“Hate Speech” is in the eye of the beholder, and the beholder is now your Federal Government

Posted on Tuesday, August 26, 2014 by BZ

Prove you’re not insane.

Go ahead, prove it. Organically and via whatever means testing is available, prove it.

Oh, and by the way, also prove you’re not a racist.

Prove anything involving a “not.”

The most difficult thing imaginable is to disprove a negative.

Yet, here we go again on the heels of “rampant racism” in America via Ferguson — the new “Hate Speech” buzzphrase meme.

From the WashingtonFreeBeacon.com:

Feds Creating Database to Track ‘Hate Speech’ on Twitter

$1 Million study focuses on internet memes, ‘misinformation’ in political campaigns

by Elizabeth Harrington

The federal government is spending nearly $1 million to create an online database that will track “misinformation” and hate speech on Twitter.

The National Science Foundation is financing the creation of a web service that will monitor “suspicious memes” and what it considers “false and misleading ideas,” with a major focus on political activity online.

The “Truthy” database, created by researchers at Indiana University, is designed to “detect political smears, astroturfing, misinformation, and other social pollution.”

There you go. Just what you need. The federal government monitoring your writings and deciding, in the proverbial vacuum, just what is proper and just what isn’t. In direct contravention of the First Amendment. Please allow me to remind:

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.

Frankly, this “hate speech” tracking sounds like Stalin to me, and Fidel Castro and Hugo Chavez. Like some Third World tin-pot dictator. Except that this is a LAW proposed in the United States of America.

Via now, Mr Barack Hussein Obama. Another tin pot dictator who is clueless, rife with NPD, and unable to manage the most basic of businesses for a profit. He would first classify profit as “evil.” Then he would drive any and said business into the ground. I suspect he couldn’t run a lemonade stand for a profit, much less our country.

Remember when Mr Obama attempted to call out those sites that were deemed to be “fishy”? From FoxNews.com:

White House Draws Fire for Requesting ‘Fishy’ Information From Supporters on Health Reform

by Molly Henneberg

The White House is under fire for a blog post asking supporters to send “fishy” information received through rumors, chain e-mails and casual conversations to a White House e-mail address, flag@whitehouse.gov.

Conservatives have pounced on the request, accusing the White House of acting Orwellian.

“If you get an e-mail from your neighbor and it doesn’t sound right, send it to the White House?”said Sen. John Barasso, R-Wyo. ” People, I think all across America are going to say is this 1984? What is happening here? Is big brother watching?”

“Social pollution.” Really? As if the meme of unhindered and unrestrained government handouts aren’t social pollution for the stupid amongst us? As if there are no limits to the depth and breadth of government largesse? Sustainability? Societal lampreys?

Possible air strike in Syria?

Sorry. Shouldn’t have mentioned that.

Policing America: should the green shirts be exchanged for Brown Shirts?

Posted on Monday, July 28, 2014 by BZ

I submit that is a question you need to ask.

First, watch this video, an excerpt from the John Stossel show “Policing America: Security vs Liberty” recently broadcasted on Fox News, July 26th, involving USBP checkpoints up to 100 miles inland from an American border:

I find this shameful and repulsive, personally and professionally. As anyone in law enforcement (as I am) knows, there is the spirit or the law and the letter of the law.

A pastor had both of his vehicle windows broken and was Tazed from both sides when he refused to let USBP search his vehicle. He is Caucasoid and spoke clear English.

The issue? The federal law indicating “a reasonable distance from the border.” Is 60 miles reasonable? 100 miles? Yes, 100 miles. As Stossel points out, that’s where most Americans live, when you consider our borders north and south, and our coastlines east and west.

Some persons are installing cameras in their cars to document these abrogations, God bless them. This is pushback and they are patriotic for doing so. Again, see the video above.

