Leftist Google: coming for your First Amendment

Google Being EvilLorette Lynch, Obama, Demorats and Leftists want to come for your free speech and your First Amendment.

In the guise of curbing “hate speech.”

Who gets to determine what “hate speech” is?

Leftists, of course.

From QZ.com:

Google’s chairman wants algorithms to censor the internet for hate speech

by Hanna Kozlowska

In an op-ed for The New York Times (paywall), Eric Schmidt, the executive chairman of Google, inserted himself directly into the middle of a heated debate about the line between fighting terrorism’s online reach and internet censorship.

“It’s our responsibility to demonstrate that stability and free expression go hand in hand,” he writes. “We should build tools to help de-escalate tensions on social media—sort of like spell-checkers, but for hate and harassment.”

His words came just after Hillary Clinton, the frontrunner for the Democratic presidential nomination, called on Silicon Valley to “disrupt ISIL” last weekend in Washington DC. Clinton said it is crucial to “deprive jihadists of virtual territory” by shutting off their means of communication.

Isn’t that funny?  Hillary Clinton calls for “disrupting ISIL” and Leftists — GOOGLE — interpret that to mean curbing free speech for everyone on the internet.

Everyone?

Just whose speech do you suppose Google will attempt to curb, if you had to guess?

Michael Moore’s speech, or my speech?  Your speech?  How about the speech of Muslims?

Who gets to determine what is and is not “hate speech”?  Will Conservatives have any input?  I think not.  Leftists will determine those parameters.  Conservatives will be the target.

I think you have your answer.

With the proper Al-Gore-rhythm, I’m sure Google could do just that.

BZ

Freedom of Speech, Journalism ProfessorHERE is what Leftists think of your pissy little “freedom of speech.”

Freedom of Speech Removed By Leftists

Here’s your Leftist “freedom of speech”

Freedom of Speech, Journalism Professor

This Leftist loon “throwing out” a college journalist isn’t a fellow student.  This is college professor Melissa Click who teaches journalism.  Yep.  Figure that one out.

Ladies and gentlemen, here is your “freedom of speech” on US college campuses these days.  Translated: there is no freedom of speech on US college campuses these days.

That face, ladies and gentlemen, is the face of evil, the face of oppression, the raging and insane face of today’s Leftist on your taxpayer-funded college campuses.

It is the face of Melissa Click, assistant professor of mass media at University of Missouri.

She says:

“Who wants to help me get this reporter out of here? I need some muscle over here.”

From the NYTimes.com:

‘I Need Some Muscle’: Missouri Activists Block Journalists

COLUMBIA, Mo. — A video that showed University of Missouri protesters restricting a student photographer’s access to a public area of campus on Monday has ignited discussions about press freedom.

Tim Tai, a student photographer on freelance assignment for ESPN, was trying to take photos of a small tent city that protesters had created on a campus quad. Concerned Student 1950, an activist group that formed to push for increased awareness and action around racial issues on campus, did not want reporters near the encampment.

“You need to get out,” Click says.  “No I don’t,” says the male journalist, Mark Schierbecker, lawfully.

He is a student attending that college, on the college campus, on college property.  Just why is it, Leftists, that he needs to leave property that he can lawfully occupy by dint of his position as a student of same?

So here is your “freedom of speech,” Americans, on today’s college campuses.  Campuses that your tax dollars fund.  You pay for Leftists to impede actual freedom of speech.  You do.

He (David Kurpius, Dean of Journalism) also noted that Ms. Click is a faculty member of the communications department, which is separate from the journalism school. He said she holds a “courtesy appointment” with the journalism school that faculty members would take “immediate action” to review.

Even CNN wrote:

Media prof. asks for ‘muscle’ to block student journalist

A Missouri mass media professor is under scrutiny after calling for “muscle” to block out journalists on a public space.

Check their video.

The NY Post says the University of Missouri hosts the world’s worst journalism professor.

The dean of the Missouri School of Journalism on Tuesday lambasted an assistant communications professor and lauded a photojournalism student for their roles in Monday’s viral video showing a confrontation between that student journalist and protesters attempting to block him from shooting photos on a public quad.

