Your dying First Amendment

Killed by Leftists, Demorats, Progressives, anarchists and, of all people, aided and abetted by the American Media Maggots.

Whose speech and freedoms will likewise be suppressed.

This used to be true. Is it now?

And even some Republicans who lack actual testosterone or estrogen.

Wait. I take that back. Too many Republicans operate on estrogen though they appear as males.

Stop. Perfect time for this video.

So why the big concern over freedom of speech? Because of past, recent and continuing incidents involving the lack of it on American college campuses. This video summarizes appropriately.

That was the view of a college professor, who accurately reflects the views on way too many American college and university campuses today. Most of these are, of course, funded by American Taxpayer cash.

Your First Amendment freedoms are at stake.

Further, your overall American freedoms are also at stake which, of course, is what makes this nation more exceptional than most any other.

What other nation has this:

Amendment I

Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof; or abridging the freedom of speech, or of the press; or the right of the people peaceably to assemble, and to petition the government for a redress of grievances.

Leftists and Demorats will tell you our nation is evil on its face and is everything but exceptional.

But where do Leftists or Demorats actually mention freedom? Where is it that they wish to add to your freedoms in any fashion, instead of removing them? Removing them and then occasionally selling them back to you at a massive profit? Come on, Al Gore only wants $15 trillion of your taxpayer dollars.

Those freedoms buttressed and solidified by the sacrifice of 419,000 US soldiers and civilians in WWII. Yet what passes for state-of-the-art thought on US freedom of speech today by a politician — a Demorat politician mind you — is this.

He couldn’t be more wrong. The First Amendment exists not to protect pablum speech, but specifically challenging speech.

First, let’s be honest: there is no real definition for “hate speech.” It, like pornography, is in the eye of the beholder. The unsaid crux of the biscuit is, naturally: just who determines “hate speech”? That is the key.

Courts have ruled that the First doesn’t protect outright threats, speech that would tend to provoke a personal fight, and child pornography. “Hate speech” is not included as an exception.

KKK speech is protected. Symbols, like a burning cross, are protected. The Westboro Baptist Church is protected.

An interesting point from Politifact:

The Supreme Court has established a general principle that a government administrator can’t decide to charge a group a higher fee for event security based on anticipated public reaction to the content of the event, and a lower court found that this applies to colleges, too. So if Berkeley is basing its security decisions on what it expects Coulter to say, that could pose a problem.

We heard what one professor thinks of free speech. Another example of what passes for state-of-the-art thought on US freedom of speech today by “educators” is this, from the NYTimes.com:

What ‘Snowflakes’ Get Right About Free Speech

by Ulrich Baer

Widespread caricatures of students as overly sensitive, vulnerable and entitled “snowflakes” fail to acknowledge the philosophical work that was carried out, especially in the 1980s and ’90s, to legitimate experience — especially traumatic experience — which had been dismissed for decades as unreliable, untrustworthy and inaccessible to understanding.

Translated: the surfeit of emotional, sensitive snowflakes are in fact traumatized by certain speech. Their horror should not be delegitimized.

The recent student demonstrations at Auburn against Spencer’s visit — as well as protests on other campuses against Charles Murray, Milo Yiannopoulos and others — should be understood as an attempt to ensure the conditions of free speech for a greater group of people, rather than censorship. Liberal free-speech advocates rush to point out that the views of these individuals must be heard first to be rejected. But this is not the case. Universities invite speakers not chiefly to present otherwise unavailable discoveries, but to present to the public views they have presented elsewhere. When those views invalidate the humanity of some people, they restrict speech as a public good.

Translated: censorship isn’t really the removal of free speech; it’s a guarantee not to offend. Offense is a much worse condition than that of the removal of speech itself. Restricted speech is a “public good.”

But listen to this.

In such cases (“when those views invalidate the humanity of some people”) there is no inherent value to be gained from debating them in public. In today’s age, we also have a simple solution that should appease all those concerned that students are insufficiently exposed to controversial views. It is called the internet, where all kinds of offensive expression flourish unfettered on a vast platform available to nearly all.

