Freedom of Speech in America

[American Patriot]

White House speech censors and the return of DhimmiTube

By Michelle Malkin • September 14, 2012 01:53 PM

Yesterday, I spotlighted the unmourned casualty of Obama’s foreign policy/national security disaster bus: The First Amendment.
It gets worse. Last night, the LA Times reported that the White House leaned on YouTube to censor the anti-Islam movie that provided jihadis with handy cover and pretext for their long-planned attack on our diplomatic posts and embassies abroad:

Administration officials have asked YouTube to review a controversial video that many blame for spurring a wave of anti-American violence in the Middle East.
The administration flagged the 14-minute “Innocence of Muslims” video and asked that YouTube evaluate it to determine whether it violates the site’s terms of service, officials said Thursday. The video, which has been viewed by nearly 1.7 million users, depicts Muhammad as a child molester, womanizer and murderer — and has been decried as blasphemous and Islamophobic.
YouTube blocked access to the video in Egypt and Libya, where protests in Benghazi erupted in violence that claimed the life of U.S. Ambassador J. Christopher Stevens and three other embassy workers. However, the video remains on the site. Protests have spread to Yemen, where hundreds stormed the U.S. Embassy.

Longtime readers of my blogs will not be surprised by YouTube’s dhimmitude. I encountered the AllahTube/Dhimmitube censors in 2006 during the Mohammed Cartoons conflagration, when I first posted an innocuous, little homemade clip about the Religion of Perpetual Outrage’s war on Western free speech titled “First, They Came.” Over the years, the whitewashing of Google/YouTube to protect radical Muslim sensitivities has been well-documented. After GWU law professor Jeffrey Rosen wrote an extensive piece inside the world of Google censors, my little clip was un-banned, embedding was restored, and it can be seen here:
Critics of Islam on YouTube, however, are now on notice:
The White House is watching. You could be the next scapegoat for this administration’s deadly derelictions of duty.
***
A Twitter follower asks: So will the White House demand that YouTube take down all incendiary videos of Obama bragging about killing Bin Laden, too?
Too bad no one in the lapdog media will ask.

[American Patriot]

http://www.nationalreview.com/articl...ew-c-mccarthy#

September 15, 2012 4:00 A.M.

Obama vs. the First Amendment
He has given too much ground to Islamists. By Andrew C. McCarthy


Archive Latest RSS Send

Outside the U.S. embassy in Cairo, September 11, 2012

inShare6

Print
Text

Comments 3

Andrew C. McCarthy

Democrats and their sharky Obamedia defense lawyers are in a snit. For three dreamy convention days in Charlotte, they told themselves that, for the first time in decades, it was their guy who had the upper hand when it came to national security. Now that bubble has burst, the way contrived narratives do when they crash into concrete challenges. At that point, an airy president of the world won’t do; we need to have [COLOR=#216221 !important][COLOR=#216221 !important]a [COLOR=#216221 !important]president[/COLOR][/COLOR][/COLOR] of the United States, a job that has never suited, and has never been of much interest to, Barack Obama.
Defense against foreign enemies is the primary job of the president of the United States. The rationale for the office’s creation is national defense — not green venture capitalism, not rationing medical care, not improving the self-image of the “Muslim world,” not leaving no child behind, not blowing out the Treasury’s credit line. Yet, though we are entering the late innings, foreign policy and national defense have not been factors in the 2012 campaign.
That is worth bearing in mind when we hear the laugh-out-loud narrative of Obama as foreign-affairs chess master. The president badly wants to win reelection. If there were anything to his alleged prowess, we’d not have heard the end of it. What we’ve heard, instead, is a bumper-sticker: “Obama killed Osama.” The Left hoped to paste it over the president’s generally dreary record. Even with the Obamedia in coordinated overdrive, the plan can work only if Mitt Romney lets it work — and, thankfully, it looks like he won’t.