The SCOTUS said that travelers can be briefly detained for the purpose of conducting a limited inquiry into residence status, as per United States vs Martinez-Fuerte, 428 US 543 (1976). Neither the vehicle nor its occupants can be searched, yet the video clearly shows that Americans are being told to submit to detentions, searches, and arrests resulting from non-cooperation when more than an ID check is demanded.

How does one conduct a brief check into residency status? Speak to the individual stopped, see if they speak English, check for a driver’s license and/or other forms of identification. Any prudent and reasonable LEO can tell you this readily.

What we see displayed above is what is known in law enforcement as “contempt of cop.” As in: you have pissed me off because you have dared to challenge my authority, and I am now making it personal.

John Stossel says “big government creates problems,” and that is certainly the case here, involving the Fourth Amendment. “It’s like living in occupied territory,” some lawful residents of the United States of America are saying.

More Americans, as Stossel says, are pushing back. As I submit they should, particularly if they possess video evidence of their incidents. Further, as an affected citizen in an incident similar to those above, I would be suing the federal agencies involved and then the individuals themselves because, as the agents themselves made it personal, perhaps they should take a helping of “personal” in return.

Let there be no mistake: I have been in law enforcement for 41 years. I have worked in a LE capacity for the federal government and for local agencies, where I have worked now for 35 years. I was a Field Training Officer (FTO) in Patrol and have been in training the bulk of my LE career. I taught my trainees to respect the foundational documents and in fact they had not only to conform to my agency training regimen, but my personal training regimen as well, which included knowledge about the Bill of Rights and its applicable amendments.

I emphasized that arrests and detentions should be built but upon solid probable cause and reasonable suspicion, and that we do not bluff. If the law is not on our side, then we don’t make a potential bad situation worse. We know, I would literally say (and wrote in my own adjunct training manual that I would hand out to my charges), when to back down.

Let me submit this for your consideration: if the USBP were literally “striking it rich” from vehicle blockades many miles within the United States proper, they and the Obama Administration would be crowing about it from the tallest of spires, the mightiest hilltops, far and wide, proving the efficacy of these policies. Not only that, the American Media Maggots, sycophants that they are, would plaster these statistics over TV screens and newspapers for days and days.

Except they aren’t. Which tells me one very salient thing: the stats are not bearing out the efficacy of this policy. Trust me, if these interior check points were literal gold mines of success and productivity you would know.

And as far as Representative Peter King (R) is concerned, he is wrong. Open your eyes. All you have to do, sir, is watch this video.

Big Brother is indeed watching. But in this case, watching the wrong Americans — whilst purposely allowing illegal invaders easy passage through our southern border.

This makes absolutely no sense whatsoever to me.

This is not the America I remember from even, say, 30 years ago.

I still adhere to the age-old axiom and standard I was held to when I worked Detectives, in Theft, Child Abuse, Warrants, Robbery and Homicide: see below.

That is how it is done in a free United States of America where the police respect the foundational documents, the US Constitution and the Bill of Rights.

Should the USBP exchange their green shirts for Brown Shirts?

Drawing the entitlement line: Bernadette, can you hear me?

Posted on Friday, July 11, 2014 by BZ

It’s time to speak and write frankly. Some of you may not like it. I couldn’t care less.

There are limits to welfare, people are commencing to realize. There are limits to benefits and entitlements. And these limitations are starting to concern those competing for same, against illegal aliens. Plain and simple. Lawful citizens vs illegals.

Because some people may actually be starting to realize that The American Taxpayer has fiscal limits.

A Houston woman, Bernadette Lancelin, makes various points.

Question: are her points valid?

Watch the video:

I chose the longer video to display, which was edited for language. Sheila Jackson Lee then gets involved therein with little enlightenment. As far as she’s concerned, this isn’t an issue.

Lollipops and Leftist stupidity evidently solve everything.

Here is an expanded version of Lancelin’s cut, where she says what she means:

Does she have a point?

I believe she does.