Perfect. Who needs actual speech? In public? Just go to the internet. Meanwhile, we as Leftists will keep our politically-correct stranglehold on what it is you can hear and read.

The great value and importance of freedom of expression, for higher education and for democracy, is hard to overestimate. But it has been regrettably easy for commentators to create a simple dichotomy between a younger generation’s oversensitivity and free speech as an absolute good that leads to the truth.

Again, Leftists proving there is no real “good” or “bad.” There are simply events that occur on a sliding scale created of their own highly-informed thinking.

We would do better to focus on a more sophisticated understanding, such as the one provided by Lyotard, of the necessary conditions for speech to be a common, public good. This requires the realization that in politics, the parameters of public speech must be continually redrawn to accommodate those who previously had no standing.

You see? A “sophisticated understanding.” This is akin to saying that because some poor people cannot actually afford to go out and purchase a firearm, we need to eliminate the Second Amendment.

The idea of freedom of speech does not mean a blanket permission to say anything anybody thinks.

Uh, yes it is. You lie. The exceptions are delineated above as determined in US courts.

It means balancing the inherent value of a given view with the obligation to ensure that other members of a given community can participate in discourse as fully recognized members of that community.

Now it gets grotty. At first blush the paragraph above is nothing but mush. I provide this accurate translation for you: if only one of a delineated set of protected species are offended, even in the slightest, that speech is deemed hateful.

Free-speech protections — not only but especially in universities, which aim to educate students in how to belong to various communities — should not mean that someone’s humanity, or their right to participate in political speech as political agents, can be freely attacked, demeaned or questioned.

Translated: speech is now hateful when you question someone.

Here is a sentence that doesn’t even warrant reproducing in its entirety.

Unlike today’s somewhat reflexive defenders of free speech.  .  .

“Reflexive defenders of free speech.” In times past that was considered a positive feature, a wonderful attribute. Now, according to “educators,” that’s a glitch, a quirk, a serious problem requiring repair.

What is under severe attack, in the name of an absolute notion of free speech, are the rights, both legal and cultural, of minorities to participate in public discourse.

Please tell me, ladies and gentlemen, where the rights, both legal and cultural, of minorities to participate in public discourse are being quashed? Examples please. Be specific.

We should thank the student protestors, the activists in Black Lives Matter and other “overly sensitive” souls for keeping watch over the soul of our republic.

Of course. Thanks, Berkeley and other US universities, for rioting and burning and blockading and threatening so that opposing views cannot be remotely considered on campus. They really are “closed campuses” with regard to alternate views, theories and speech. Closed. Walled off. It is truly suppression by violence. On the part of Leftists.

Here is what Judge Andrew Napolitano said of this specific editorial.

Light to make the cockroaches scatter.

You know you have a serious problem when even Bill Maher skewers Leftists blocking free speech.

That’s an individual on a TV show. What happens when you have a mammoth tech giant like Google censoring from within? From DCClothesline.com:

Google’s Schmidt: “We’re Not Arguing For Censorship, We’re Arguing Just Take It Off The Page”

by Chris Menahan

Google is not going to “censor” their search results, they’re just going to take search results “off [their] page” to “essentially have you not see it.”

Say what?

In a video from March 23 that’s just now going viral, former Google CEO Eric Schmidt was asked by Fox Business’s Maria Bartiromo how they plan to deal with extremist content. Eric Schmidt responded by mixing in “fake news” with “extremist things” and suggested their computer algorithms will determine what’s true:

“My own view on most of this sort of extremist things as well as fake news in general is that it’s essentially a ranking problem. We’re very good at detecting what’s the most relevant and what’s the least relevant. It should be possible for computers to detect malicious, misleading and incorrect information and essentially have you not see it. We’re not arguing for censorship, we’re arguing just take it off the page, put it somewhere else.”