Advertisement

Give the president his due: In 2008, he said he would go hard against terrorist havens, no matter how upset this made John McCain’s cherished “allies” in Pakistan, and he has. But even the welcome slamming of jihadist redoubts is undermined by the mess Obama has made of terrorist detention — so our forces kill in situations where they could capture, drying up the intelligence reservoir that has been vital to thwarting new cells and plots. Moreover, any president would have given the order to take bin Laden out, and just about any post-9/11 president would bomb jihadist hideouts. What’s extraordinary about Obama’s performance in this regard is that he’s one you might have wondered about — he gets graded on a curve. But, thankful as we may be, this is thin camouflage for the rest of Obama’s agenda, which is post-American, anti-constitutional, enabling of the ideology that spawns terrorism, faithless toward our real allies, and feckless in the face of menacing Iran.
The game never goes according to plan. The batted ball always manages to find the suspect fielder, no matter how hard the coach, or the campaign, tries to hide him. On the eleventh anniversary of the 9/11 atrocities, the world and its affairs found the Obama administration — intruding on the president’s effort to win reelection by a brand of domestic class warfare that gives new meaning to the word “small.”
When it came, Obama’s moment was entirely predictable. It was, after all, self-inflicted: the inevitable fallout of policy crafted by the faculty-lounge pinhead, whose ideas are so saccharine smug there’s never a thought of anything so jejune as their consequences. Obama being Obama, when the consequences came, he crawled under his desk — before escaping to a Vegas fundraiser.
“The Embassy of the United States in Cairo condemns the continuing efforts by misguided individuals to hurt the religious feelings of Muslims.” So declared the [COLOR=#216221 !important][COLOR=#216221 !important]Obama [COLOR=#216221 !important]State[/COLOR][/COLOR][/COLOR] Department in a statement issued on the website of its Egyptian embassy. At the time, it was clear that another episode of Muslim mayhem was imminent.
The statement is a disgrace, just as Mitt Romney said it was. It elevated over the U.S. Constitution (you know, the thing Obama took an oath to “preserve, protect, and defend”) the claimed right of sharia supremacists (you know, “Religion of Peace” adherents) to riot over nonsense. Further, it dignified the ludicrous pretext that an obscure, moronic 14-minute video was the actual reason for the oncoming jihad.
Here is the important part, however, the part not to be missed, no matter how determined the president’s media shysters are to cover it up: The disgraceful embassy statement was a completely accurate articulation of longstanding Obama policy.

[Ryan Ruck]

So much for colleges being a place for the free exchange of thoughts and ideas. I guess only if you agree with liberal dogma...

[American Patriot]

Wow....

[American Patriot]

OBAMA’S AMERICA:FREEDOM OF SPEECH DOA.PARENT ARRESTED, FORMER PROSECUTING ATTORNEY, AT SCHOOL BOARD MEETING!WHAT’S GOING ON? Commentary By Adina Kutnicki

Posted on May 20, 2014

BEFORE we delve into the heart of the matter, please recall who the Governor of New Hampshire is. In fact, the Mrs. in charge of the citizens of New Hampshire is married to the principal of Phillips Exeter Academy, a prep school featured within these pages. A real power couple. How nice for them.
Full Disclosure: a few close acquaintances/business associates graduated from the halls of Philips Exeter Academy (the subject below) back in the early 1980′s, and just a few years before its Islamic infestation. These individuals are at the top of their chosen professions, therefore, the influence many of its graduates yield is considerable, even if not in the Presidential arena.
‘Academy That Produced Three Presidents Now Terrorist Breeding Ground’


Meet Maggie Hassan, the Democratic candidate for governor in the state of New Hamphshire. Maggie is married to Thomas Hassan, the principal of Phillips Exeter Academy. For those of you who are not familiar with Phillips Exeter Academy, it is ranked the number six school in the country and has an extremely impressive list of alumni that includes Oliver Wendell Holmes, John F. Kennedy and the list goes on: Bill Belichick, coach of New England Patriots; James Spader the actor; Dr. Spock, renowned pediatrician from the 1950’s, and many more. The list is like a “who’s who” of American history, and there is no doubt that the students currently enrolled will have similar power and influence in the decades to come. So what could be the problem with that? The short answer: radical Islam.
To quote an excellent article by Chris Anu of the New Hampshire Herald:

…On Thomas Hassan’s watch, numerous Islamic scholars and activists with ties to radical Islamic groups have been invited to address student assemblies and other student forums. Among them, Hadia Mubarak, former president of the Muslim Student Association, spoke at a PEA assembly on Oct, 1, 2007. Founded by the Muslim Brotherhood, the MSA was labeled “a virtual terror factory” by terrorism expert Patrick Poole. Its former members include such notable jihadists as Anwar al-Awlaki, Ramy Zamzam, Omar Hammami, Abdurahman Alamoudi, Aafia Siddiqui and Ramzi Yousef.

With the above in mind, it is hardly surprising that strong-arm tactics are being used against anyone who refuses to toe the radical left’s dictates or the increasingly emboldened thrusts by Islamists. Readers must internalize that one does not negate the other, in fact, they feed off of each other! Dracula-like. Hence, the constant reference to the red/green alliance.


Into this arena, along came a concerned father from the small state of New Hampshire (he happens to be a lawyer, having worked in the NYC Prosecutor’s office, not exactly a milieu which renders one squeamish, nor aghast at heavy-handed actions) who became duly alarmed by a particular book assigned to his 14 year old daughter. Not unlike any responsible parent, he placed a call into the principal’s office. No one responded to his concerns. After several failed attempts, he attended a school board meeting to address the issue. Well and good – or so you would think.


Now, the fact that the book was written by a bestselling author is neither here nor there. But what does matter is the absolute graphic and sexual nature of this work of fiction, which in the “infinite wisdom” of leftist driven school officials is supposed to teach requisite lessons. It is “a fictional account of a school shooting in New Hampshire that lasted for 19 minutes (hence the title) that contains explicit and graphic sexual material, along with arguably controversial messages about homicide and yes, gun violence”.


What’s the point? Well, even though authors are free to sell their stories – PG rated or XXX – responsible parents are allowed (actually obligated) to object to material they consider gratuitously sexual and violent in nature. The questions become: what are the educators in America, the poohbahs, thinking? and what is their driving force?
In the main, there is a concerted push to “desensitize” students to graphic sexual content and lifestyles. At the same time, they are bent on indoctrinating them into a gun control mindset, and their methods are targeted in approach.


Adding to the incendiary mix is the vise-grip surrounding all those who refuse to cow to their radical, revolutionary, anti-freedom agenda. Consider: how much easier is it to deconstruct America, especially when every sexual lifestyle is seen as “equal”(hence the push for graphic materials etc) and citizens are terrified to express opposing views, fearing they too will be arrested for resisting said putsch?


When protecting your children becomes a crime against the state in New Hampshire – The critical back-story now told
Northeast Intelligence Network

By Douglas J. Hagmann

Thursday, May 7, 2014: “I was arrested.”


It took a minute for me to wrap my mind around those words, uttered by a one of the most decent men I know. He is an attorney by profession, having worked in the prosecutor’s office within the Five Boroughs of New York City. He’s dealt with some of the most unsavory people and unspeakable crimes of our nation in that capacity. More importantly, however, he is a proud and protective family man. He’s a loving husband and a proud father of two children, including Marina Baer, a ninth grader in the Gilford, New Hampshire School District.


My mind raced as I fired questions at him with mind numbing rapidity. “Where, What for? What happened?” I prodded. He answered each question calmly and methodically, combining his replies with an extremely important “back-story” that will probably not be reported anywhere by the mainstream media.


Mr. Baer explained that he was arrested at a meeting of the Gilford School Board meeting on Monday, 5, 2014 and charged with a misdemeanor charge of disorderly conduct. As audio and video evidence of the events clearly illustrates, however, there was nothing remotely disorderly about Mr. Baer’s conduct at the meeting. It was the first time he was arrested in his life.