The filmed confrontation appeared to show the University of Missouri protesters, including Assistant Professor Melissa Click, engaging in a clear violation of the First Amendment, since the incident occurred in a public space on the campus of a public university.

The truth will out, every once in a while however.

Video can be good or bad.  In this case, video is good.

Oh, one final point.

From the UKDailyMail.com:

Media professor who bullied journalists away from University of Missouri protests resigns from her ‘courtesy’ position at the prestigious journalism school

by Ashley Collman and Kiri Blakeley

  • Melissa Click, an assistant media professor at the University of Missouri, was caught trying to force journalists out of a public protest on Monday

  • On Tuesday, Click apologized for her actions and resigned from her ‘courtesy appointment’ with the School of Journalism

  • While she was previously affiliated with the journalism school, Click was on the faculty of the separate College of Arts and Sciences   

  • The video in question shows Click walking up to a cameraman and yelling that he get off the quad where a group of protesters had camped out

  • She tries to knock down his camera and then says: ‘Who wants to help me get this reporter out of here? I need some muscle over here’ 

  • Click has issued an apology for her behavior saying: ‘I regret the language and strategies I used’ 

Obviously, I am chagrined and disappointed.  I expected better from Leftists.

Uh, no.  I larfed my arse off when Click the Chick got kicked to the curb.

BZ

 

“Net neutrality” to censor Drudge, Fox and ME?

Freedom of Speech StoppedAh yes, Leftists soon to get what they want, the censorship of those who oppose their policies?

As per normal it isn’t Republicans or Conservatives or those on the right who want to remove your freedoms and specifically your First Amendment freedoms, it is those who profess to be the most embracing and the most understanding and tolerant who wish to remove your freedoms: the Demorats and Leftists and so-called Progressives.

From the WashingtonExaminer.com:

Drudge, Fox News could be censored under new federal rules, experts warn

by Rudy Takala

A Washington, D.C., appeals court is set to hear arguments later this year on new net neutrality rules, which critics say could lead to government regulators censoring websites such as the Drudge Report and Fox News.

In its February vote on net neutrality, the Federal Communications Commission stated that broadband providers do not have a right to free speech. “Broadband providers are conduits, not speakers … the rules we adopt today are tailored to the important government interest in maintaining an open Internet as a platform for expression,” the majority held in its 3-2 vote.

The rules, which went into effect in June, require that broadband providers — such as Verizon or Comcast — offer access to all legal online content. It did not place such a requirement on “edge providers,” such as Netflix and Google. The FCC defines edge providers as “any individual or entity that provides any content, application, or service over the Internet, and any individual or entity that provides a device used for accessing any content, application, or service over the Internet.”

No right to free speech?

Writing in separate briefs, former FCC Commissioner Harold Furchtgott-Roth and the Center for Boundless Innovation in Technology argues that the rules violate the First Amendment right of Internet providers to display the speech they choose.

“If rules such as these are not reviewed under the most rigorous scrutiny possible, government favoritism and censorship masquerading as ‘neutrality’ will soon cascade to other forms of mass communication,” the center argues.

“If the court upholds the FCC’s rules, the agency’s authority over the Internet would extend from one end to the other,” Fred Campbell, president of the Center for Boundless Innovation in Technology, told the Washington Examiner. “Because the same theories the FCC relied on to impose its new regulations on Internet service providers are also applicable to companies like Apple and Netflix, the FCC could extend its regulatory reach much further in the future.”

Could that “reach” mean me?  And you?  Our opinions on social media?  Any bit of written expression that involves an opinion or even a viewpoint?

More pointedly, our political opinions?  Opinions that could contradict those of the regime in power, as Mr Obama or others of power in DC?

Specifically, Campbell said, the FCC will likely try to control political speech.

“This possibility raises the risk that Congress or the FCC could impose restrictions on Internet video and other services that have traditionally been imposed on over the air broadcasting and cable television, including the fairness doctrine that once put the government in charge of determining whether broadcasters were fairly representing both sides of an issue,” he explained.