Read that again. “We’re not arguing for censorship, we’re arguing just take it off the page, put it somewhere else.”

And this isn’t censorship how? You’re taking it off the page. Where “else” are you putting it?

You see, of course, just who makes this determination of censorship or hate speech, yes? Me? No. You? No. Leftists.

As far as Leftists are concerned, it is precisely your freedoms that put the world in its predicament today.

It is your freedom of speech that suppresses any number of individuals and makes them feel less a person. It is your Second Amendment that stacks bodies like cordwood and forces young black males to kill each other in large urban venues. It is your ability to drive where you want when you want that has polluted our skies and clogged our cities. It is your ability to eat what you want that has resulted in obese young people and poor people. It is your freedom to manufacture goods and create a mighty industrial base that has resulted in competition globally, which is a terrible idea and rife with pollution, greed, capitalism and consumerism. It is your freedom to regulate borders which has resulted in people unable to enter the US and partake of the Free Cheese available within. It is your freedom to be independent and sovereign which has closed off globalism and failed to consolidate power into a smaller, brighter, more enlightened band of clear-thinking individuals. It is the freedom to embrace religion which creates societal judgments which conflict with secularism. Islam not included.

When you have no Second Amendment, you have no First Amendment. When you have no First Amendment you have no freedom whatsoever.

As Europe is in a terrible cultural war with globalism and sovereignty, so is the United States.

“Hate speech”? I think you know who determines that and why.

Power. Control.

BZ

 

Berkeley riots: how many arrests from local cops?

As a result of the riots on the UC Berkeley, California campus Wednesday night, were there hundreds of resulting arrests? Fifty arrests? Thirty arrests? Ten arrests? Five arrests? How about this: one arrest. Few news outlets are even asking if there were arrests. Most news organizations are mentioning — purposely I submit — nothing about arrests. How do I know there was only one arrest? Because I telephoned the Alameda County jail and other associated numbers on Thursday and finally found a rushed bureaucrat who gave me that statistic. This was later confirmed on Friday by the American Media Maggots, or AMM. One arrest.

What about this from CampusReform.org? Paid cops who couldn’t perform their jobs.

We paid over $6,000 for over 100 police officers to ensure our constitutional right to free speech—as well as Milo Yiannopoulos—were protected, but all this was for naught.

Again: my opinion, I do not know this for a fact, but I go by what I term the “logical extension” and past history — I’ll wager the UC Berkeley campus police got a phone call from a “university administrator” (Janet Napolitano?) to its chief and the message was relayed from there to the watch commander, the Lieutenant then to the various Sergeants in the organization: stand down. Yes, there were riot-clad police present. But they stood by. I suspect Berkeley PD also received a telephone call and likewise stood down but eventually someone had to do their job and provide a token arrest.

One arrest. After hundreds of protesters rioted, lighted fires, burned trees and property, smashed windows. Sounds like a good idea to just stand by and watch the fun, eh wot? That’s how your local bay area law enforcement values the property and civil rights of taxpayers.

[As an aside, remember that it is Janet Napolitano who stated in January that she would continue to defy immigration laws by making the UC system “sanctuary campuses.” Milo Yiannopoulos was planning to use his Wednesday UC Berkeley speech to call for the withdrawal of federal funds from sanctuary campuses, such as UC Berkeley.

Free speech on UC campuses any more? Surely you jest. No such thing. Not there, and not on major campuses nationally.

Would you be shocked to know it is a UC Berkeley “researcher” who states the police always provoke violence at protests anyway? It’s never the protesters fault, you see.

Further, SFPD, the San Francisco Police Department, now says it won’t be coordinating any more with the FBI. From Breitbart.com:

Rebel San Francisco P.D. Cuts Ties with FBI on Counterterrorism

by AWR Hawkins

The San Francisco Police Department (SFPD) is ending its coorperation with FBI counterterrorism efforts as part of the city’s larger rejection of President Donald Trump’s executive order on immigration.