No, there was something far deeper at work here, something that you will not see, hear or read about in the “drive-by” reports done by the mainstream media. It is this lead-up to the school board meeting that puts the events of May 5th in a much clearer, and much more unsettling perspective. It should serve as a warning to all parents that there is an agenda much greater than what we are seeing. In the words of Mr. Baer, “something is very wrong.” Indeed it is, and the report that follows should send a chill down the spine of every parent, of every American, for this is coming to your city, town, or municipality if it does not already exist.


The critical back-story


Last Thursday, Mr. Baer sent me an e-mail about a book his daughter was assigned to read by her teacher with the full and complete approval of the Gilford School Board. He wrote that he was stunned, despite his experience working in one of the toughest cities in the country, by what was assigned to his 14 year-old daughter for her ninth grade Honor’s English class, and attached a scanned copy of one page from the book for my perusal. Having over a quarter century of investigative experience myself, I’m no prude in reading graphic text. Regardless, I would never have knowingly permitted my child to read what he sent, even if it was part of a school assignment sanctioned by the school board.


Upon closer scrutiny of the book, Nineteen Minutes by author Jodi Picoult, Mr. Baer saw that it was a fictional account of a school shooting in New Hampshire that lasted for 19 minutes (hence the title) that contains explicit and graphic sexual material, along with arguably controversial messages about homicide and yes, gun violence. Despite its inclusion on the New York Times best seller list, any ordinary parent of reasonable sensibilities would certainly question why such a book was selected as required reading for a ninth-grade Honor’s English class.


After doing his own homework, Mr. Baer followed a logical approach to learn why the book was assigned without his consent, and to be proactive, for he was not about to allow his daughter to be subjected to this subject matter, at least not in this fashion. He first contacted the high school principal, who declined to formally meet with him in order to find a suitable remedy to this issue. After being effectively deferred and deflected at every turn, Mr. Baer was left with attempting to remedy the situation by attending the school board meeting to publicly address this issue.


It was as if it was made impossible for Mr. Baer to be given any remedy to clear this matter up, except by attending the school board meeting that would convene the following Monday. It is here—at this exact point— that people must pay attention to how events were being managed behind the scenes.


According to information obtained by this author, the Gilford, New Hampshire school board was alerted in advance to Mr. Baer’s intention to raise this issue at their normal Monday meeting. In anticipation of Mr. Baer’s attendance, they did a number of things they have not done in the past.


First, they stationed a Gilford Municipal police officer inside the meeting venue “to keep order.” Then, they limited all public comments to two minutes only, and refused to answer any questions of the attendees. Ostensibly, this was done because of the multitudes of those present to speak out against the book, yet not more than a few dozen people were actually present. Also, the number who actually wished to speak remained in the single digits, including Mr. Baer. Accordingly, any sensible person would question the rationale behind such an arbitrary policy instituted for this particular meeting.


No dissent permitted


The critical back-story, then, indicates that the school board not just anticipated Mr. Baer’s attendance, but took very precise steps to make certain that his objections would be muted and otherwise dealt with in a manner that has been inconsistent with previous public meetings. It would appear that dissent about the book as an assignment in an ninth grade honors class was not merely expected, but the response to such dissent was decided in advance.


The meeting


When attendees were called to speak, Sue Allen, the board chairwoman, could be heard asking at least twice if anyone cared to speak before Mr. Baer was recognized. When he was permitted (or confined) to his two minutes, he first noted that there was an unusual “default setting” to the parental authorization that would permit the children to be exposed to this material. Normally, a parent must “opt-in” to allow the book to be read by their child, must like parental authorization is given for a field trip. In this case, however, it was only if the parent had an objection to the book that they would need to “opt-out.”


Secondly, Mr. Baer asked the principal present to read page 313 of the book to give those in attendance the reasons for which he was voicing his objections. After all, not everyone there was aware of the contents of the book. The principal refused as did every other board member, calling it “inappropriate.” Mr. Baer attempted to compel the board members to answer legitimate questions about the class assignment and methods, but they refused, asserting they would only allow the attendees two minutes worth of comments to be put on record. As the video shows, it was an exasperating exercise in futility for Mr. Baer to seek redress in this venue to which he was directed.
Mr. Baer ultimately exceeded his two minutes by 18 seconds, an obviously egregious offense to the royalty of the Gilford School District. After sternly warning Mr. Baer that his time was up and they would have no part in addressing his concerns, he dutifully sat down.