FCC Commissioner Ajit Pai, who voted against the net neutrality rules, has said such restrictions may be coming if net neutrality is allowed to stand, warning in March that online political content like the Drudge Report could face greater regulation.

Why is it, however, that only Drudge and Fox News should be targeted?  Is it because the “rest” of the news agencies are so terribly unbiased — such as NBC, CBS, ABC and CNN?  It is no shock that there is much Left-wing bias in the newsrooms of what most would term the “mainstream media.”  Bernard Goldberg knew this years ago.  There are very few Republicans and right-wingers in MSM newsrooms.

Further, clearly the ignorant don’t know that Drudge doesn’t write news; the DrudgeReport is nothing more than a news aggregator.  It collects and collates news from sources around the globe, then slugs stories with a headline that catches.

Is this really the United States of America, when something like this could actually happen?

BZ

 

Pushback pushes Marxist Houston Mayor Annise Parker BACK?

Mayor Annise Parker, HoustonI wrote about the situation originally here, where Mayor Parker wanted to remove the free speech of religious organs in Houston.  Please read the post first.

That said, Thursday, from WashingtonTimes.com:

Bully pulpit: Houston subpoenas pastors’ sermons, then backs off amidst outcry

Pastors had slammed demand from Mayor Annise Parker, city, as a threat to religious freedom

by Valerie Richardson

After calling church sermons for subpoena, Mayor Annise Parker backed down Wednesday from the city’s effort to force local pastors to turn over speeches and papers related to a hotly contested transgender rights ordinance.

The city had asked five pastors for “all speeches, presentations, or sermons” on a variety of topics, including the mayor, and “gender identity.”

The subpoena prompted a storm of criticism when it became public Tuesday. The pastors are involved in legal efforts to overturn the Houston Equal Rights Ordinance, also known as the “bathroom bill.”

First Amendment FlagWait.  Is it just me?  Is this writer attempting to gloss over the fact that the mayor was attempting to set her Stasi Rottweilers upon those persons with which she simply disagrees?  In one word: yes.

Closely examine how the headline and sub-headline are written.  Any slant there you see?

However, Ms. Parker, a self-declared lesbian, defended the subpoenas after she was aware of them, according to her Wednesday afternoon statement.

In a post on her Twitter feed late Tuesday, around midnight, Parker said that issuing subpoenas for sermons was appropriate if the pastors had been active in promoting the signature-gathering effort to overturn the ordinance.

Frankly, nothing more than a naked abuse of power writ large.

Ms. Parker’s office initially doubled down in the face of such criticism but issued a statement late Wednesday saying the mayor “agrees with those who are concerned about the city legal department’s subpoenas for pastors’ sermons.”

But all is not won; in fact, public opinion isn’t having the effect many would like.

The statement says the city will “move to narrow the scope during an upcoming court hearing” and that city and that City Attorney David Feldman “says the focus should be only on communications related to the petitions to overturn the ordinance.”

Translated: there will still be a focus on the abrogation of the First Amendment in Houston proper.  We will still go for e-mails and other forms of communications.

Mark this now.  For a state that allegedly declares itself uninfluenced and independent and self-reliant and worthy of a lone star flag, Tejas proves itself more aligned with Fornicalia than many other states.

The five pastors targeted by the subpoenas are Hernan Castano, Magda Hermida, Khan Huynh, Steve Riggle and David Welch, all of whom opposed the ordinance.

Mr. Welch, executive director of the Texas Pastors Council, said city officials appear to be interested in “demonizing” the pastors by finding something politically incorrect in the stacks of sermons, emails, presentation notes and other communications requested under the subpoenas.

Tolerant LeftistsA story in flux and transition.  And not yet entirely solved in favor of logic or even the founding documents of our great nation.

Marxist Lesbian Mayor Annise Parker ain’t done yet.

Not until she grinds religion under her heel.