On January 31, Breitbart News reported that San Francisco Police Chief William Scott, Sheriff Vicki Hennessy, and Mayor Ed Lee sent a letter to the Department of Homeland Security informing them that city would not comply with the order.

The SFPD is now cutting ties with the Joint Terrorism Task Force (JTTF), because it would couple SFPD officers with federal agents in carrying out the requirements of the immigration order.

According to the San Francisco Chronicle, the JTTF was formed in 2007,  “when the police force entered into an agreement with the FBI that authorized intelligence-gathering by San Francisco officers of people engaged in First Amendment activities such as religious services, protests and political assemblies.”

Opponent of Trump’s order — including the Council on American-Islamic Relations (CAIR), which has been declared a terrorist organization by the United Arab Emirates and was named by federal prosecutors as an unindicted co-conspirator in a Hamas funding operation –sent a letter to the San Francisco officials in January, asking them to adhere to “city and state rules” when working with the federal government.

So SFPD did. Not shocking, since I’ve already written about the SFPD being gutless cowards.

Political correctness has now officially infiltrated our police departments, most certainly on the Left Coast and in Fornicalia. As a retired law enforcement officer of 41 years I am disgusted and sickened. The non-actions of the two “involved” law enforcement agencies is reprehensible. They dishonor their badges and their oaths. I am now actually beginning to wonder: can you truly count on Fornicalia law enforcement having the backs of taxpayers?

Anarchy is not unheard-of at the UC Berkeley campus, of course. Let’s hearken back to 1969 under then-Governor Ronald Reagan. One rioter was killed and a police officer was stabbed in the chest with a knife.

As a result of the riots in Berkeley this past Wednesday night, damage is estimated at $100,000 or more, to also include a damaged Starbucks shop which, honestly, I find highly ironical since Starbucks is a backer of most any half-cocked Leftist scheme and swears it will hire 10,000 refugees for its stores — instead of, for example, homeless veterans who oddly enough happen to desperately need jobs themselves.

For further illustration, here is an NYU professor — as she readily admits — going frothingly berserk in front of NYPD officers at a Gavin McInnes event at NYU. McInnes is a Libertarian and co-founder of VICE, a lovely little Leftist news organization that recently emerged with its own news channel on cable. Apparently the Antifa** rioters and protesters utterly failed to realize the background of McInnes. And these are supposed to be the “best and brightest” young persons in the country? FAIL.

From Breitbart.com, concerning the McInnes speech at NYU.

Four Arrested at Gavin McInnes Event as Antifa Protesters Become Violent

by Charlie Nash

Four people were arrested at a New York University event where libertarian commentator and VICE co-founder Gavin McInnes delivered a speech, after “anti-fascist” protesters started to become violent and throw punches.

Following a fight, which started after protesters started to assault McInnes as he entered the venue and ended in a stolen Make America Great Again hat being set on fire, protesters followed McInnes into the venue and attempted to disrupt his show with chants.

“The NYU Anti-Fascists organized the event on Facebook titled ‘Disrupt Gavin McInnes at NYU’,” reported Pix 11, however unlike the riot that anti-fascists started during Breitbart Senior Editor MILO’s show at UC Berkeley on Wednesday, New York police intervened and managed to prevent a large-scale incident from taking place.

Protesters made chants of “get out of here you Nazi scum,” at McInnes, and “hurled expletives at police,” and others who attempted to either enter the venue or keep students and attendees safe.

This tends to prove, as I pointed out above, that NYPD is primarily a professional law enforcement organization which knows how to conduct itself and keep people safe, setting up skirmish lines and making arrests, plural — as opposed to the UC Berkeley Police and the city of Berkeley Police Department, who have proven themselves to be nothing more than the timorous law un-enforcement arm of Leftist regimes and jurisdictions in Fornicalia. With purpose. Dancing at the ends of strings pulled by their Leftist Masters.