At this point, a man positioned behind Mr. Baer spoke up and glowingly described how the book actually prompted a frank family discussion about the subject matter of the book, taking a tone that seemed to paint Mr. Baer as an advocate of censorship and book banning, which is far from the truth or Mr. Baer’s intent. In response to this false accusation and mischaracterization, Mr. Baer verbally dissented. He calmly defended himself against these public accusations, attempting to set the public record straight.
It was as a result of this egregious offense, one that caused Mr. Baer to add another 30 seconds or so onto his unauthorized 18 seconds beyond the allotted 2 minutes that caused the school board to react – and react with prejudice.


The arrest


Remember that out-of-place municipal police officer standing guard for the first time in recent memory at the Gilford School Board meeting? Based on what appeared to be the hand signal of a member of the school board, the officer responded by walking to a stunned Mr. Baer, who was now seated, reaching to escort him from the meeting. Mr. Baer asked if he was being asked to leave, if he was being arrested, and was further stunned by the rapidity of the response for such a minor infraction of exceeding his allotted time by less than a minute in total, including his unscheduled verbal defense against his character.


According to Mr. Baer and as seen in the video, the arresting officer appeared a bit nervous while escorting this dissenting parent from the room and placing him in handcuffs behind his back. Mr. Baer has a bad neck injury, which he made known to the officer, that restricted the movement of his left arm. This, as is seen, was apparently construed as resisting arrest by the otherwise docile Mr. Baer.


Apparently the officer had his orders, for it is here that the officer could have used his discretion and let Mr. Baer go, as long as he did not re-enter the meeting or otherwise cause problems for the school board.


Unless or until enough Americans rise up to the tyrannical methods used to quell dissent against child abuse at the hands of school authorities, Mr. Baer will be arraigned on June 17th, 2014 for charges of disorderly conduct. I spoke with Mr. Baer, who stated that he feels strongly about not just the book, but how he stood up to the school board to protect his daughter.


As an investigative journalist who thoroughly researched this set-up and a friend of Mr. Baer, I urge everyone to see through the fog of disinformation and to make your own voices of dissent heard on his behalf by demanding that the charges against him be dropped without prejudice.


I am absolutely certain that Billy Baer, attorney, father and American patriot, would do the same for all of us.


Make your voices heard: Gilford NH High School


Principal: Mr. Peter Sawyer (email – psawyer@sau73.org)
Assistant Principal: Mr. Anthony Sperazzo (email – asperazzo@sau73.org)
Video (Part one-Mr. Baer’s statement and subsequent arrest): http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=1HC2L...ature=youtu.be
Video (Part two – daughter speaking on behalf of her father following his arrest): https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ryVW...ature=youtu.be
Gilford School Board: http://www.sau73.org/school-board
Listen to Billy Baer discuss the events on The Hagmann & Hagmann Report on Tuesday, May 6, 2014 –CLICK HERE



———————————————————————————————————-


In a VERY real sense, a police state is forming all over America, from the smallest of states to the largest. Not to switch topics midstream, but isn’t it curious that a military apparatus appeared – seemingly out of nowhere – to cow Bundy and his supporters, not unlike in a fascist police state?


In other words, isn’t there an underlining strategy at work, a common denominator, meant to intimidate/threaten parents whose only “crime” is protecting their children, as well as those who assert their property rights and more?

[American Patriot]

The Thought Police are being groomed in your own home....

May 20, 2014

• in African-American, America, politics, Racism, School, School districts
• 3 Comments

Michelle Obama Would Like Students to Monitor Family Members for Racial Insensitivity



First lady Michelle Obama is encouraging students to monitor their older relatives, friends and co-workers for any racially insensitive comments they might make, and to challenge those comments whenever they’re made.