“What about the kids here? In our neighborhood? Not just in this neighborhood but in our country. All these kids? Really? Why can’t they go back?”

“I’m sorry that their parents are in poor living conditions or surroundings or whatever’s going on out there. I don’t care. I care about what’s going on right here in my own back yard, my neighborhood.”

“Am I the only one in this community that’s out here that watches the news this morning? Oh, my god! I feel alone right now this this, and I’m very saddened by it.”

Get prepared, Bernadette. I’m about to answer your question, and you won’t like it.

First: your concerns are by any Leftist’s standards incredibly racist.

However, you won’t get called on them because you are 1) black, and 2) female. You hold the BF Exemptive Card. Temporarily.

As I’ve written for ten years now: demography is prophecy. And the demographics don’t support you, Bernardette. Because blacks are not procreating as rapidly as Mexicans and Central Americans.

They are bringing their women and their wombs into the United States, and having babies by the truckload. Completely and purposely unimpeded by the current sitting US Government.

These truckloads are potential voters. Their parents will be the current demanders for Free Cheese and their children will continue this demand into the next generation. Ably abetted and supported by Leftists and Demorats.

Those people who want Free Cheese will continue to vote for Free Cheese and that means Demorats stay in power in perpetuity.

Caucasoids and blacks are too interested in abortions. Their numbers are falling, not rising as contrasted with Mexicans and, now, Central Americans.

Caucasoids are interested in which iPhone is out now; which PlayStation has the best reviews, and which social media site is the newest and coolest. They want to wear their dreadlocks and sport their tattoos and revile their so-called privilege via instructed guilt. They are the T-ball Esteem Generation writ large, raised and monitored by Helicopter Parents. Given a T-ball because their parents expected so much less of them. Because just by existing they were so inherently stellar.

They want to be squeezed into mini-apartments in the center of a city with mass transportation, no individual cars, and Big Brother watching over them. They are more than willing to eschew freedom for the allure of more and more Free Cheese. So that they can “be themselves.” But “themselves” involve “selfies” because, after all, “it’s all about them.” Just as Obama’s NPD.

Caucasoids the world over are dying out. And possibly rightly so. They are more than willing to trade freedom for security and — more importantly — security for a “cradle-to-grave” pablum blanket. As long as they have their trinkets and their toys they’re just “fine with it.” And as long as they accept Multi-Kulti.

“Those who would give up essential Liberty, to purchase a little temporary Safety, deserve neither Liberty nor Safety.”

-Benjamin Franklin, 1755

[Note to Millennials: I am staying in my job, at my advanced age, to make sure that I piss you off with this Truism: just one of me, in my generation, makes about 2.5 of you, because you are such pussified Navel-Gazing Fucktards. Sorry for the F-word. But not really. They pay me not for what I do, but what I know. I am a Peter Drucker “knowledge worker.”]

Millennials have little if any care about our foundational documents regarding the US Constitution, the Bill of Rights, the Federalist Papers. They have no idea who Bastiat or Hegel or Ayers or Churchill or Reagan or Hitler may be. But they know that Germany just beat Brazil in soccur.

The misspelling is purposeful. Soccur is for pussies who embrace aerobics whilst they falsely writhe and twist on the ground for theatrics.

Still with me, Bernadette?

Good.

Because here’s the truth: you and your kind — blacks — matter in a minimal fashion day by day. You don’t have enough kids which means you don’t kick out a sufficient number of potential Demorat voters. Mexicans and — now — Central Americans simply have you beat.

Sorry girl.

Complain to La Raza and/or MEChA. And you’d better click on each link. What is the literal translation of La Raza, by the way? Oh yes: “The Race.”

Nothing racist there, eh wot? Nah. Move along.

The demographics are finally catching up. Move over for the New Boss, same as the Old Boss.

Danes: there can be “free speech” as long as there is no pushback

Posted on Tuesday, June 24, 2014 by BZ

There is in fact, something rotten in Denmark.