This will be the “new normal” around the nation. Free speech is moribund, and Leftists, anarchists, Demorats and the American Media Maggots all want it so.

Again I say, laughingly — because Leftists, Demorats, anarchists and the American Media Maggots are turning out to be such complicit, spittle-frothing boobs — please keep it all up.

Day by day you are doing three things: 1) Proving your further irrelevance; 2) Ensuring President Trump will be in place until 2024, and 3) Allowing the GOP to keep both the House and the Senate following mid-terms in two years.

You blubbering, simpering cretins.

All my love,

BZ

P.S.

**    “Antifa” is the name for “anti-fascists,” a loose collection of motley anarchist mongrels wearing black clothing and masks, too cowardly to allow themselves to be seen as, now, everyone has a camera and makes video at every event in the nation.

 

 

Burn, Berserkeley, burn

This past Wednesday night, Leftists thought it would be a wonderful idea to burn a good portion of the People’s Republic of UC Berserkeley in Fornicalia, because they disagreed with the appearance of a gay British/Greek “cultural libertarian” and “free speech fundamentalist” by the name of Milo Yiannopoulos, who is also a senior editor at Breitbart News. He is an unabashed critic of political correctness, Social Justice Warriors and third-wave feminism.

In order to place Milo in context, let’s watch a compendium of his presentations at various venues within the past few years.

It becomes difficult to assail a gay Greek/British young man who thinks on his feet as rapidly as Milo and who is more than an intellectual match for Leftists arrayed against him, which are legion.

Now that you’ve seen and heard him, you likely have a greater facile grasp of what occurred on the UC Berserkeley campus Wednesday night and, further, why it happened.

That is this: Leftists cannot abide the truth. They cannot abide dissent. They obviously cannot abide views opposite their own because they are simply and plainly unequipped to deal with cogent arguments predicated but upon facts, history, logic, rationality, proportion and common sense.

And thusly the once-heralded bastion of “free speech,” Berkeley, California, has now been confirmed as the center of oppressed speech and violent rioting now embodied in the People’s Republic of UC Berserkeley.

UPDATE 18: ANTIFA and Bay Area Socialists named as organizing groups of riot.

CNN is referring to these incident as protests. Let me be clear, these are not protests, they are riots. These actions will cost the taxpayers in California many millions of dollars whether it is through the UC system, the City of Berkeley or Alameda County in the east bay. People will pay. And only the producers — California taxpayers — will bleed. The hosts bleed whilst the parasites are emboldened.

And now, from YahooNews.com:

Trump threatens UC Berkeley funds over Breitbart protests

Los Angeles (AFP) – US President Donald Trump threatened Thursday to withdraw federal funds from UC Berkeley after violent overnight protests against a planned appearance by a controversial editor of conservative news website Breitbart.

Hundreds of students and other protesters chanting “shut him down” smashed windows at the University of California campus, set wooden pallets on fire and threw fireworks and rocks as police in full riot gear responded with tear gas.

I believe the above graphic says all you need to know about Berserkeley, Fornicalia.

The university was placed on lockdown as the sold-out appearance by Milo Yiannopoulos, a conservative firebrand, was canceled Wednesday evening.

“If U.C. Berkeley does not allow free speech and practices violence on innocent people with a different point of view – NO FEDERAL FUNDS?” Trump wrote on Twitter Thursday.

About half of research at Berkeley is funded by the federal government, according to the university website. Berkeley however has been struggling in the past years with budget shortfalls and spending deficits.

I say: keep it up Leftists and anarchists. Keep it up, Demorats. Sooner or later the public is going to tire of your antics and call you on them. Or worse, you will push to the point where pushback may, sadly, take some sort of revolutionary form. You won’t enjoy it, no one will enjoy it

Sadly, this is what passes for accepted and “understandable” Leftist behavior these days. Leftists, like Muslims, are in a state of perpetual rage — and that is condoned

BZ

 

Reflections on Orlando: we’re not learning

Muslim Kills 49 Orlando Gay ClubApologies for the lack of current posts. Personal issues. — BZ ]

The US is not learning from the radical wave of Islam that is thundering across Europe right now and, of course, it is having its own effects here.