The first lady spoke on Friday to graduating high school students in Topeka, Kansas, and in remarks released over the weekend, Obama said students need to police family and friends because federal laws can only go so far in stopping racism.


First lady Michelle Obama is encouraging students to patrol their family members for racially insensitive comments.


“[O]ur laws may no longer separate us based on our skin color, but nothing in the Constitution says we have to eat together in the lunchroom, or live together in the same neighborhoods,” she said. “There’s no court case against believing in stereotypes or thinking that certain kinds of hateful jokes or comments are funny.”


To address these limitations in the law, Obama asked students to take steps to “drag my generation and your grandparents’ generation along with you” in the fight against racism.


“Maybe that starts simply in your own family, when grandpa tells that off-colored joke at Thanksgiving, or you’ve got an aunt [that] talks about ‘those people,’” she said.

“Well, you can politely inform them that they’re talking about your friends.




“Or maybe it’s when you go off to college and you decide to join a sorority or fraternity, and you ask the question, how can we get more diversity in our next pledge class?”
she added. “Or maybe it’s years from now, when you’re on the job and you’re the one who asks, do we really have all the voices and viewpoints we need at this table?"


via Michelle Obama Would Like Students to Monitor Family Members for Racial Insensitivity | TheBlaze.com.

[Malsua]

The left will not be happy until all white people are dead, children are born as wards to the state and Islamic, gay, clit-free women run everything,

[American Patriot]

http://dailycaller.com/2014/05/20/ob...-and-benghazi/

Obama To Voters: Shut Up About Obamacare And Benghazi


dailycaller.com ^ | 5/20/2014 | Neil Munro
Posted on Tuesday, May 20, 2014 8:51:10 AM


The nation shouldn’t be debating the nation’s health-care system or the successful jihadi attack in Benghazi in 2012, President Barack Obama complained at a May 19 fundraiser in Maryland.


“Yes, we can have a legitimate debate about does every government program work… [but] the debate we’re having right now is about, what, Benghazi? Obamacare?” Obama told his donors in the wealthy Potomac district of Maryland.


“It’s not serious [and] is not speaking to the real concerns that people have,” Obama insisted.


(Excerpt) Read more at dailycaller.com ...

[American Patriot]

Wife of White House Operative Demands George Will’s Firing

Jun. 12, 2014 10:18am Fred Lucas
5

Shares






The spouse of a White House official is calling for the Washington Post to fire conservative columnist George Will following a column he wrote about the Obama administration’s policy on college sexual assaults.
Conservative columnist George Will has sparked demands for his firing after a recent column about sexual assault. (AP)



A petition from the liberal group UltraViolet demands: “Tell The Washington Post: Rape is real. No one wants to be a victim. Fire George Will.”


UltraViolet was co-founded by Nita Chaudhary, a longtime Democratic party activist and the wife of Jesse Lee, the director of progressive media and online response at the White House.


The organization says it’s gathered 87,000 signatures in protest to the syndicated column published in the Post on June 6 with the headline, “Colleges become the victim of progressivism.”


“From mocking survivors to misleading the public on demands for college sexual assault reform and blaming women for violence against them– the Post has left the realm of honest debate and entered the realm of hate-speech and dog whistles,” Chaudhary said in a statement.

Chaudhary previously served as the online communications director for the Democratic National Committee and as a former campaign director for MoveOn.org.


Before taking the White House job in 2011, Lee also worked for online communications at the DNC, served as senior new media adviser for then-House Speaker Nancy Pelosi and worked for the Democratic Congressional Campaign Committee.


Top White House senior adviser Valerie Jarrett helped Lee propose to Chaudhary at a state dinner, the Weekly Standard reported.


President Barack Obama and Vice President Joe Biden had spoken about the increasing number of rape at college campuses.


In his column, Will questioned the administration’s statistics on the matter.


“Now the Obama administration is riding to the rescue of ‘sexual assault’ victims. It vows to excavate equities from the ambiguities of the hookup culture, this cocktail of hormones, alcohol and the faux sophistication of today’s prolonged adolescence of especially privileged young adults,” Will wrote.


