State College contract last year and probably will again, even though Papa John’s beat their bid by $1 per pizza. Those footing the bill can consider $1 per pizza a small price to pay for political purity. Schnatter and Papa John stockholders are paying a much higher price — as is anyone who values living in a free and sane society.

On a tip from Heckrules.

Aug 21 2019

Miss Nevada Katie Williams Denied Crown Over Politics

Kathy Zhu wasn’t the last beauty queen to lose her crown for countermoonbattery. Conservative Miss Nevada Katie Williams has been banned from competing in the Miss America contest for explicitly political reasons:

“I was officially disqualified from competing in the Miss America pageant for 2019,” said Katie Jo Williams in an Instagram video. She says organizers told her she was “too political” to be involved.

She was told she must delete everything she had posted on social media.

The director of the pageant sent screenshots which included pictures of Williams in her Trump 2020 hat, professing her love for America and her opposition to Antifa, making it clear that they all needed to be erased.

Refusing to comply cost her the Miss Nevada crown. Being the sort of woman who would rather be a principled patriot than a beauty queen is worth more than any crown.

On tips from Kate P and Dragon’s Lair.

Aug 20 2019

PragerU v YouTube

Lawyer Eric George makes the case that the PragerU v YouTube suit is the most important legal battle currently in the courts:

PragerU is the perfect outfit to bring this suit, because YouTube’s suppression of its educational and totally noncontroversial center-right content is so conspicuously outrageous.

Hopefully, this will resolve once and for all whether Google, YouTube, Facebook, and Twitter are neutral platforms or leftist publishers. So long as they pretend to be both, radical leftists will continue to crowd opposition out of the public square.

On a tip from Dragon’s Lair.

Aug 05 2019

United Nations Announces Crackdown on Free Speech

Utopia must be imposed on a global basis; otherwise, people will escape to places where basic human rights like free speech and self-defense are still respected. That’s what makes the supranational United Nations so important. Secretary General Antonio Guterres has just put his name to a memo on a plan to suppress free speech (I mean, “hate speech”) worldwide.

Via Big League Politics:

The globalist organization was vague and unclear on what exactly they defined as “hate speech,” choosing to describe the phenomenon as “any kind of communication in speech, writing or behaviour, that attacks or uses pejorative or discriminatory language with reference to a person or a group on the basis of who they are, in other words, based on their religion, ethnicity, nationality, race, colour, descent, gender or other identity factor.”

“I don’t like it that vandals keep breaking the windows,” for example, is pejorative and discriminatory against people who identify as vandals. Needless to say, any remark critical of unlimited mass immigration would qualify as hate speech.

The definition of hate speech is left vague enough so that most anything you might say could conceivably qualify. That way, troublemakers can be punished selectively, and the rest of the herd will limit itself to reciting leftist talking points just to be on the safe side.

The United Nations believes that member nations are required to criminalize speech deemed by transnational bureauweenies to constitute “incitement.” No doubt these bureauweenies believe that their dictates supersede the US Constitution.

On a tip from Stormfax.

Aug 02 2019

Compelled Speech in Ann Arbor

Suppressing speech isn’t repressive enough. True totalitarianism features compelled speech. People are forced to express views they are opposed to in benighted tyrannies such as Russia under Stalin, China under Mao, and Ann Arbor, Michigan under the moonbats running it now:

The Ann Arbor non-discrimination law is extremely broad and open to abuse. The law defines a “place of public accommodation” to include any “business … whose goods, services, facilities, privileges, advantages or accommodations are extended, offered, sold or otherwise made available to the public.” Any such company is prohibited from discriminating on the basis of political beliefs.

They used to say that when tyranny comes to America, it will arrive brandishing a Bible and a flag. They were wrong. It has arrived bleating piteously about discrimination.

Thankfully, someone is pushing back.

Alliance Defending Freedom (ADF) filed a lawsuit on behalf of a conservative political consulting firm, warning that an Ann Arbor non-discrimination law would force that firm to parrot liberal messages and help Democrats get elected. If they refuse, they could get hit with fines of $500 per day. ADF is representing Grant Strobl and Jacob Chludzinski, founders of the company ThinkRight Strategies.

Nondiscrimination has been used as a pretext for tyranny before. The malicious persecution of Christian bakers and florists is an obvious example. Ann Arbor’s demented law could throw this thuggery into overdrive.

It isn’t only conservative consultants like Strobl and Chludzinski who might find themselves enslaved to their ideological opponents. Theoretically, anyone might be forced to say anything, lest they be found guilty of discrimination. As ADF Legal Counsel Samuel Green notes of the law,

“It could be used to require a Democrat to write speeches for President Trump or a pacifist painter to paint pro-war murals. It could force a pro-life painter to produce a mural for Planned Parenthood.”

Realistically speaking, however, experience indicates that the bullying will only go one way — in favor of forcing conservatives to mouth moonbattery.

On a tip from Eddie_Valiant.

Jul 29 2019

Congress May Outlaw Memes

The European Union has already launched a war on memes (see here, here, and here). Now Congress follows suit:

A bi-partisan bill working its way through Congress could drastically change how copyright claims are processed, and would create a system to impose up to $30,000 in fines on anyone who shares protected material online.

In other words, the Congress wants to make it easier to sue people who send a meme or post images that they didn’t create themselves, essentially a giveaway to lawyers who sue unsuspecting suckers for a living.

Already, copyright trolls have forced to stop using graphics that are not embedded so as to avoid legal fees. The situation is about to get worse.

From the Copyright Alliance, which hopefully won’t sue me for quoting them:

On July 18, 2019, the Senate Judiciary Committee passed S. 1273, the Copyright Alternative in Small-Claims Enforcement Act of 2019 (CASE Act), legislation that will provide U.S. creators with a viable means for defending their copyrighted works through the creation of a small claims tribunal within the U.S. Copyright Office.

Sponsors include infamous moonbats Dick Durbin and Mazie Hirono in the Senate, Jerry Nadler and Ted Lieu in the House. However, some Republicans like John Kennedy are also on board.

The immediate effect will be to kill the meme, a political art form at which conservatives excel but liberals flounder, much like talk radio.

A Fight for the Future campaign explains what this will mean for you if the bill becomes law:

Have you ever shared a meme that you didn’t make? Or downloaded a photo you saw on social media? If Congress has its way, you could soon get slapped with a $15,000 fine by copyright trolls––with no chance of appeal––just for doing normal stuff on the Internet. These trolls buy up copyrights with the sole intent of sending out mass threats and lawsuits to harvest settlements.

Next, after they have purged graphics from every website with a smaller budget than CNN’s, they will go after extracted text, so as to wipe out blogs like this one completely.

A free and open Internet is too much of a threat to the Powers That Be to be allowed to exist indefinitely. Bureaucrats will regulate the life out of it, using copyrights and/or “hate speech” as the pretext. Soon we will be left with an Internet as bland, elitist, and 100% politically correct as PBS television.

On a tip from Bluto.

Alibi3col theme by Themocracy