I’m referencing the San Bernardino shootings from December of last year by Muslims and most recently the Orlando gay bar mass shooting on Saturday night/Sunday morning in Florida.  This Islamic fuck — whose name isn’t warranted printing here on my blog — now holds the “record” for the number of persons killed in one US mass shooting, at 49 murdered and 53 wounded.  (Except for Antietam, where roughly 22,000 persons were killed in one day, American vs American, and perhaps Wounded Knee.)

The wife of this piece of shit was a clear accomplice and should be charged as a co-conspirator to murder.  She knew that, on June 4th and 5th, he purchased a 9mm handgun and an AR-15 rifle.  She knew how false he was.  Of what his dogma truly consisted.  You cannot live together and now know, unless you are continents away.  They were not.  She knew his heart.  She knew what he was.  And what he wasn’t.  Specifically, she knew about the attack.

Oh, but wait.  It was not an AR-15 the Islamic fuck possessed.  It was a Sig Sauer MCX carbine which shares no major parts with an AR-15.  At all.  The MCX also  Of course, how can you fault the American Media Maggots?  Everything, as you well know, is an AR-15.  This is no mistake, naturally.  This is called a narrative.

AR5

And like good anti-gun Lefitsts, everything evil must be an AR-15.  Therefore the ammunition for AR-15s must be eliminated as well.

Clue into this, Leftists: again, like the bulk of most recent shootings in the US, he was in compliance with the current gun laws for the area.  Further, he was a security operator for a company that held a contract with the federal government.  He not only had to pass local security laws for possession of various weapons — as a security operator that guarded federal facilities — but had to pass federal background checks.

And did.

Further, the FBI conducted two separate investigations into the suspect.  They found nothing.  They cleared him.  They met with him three times.

We — the United States — we are not learning.

The Muslim fuck was working for a multi-national security company that employs about 625,000 people with many contracts to the US federal government.  A “security company” can range from someone guarding a parking lot to persons providing specialized security for special ops American forces on the ground — as with those highlighted in the “13 Hours of Benghazi.

With these contracts, the federal government required a security backgrounding of every employee.  Both sides failed to report.  The Muslim fuck had two gun licenses.  One was for the rifle — the “AR-15” — and it is unlikely he would have acquired these licenses had his employer known of the FBI investigation.  They proscribe even “contact” with the FBI.

AR6[ Hillary Clinton, as an aside, is wrong again as the bint she is.  The “AR-15” she falsely said was involved is not a “weapon of war.”  It is a rifle.  It shoots semi-automatically.  It is in fact used by hunters.  What she really objects to, like most Leftists, is that it has odd bits and angles that make it, with its black color, appear to be completely sinister in their over-imaginative minds. ]

The FBI concluded it lacked sufficient evidence to go forward with even what they call a “preliminary investigation.”  But whatever they found out about him, they should have told his employer.  In that they failed.

Let me repeat for the abundant Leftists amongst you here and now: the Islamic fuck Omar Mateen (okay, sorry) passed every background check required by the state and by the federal government.  He was never “institutionalized” as well.  But there’s more; just wait a few paragraphs.

Captain Obvious: the bar was a “No Gun Zone.”  Right.  Larfs all around.  But nothing works against a gun like?  Right.  Another gun.

Columbine, Newtown.  All of these mass killings took place where the government prohibited people from protecting themselves.  A “gun free zone” is like shooting fish in a barrel.  Gays or not.

A LE axiom: when an assailant is confronted sooner rather than later, lives are saved.  Period.

Leftists immediately jumped to gun control.  And the American Media Maggots helped to buttress that so-called “argument.”