“The administration’s crucial and contradictory statistics are validated the usual way, by official repetition; Joe Biden has been heard from,” Will’s column continued. “The statistics are: One in five women is sexually assaulted while in college, and only 12 percent of assaults are reported. Simple arithmetic demonstrates that if the 12 percent reporting rate is correct, the 20 percent assault rate is preposterous. Mark Perry of the American Enterprise Institute notes, for example, that in the four years 2009 to 2012 there were 98 reported sexual assaults at Ohio State. That would be 12 percent of 817 total out of a female student population of approximately 28,000, for a sexual assault rate of approximately 2.9 percent — too high but nowhere near 20 percent.”


(H/T: Weekly Standard)

[American Patriot]

It has come to this... the Government is now CANCELLING legally binding registered trademarks, cuz, well, they don't like 'em.


NPR



Washington Redskins trademark canceled by US Patent Office

Chicago Tribune

- ‎19 minutes ago‎

The U.S. Patent and Trademark Office has canceled the Washington Redskins trademark registration, an extremely rare move the office said it made because the name is offensive to Native Americans.
Related United States Patent and Trademark Office » Trademark Trial and Appeal Board » Washington Redskins name controversy »

Redskins trademark canceled: What does it mean?MyFox Washington DC

Redskins' 'Disparaging' Trademark Canceled by Patent OfficeBusinessweek

Opinion:US Patent And Trademark Office Cancels Redskins TrademarkHuffington Post
In Depth:Redskins trademarks canceled by US Patent OfficeUSA TODAY

[Malsua]

Start printing Redskins merch!

I want to know what guy in the patent office signed off on that? Then I want him frog marched to a gibbet.

No one in the patent office has the RIGHT to make moral decisions about what is or is not offensive. Their job is to provide patents, that's it.

[vector7]

GOVERNMENT ARRESTING PEOPLE FOR ANTI-OBAMA FACEBOOK POSTS

Posted by Staff on June 14, 2014



This article will make you angry. The US Government is actively seeking those who criticize government, specifically Barack Obama, and arresting them without charging them. They are remanded to mental health institutions where they are given "training" on how to view the world.

Remind you of a little book that George Orwell wrote?

It gets worse.

Most of the victims of the government's kidnapping scheme are veterans.

OBAMA IS TRYING HIS BEST TO DESTROY AMERICA. FIND OUT JUST HOW FAR HE'S GOTTEN BY CLICKING HERE.

From The Rutherford Institute:

In the four years since the start of Operation Vigilant Eagle, the government has steadily ramped up its campaign to “silence” dissidents, especially those with military backgrounds. Coupled with the DHS’ dual reports on Rightwing and Leftwing “Extremism,” which broadly define extremists as individuals and groups “that are mainly antigovernment, rejecting federal authority in favor of state or local authority, or rejecting government authority entirely,” these tactics have boded ill for anyone seen as opposing the government.

One particularly troubling mental health label being applied to veterans and others who challenge the status quo is “oppositional defiance disorder” (ODD). As journalist Anthony Martin explains, an ODD diagnosis

“denotes that the person exhibits ‘symptoms’ such as the questioning of authority, the refusal to follow directions, stubbornness, the unwillingness to go along with the crowd, and the practice of disobeying or ignoring orders. Persons may also receive such a label if they are considered free thinkers, nonconformists, or individuals who are suspicious of large, centralized government… At one time the accepted protocol among mental health professionals was to reserve the diagnosis of oppositional defiance disorder for children or adolescents who exhibited uncontrollable defiance toward their parents and teachers.”

The case of 26-year-old decorated Marine Brandon Raub—who was targeted because of his Facebook posts, interrogated by government agents about his views on government corruption, arrested with no warning, labeled mentally ill for subscribing to so-called “conspiratorial” views about the government, detained against his will in a psych ward for standing by his views, and isolated from his family, friends and attorneys—is a prime example of the government’s war on veterans.