BZ

 

Leftists in America: suppressing Free Speech and Christian beliefs in Houston, TX

Brown Shirts MarchingJust when you were wondering: “how much worse can the attack on the First Amendment get?” — it gets worse.

From FoxNews.com:

City of Houston demands pastors turn over sermons

by Todd Starnes

The city of Houston has issued subpoenas demanding a group of pastors turn over any sermons dealing with homosexuality, gender identity or Annise Parker, the city’s first openly lesbian mayor. And those ministers who fail to comply could be held in contempt of court.

Read that again and begin to fully and truly digest its meaning.

Annise D. Parker is a Stalinist mayor in America.  This is the re-creation of the Stasi and Brown Shirts all over again within the borders of the United States of America.

The subpoenas are just the latest twist in an ongoing saga over the Houston’s new non-discrimination ordinance. The law, among other things, would allow men to use the ladies room and vice versa.  The city council approved the law in June.

The Houston Chronicle reported opponents of the ordinance launched a petition drive that generated more than 50,000 signatures – far more than the 17,269 needed to put a referendum on the ballot.

However, the city threw out the petition in August over alleged irregularities.

After opponents of the bathroom bill filed a lawsuit the city’s attorneys responded by issuing the subpoenas against the pastors.

But here’s the Crux of the Biscuit:

The pastors were not part of the lawsuit. However, they were part of a coalition of some 400 Houston-area churches that opposed the ordinance. The churches represent a number of faith groups – from Southern Baptist to non-denominational.

Therefore, you can chalk the subpoenas up to nothing more than retribution.  And jackbooted authoritarianism.

The lawsuit and subpoenas were designed to intimidate, quash and chill the free speech of pastors and base religious freedoms themselves.

Mayor Parker will not explain why she wants to inspect the sermons. I contacted City Hall for a comment and received a terse reply from the mayor’s director of communications.

“We don’t comment on litigation,” said Janice Evans.

However, ADF attorney Stanley suspects the mayor wants to publicly shame the ministers. He said he anticipates they will hold up their sermons for public scrutiny. In other words – the city is rummaging for evidence to “out” the pastors as anti-gay bigots.

Pages ripped from the playbooks of both Saul Alinsky’s “Rules For Radicals” as well as Stalin and Marx:

Among those slapped with a subpoena is Steve Riggle, the senior pastor of Grace Community Church. He was ordered to produce all speeches and sermons related to Mayor Annise Parker, homosexuality and gender identity.

The mega-church pastor was also ordered to hand over “all communications with members of your congregation” regarding the non-discrimination law.

“This is an attempt to chill pastors from speaking to the cultural issues of the day,” Riggle told me. “The mayor would like to silence our voice. She’s a bully.”

No kidding.  The response:

David Welch, director of the Houston Area Pastor Council, also received a subpoena. He said he will not be intimidated by the mayor.

“We’re not afraid of this bully,” he said. “We’re not intimidated at all.”

He accused the city of violating the law with the subpoenas and vowed to stand firm in the faith.

“We are not going to yield our First Amendment rights,” Welch told me. ‘This is absolutely a complete abuse of authority.”

Tony Perkins, the head of the Family Research Council, said pastors around the nation should rally around the Houston ministers.

“The state is breaching the wall of separation between church and state,” Perkins told me. ‘Pastors need to step forward and challenge this across the country. I’d like to see literally thousands of pastors after they read this story begin to challenge government authorities – to dare them to come into their churches and demand their sermons.”

Pastor Welch said: “We can no longer remain silent. We must stand together – because one day – the government might come for your pastor.”

This, of course, reminds me of the classic quote from another pastor named Martin Niemoller:

First they came for the Socialists, and I did not speak out—
Because I was not a Socialist.

Then they came for the Trade Unionists, and I did not speak out—
Because I was not a Trade Unionist.

Then they came for the Jews, and I did not speak out—
Because I was not a Jew.

Then they came for me—and there was no one left to speak for me.

Final question: do you think this would have occurred with regard to Islamic sermons in America?  Do you think Islam “loves” gays?

I know my answers.

BZ