There was no call from the Oval Office to Orlando.  Party politics.  Leftist Obaka to Republican Governor Rick Scott.  Didn’t happen.

There is no doubt that the Muslim fuck was motivated by Islam.  His father was a supporter of the Taliban.  The Muslim fuck himself cheered when planes struck the WTC on 9/11.  Inspire magazine exists to, eh, “inspire” after all.

On the other hand, it could be clear that the Muslim fuck was sexually confounded.  He could have been trying to resolve various homosexual issues that he finally applied to the Pulse gay bar.

I suspect there were a number of motivators of the Muslim fuck.

I suspect that he was conflicted with his own personal sexuality.  I suspect that he realized the inherent conflict that exists in the Middle East — a conflict that very few persons seem willing to address in the Western Media.  That is to say, the conflict that exists between small boys and older men.

In the ME form of Islam it does not seem to be disagreeable that small boys are penetrated anally for sexual satisfaction.

US soldiers in ME assignments realize this rather rapidly: “women are for procreation, and boys are for fun.”

That brings us to the “bacha bazi” dancing boys.  Click at your own disgust.

Muslim Bacha Bazi BoysThe secret shame of Afghanistan’s bacha bazi ‘dancing boys’ who are made to dress like little girls, then abused by paedophiles

  • Bacha bazi, meaning ‘boy play’, is a tradition found across Afghanistan, where boys dress as women and perform

  • But these boys, some as young as 10, are also sexually abused by the men – passed around after the parties

  • The stigma of having been a ‘bacha bereesh’ sees the victims shunned by their families and society

  • However, ‘owning’ more than one boy is seen as a display of both power and wealth among some Afghan war lords

  • See full news coverage and stories from Afghanistan at www.dailymail.co.uk/afghanistan 

For some deviant reason, in the ME form of Islam, this is not considered a form of pederasty.  Only when one transitions from boys to men is buggery considered verboten by Islam.  And by that the Islamic fuck found himself conflicted.  He was not attracted by boys.

He liked men.  He hated America.  He may have been spurned in conflict of his religion.  It only takes one blowjob to make someone a “homosexual.”  And that appellation of “homosexual” is completely unacceptable in Islam.

As a conflicted homosexual, to attack a gay bar would solve the bulk of his problems.  It would resolve his unstated sexuality, and it would place him into a place of importance within Islam.  Let’s kill gays.

But instead of Islam or violence or philosophy, instead, according to Obama and his sycophants, it’s all about guns.

If guns were the issue, then what about Belgium?  What about France?  What about the UK?  What about California?  These locations all have the strictest gun control imaginable.  California has the strongest, most constrictive laws on the books of any state — and they are creating even more.

And yet it’s about the tools and not about the root cause.

To Leftists: let there be no mistake.  Barack Hussein Obama has drawn the battle lines between Islam and gays.

Guess what?  Islam wins.

“Evil always wins through the strength of its splendid dupes; and there has in all ages been a disastrous alliance between abnormal innocence and abnormal sin.”
— G.K. Chesterton

BZ

P.S.
The most immediate goal of Leftists now?  To eliminate those weapons which have detachable magazines.

Trust me.

 

LEFTISTS determining to LIMIT free speech

Freedom of Speech StoppedAnd not a shock considering the history of Leftists insisting upon control — death-grip control — of speech across the globe.

Europe first.

From Bloomberg.com::

Tech Giants Vow to Tackle Online Hate Speech Within 24 Hours

by Stephanie Bodoni

U.S. Internet giants Facebook Inc., Twitter Inc., Google and Microsoft Corp. pledged to tackle online hate speech in less than 24 hours as part of a joint commitment with the European Union to combat the use of social media by terrorists.

Beyond national laws that criminalize hate speech, there is a need to ensure such activity by Internet users is “expeditiously reviewed by online intermediaries and social media platforms, upon receipt of a valid notification, in an appropriate time-frame,” the companies and the European Commission said in a joint statement on Tuesday.