It appears to be from the Danes themselves.

From Pamela Gellar’s Atlas Shrugs:

Danish magazine for lawyers: Free speech is only democratic as long as it does not provoke violent people

By Nicolai Sennels, Jihadwatch, June 20, 2014

Recently the UK Law Society introduced a guide to sharia law. And in Denmark, law professor Trine Baumbach attacks the freedom of speech in the latest issue of Juristen (The Lawyer). Via 10news.dk, translated from Uriasposten:

Freedom of expression can be seen as an expression of democracy — but only to the extent that free speech is used for the benefit of a democratic society and its citizens. … Freedom of expression is one of the foundations of democratic societies, but only to the extent that freedom of expression is not misused to violate the rights of others or used in a way that society risks being plunged into social unrest and civil peace being threatened.

Of course. We “like” free speech until free speech conflicts with something else that is politically incorrect or sensitive or impolitic or requires courage, which is something Lefitsts clearly do not possess.

In other words: when there is pushback — in this case, something involving Islam and Sharia Law — “freedom of speech” is merely an old, volatile and hackneyed phrase. And one that must be kicked to the curb. There can be no courage in the face is Islam vs Westernized Nations. The West must inherently lose, according to the GOWPs of the West. The Guiilty Overeducated White People.

But I say this:

There must be a REASON that our Founding Fathers decided to place freedom of speech on “front street” in terms of our Bill of Rights, which states:

Amendment I

I don’t suppose there can be a more clear and simple delineation of a basic freedom than the First Amendment.

But here’s the “rub.” There will be greater conflicts when so-called “free speech” comes into conflict with “tolerance” and “cultural acceptance.”

What happens when you place Sharia objections of free speech under the guise of “tolerance,” then?

I submit: you lose your free speech.

As Pamela Geller clearly states and I obviously embrace, it is a characteristic of religious barbarians vs the common sensical.

When you embrace the consideration of Sharia Law as opposed to actual western rules of law, you ask for “civilizational suicide.”

“The political function of ‘the right of free speech’ is to protect dissenters and unpopular minorities from forcible suppression.”

Pamela Geller writes:

Abridging this most crucial freedom so as not to offend savages is civilizational suicide. It is the death knell for the modern enlightenment.

I couldn’t agree more.

Guess what, Denmark? You’re about to LOSE your country. Get prepared.

Memorial Day and gun control

Posted on Monday, May 26, 2014 by BZ

Some of the finest engraving ever witnessed on a firearm.

In my mind, Memorial Day and the Second Amendment go hand-in-hand, as does the full Bill of Rights and our US Constitution.

More and more persons, Leftists and the ignorant and the naive, want to give and bargain away our freedoms for perceived security.

They predicate their decisions, opinions and philosophies but upon emotions and not facts or reality.

One man said:

“On some positions, cowardice asks the question, is it expedient? And then expedience comes along and asks the question, is it politic? Vanity asks the question, is it popular? Conscience asks the question, is it right?

There comes a time when one must take the position that is neither safe nor politic nor popular, but he must do it because conscience tells him it is right.”

Who was this man?

Martin Luther King, Jr.

One man said:

“We sleep safely at night because rough men stand ready to visit violence on those who would harm us.”

Who was this man?

Sir Winston S. Churchill.

Why is this country still safe? Its Constitution and Bill of Rights. And its military soldiers.

Bloviating Zeppelin

Right thinking from a Left brain.

Tag Archives: Bill of Rights

Policing America: should the green shirts be exchanged for Brown Shirts?

Danes: there can be “free speech” as long as there is no pushback

Memorial Day and gun control

“On some positions, cowardice asks the question, is it expedient? And then expedience comes along and asks the question, is it politic? Vanity asks the question, is it popular? Conscience asks the question, is it right?

“We sleep safely at night because rough men stand ready to visit violence on those who would harm us.”