But what is “hate speech”?  And who makes that determination?

As an American, I understand that Europe has no real First Amendment as do we.  There is no history, in Europe, of valuing true free speech.  As is commonly said in America, however, the First Amendment exists not for everyday or pablum-oriented speech, but challenging speech.

The code of conduct arrives as Europe comes to terms with the bloody attacks in Paris and Brussels by Islamic State, which has used the Web and social media to spread its message of hate against its enemies. The companies said it remains a “challenge” to strike the right balance between freedom of expression and hate speech in the self-generated content on online platforms.

“We remain committed to letting the Tweets flow,” said Twitter’s head of public policy for Europe, Karen White, in the statement. “However, there is a clear distinction between freedom of expression and conduct that incites violence and hate.”

But it looks like, when you get down to it, the objection by these large techies isn’t necessarily terrorism as in the standard definition of the word — specifically as with regard to the Brussels attacks.  Perhaps that was the original intent a month or so ago.

Read this, from the AP.org on the same topic:

“The internet is a place for free speech, not hate speech,” said Vera Jourova, the EU commissioner responsible for justice, consumers and gender equality. She added that the code of conduct, which will be regularly reviewed in terms of its scope and its impact, will ensure that public incitement to violence to hatred has “no place online.”

The firms themselves say there’s no conflict between their mission statements to promote the freedom of expression and clamping down on hate speech.

But again, WHO determines the definition of “hate speech”?  We already know that Facebook has been caught short-shrifting and minimizing stories involving conservative issues of import.  We already know that the IRS targeted conservative groups.  We already know that every newsroom in the US is 85% + Leftist.  We already know that Google, Facebook and Twitter are run by Leftists, and that Google, Facebook and Twitter have suspended the accounts of conservative persons for no stated specific reason whatsoever whilst simultaneously allowing the same behavior to occur on behalf of Leftists for Leftist causes.  Facts in evidence.

Obama Billionaire Corporate DemoratsWe already know that Obama and DC don’t hate all capitalists.  They love Leftist tech capitalists.  Just look above.

Now?  It would seem to me that the definition of “hate speech” is expanding.

What is “hate speech”?  Is it, “Allahu akhbar, slay all the infidels and behead the nonbelievers, run their parts through a wood chipper and set that liquid on fire”?

Is it “kill all the Jews, may their corrupt Zionist bodies be blown to bits and their children slaughtered in their beds with the sharpest of machetes”?

Or is it when BZ writes that “black lives don’t matter”?

Is it when BZ takes umbrage with the word marriage meaning one man and one man, one woman and one woman — even though BZ couldn’t care less that two gays or lesbians enjoy a “civil union” and should be afforded precisely the same benefits as one man and one woman?  That he just despises the meanings of words being hijacked?

Is it when BZ writes the word “trannies”?

Is it when BZ says that Leftists are every bit as hypocritical as everyone else and frequently more so, or that most Leftists have no concept of reality, or that Obama is one of the most dangerous persons to the United States ever installed in the White House?  Or that the electorate is increasingly brain dead for Free Cheese?

Is it when BZ writes emphatically that illegal Mexicans should not be allowed into the United States?

Is it when BZ writes that “Islam is as Islam does”?

I’m certain by now you see where I’m going with this.

LEFTIST WORD POLICEThe Dream Police are here.  So sayeth Cheap Trick.  The Word Police are setting up shop and already have a logo.  The Thought Police are deciding what color uniform to purchase.

Yes, ladies and gentlemen, the Thought Police.  You realize, of course, that technology is already being developed in order to truly read your thoughts?  For shame, if you think I’m writing out my ass.  Click the links here and here.

So I ask again:

Just what is “hate speech”?

Who gets to decide?

“It’s a beautiful thing, the destruction of words.” 

Eric Arthur Blair is shaking his head and saying “I told you so.”

BZ

IGNORANCE IS STRENGTH