Raub’s case exposes the seedy underbelly of a governmental system that is targeting Americans—especially military veterans—for expressing their discontent over America’s rapid transition to a police state.

Here is a news story by RT (Russian Times) about Brandon Raub. Apparently the corporate media in the United States won't tell his story:


To underscore how big this story truly is, John Whitehead of the Rutherford Institute is the lead attorney defending the innocent victims targeted by the Obama Thought Police. Whitehead is quite famous for his defense of the Bill of Rights for the past several decades.

This is big.

Obama wants everybody to think like a brain-dead zombie while he transforms America into Orwell's 1984.

Wake up.


Full text, Brandon Raub’s proclamation: Take our Republic back

Posted 6:13 pm, August 21, 2012, by Alix Bryan, Updated at 06:16pm, August 21, 2012



The following text is from a copy of a Facebook post that Brandon Raub made in 2011. The text was given to CBS 6 by Raub’s mother.

The Truth

by Brandon J Raub on Friday, November 11, 2011 at 10:00 am

America has lost itself. We have lost who we truly are. This is the land of the free and the home of the brave.

This is the land of Thomas Jefferson.

This is the land of Benjamin Franklin.

This is the land of Fredrick Douglas.

This is the land of Smedley Butler.

This is the land John F. Kennedy.

This is the land of Martin Luther King.

This is the land where the cowboy wins. This is the land where you can start from the bottom and get to the top. This is the land where regardless of you race and ethnicity you can succeed and build a better life for you and your family. This is the land where every race coexists peacefully. This is the land where justice wins. This is the land where liberty dwells. This is the land where freedom reigns. This is the land where we help the poor, and people help each other. This is land where people beat racism.

The Federal Reserve is wrong. They have designed a system based off of greed and fear. They designed a system to crush the middle class between taxes and inflation. This is wrong, and it is unjust. It is wrong.

We have allowed ourselves to be deceived and seduced by the powers of the printing press. It is not a good system. It discourages saving: the foundation for all stable economic activity. The Federal Reserve is artificially manipulating interest rates and creating phony economic data.

This thing has deceived our entire nation.

They created it in 1913. They also created the income tax in 1913. They encouraged the growth of debt so they can tax you on it. There is interest on the debt. Your government is in bed with these people. They want to enslave you to the government so that they can control every aspect of your lives. It is an empire based on lies. They operate of greed and fear.

There is a better way. It’s called freedom. Freedom is called a lot of things. But there is a true meaning. It means very simply that you have the right to do whatever you want as long as you are not infringing on the freedoms of other people.

I firmly believe that God set America apart from the other nations of the world. He saved a place where people could come to to escape bad systems of goverment. This system we have created works. It really works.

There is evil going on all around the world. The United States was meant to lead the charge against injustice, but through our example not our force. People do not respond to having liberty and freedom forced on them.

Men and Women follow courage. They follow leadership, and courage. Our example has paved the way for people all around the world to change their forms of government.

Force is not the way because liberty is a powerful concept. The idea that men can govern themselves is the basis for every just form of government.

We can govern ourselves. We do not need to be governed by men who want to install a one world banking system. These men have machine hearts. Machine and unnatural hearts.

They have blocked out the possibility of a better world. They fear human progress. They have monopolies on everything.

This life can be free and beautiful. There are enough resources on this earth to support the world’s population. There are enough resources on this earth to feed everyone. There is enough land for everyone to own their own land and farm, and produce their own energy.

These people have been hiding technology. There are ways to create power easily. There is technology that can provide free cheap power for everyone. There are farming techniques that can feed the entire world.

The Bill of Rights is being systematically dismantled. Men have spilled their blood for those rights.

Your sons and daughters, your brothers and sisters, and Americas best young men and women are losing their limbs. They are losing their lives. They are losing the hearts. They do not know why they are fighting. They are killing. And they do not know why.

They have done some extraordinary acts. Their deeds go before them. But these wars are lies. They are lies. They deceived our entire nation with terrorism. They have gotten us to hand them our rights. Our Rights! Men died for those rights!

September Eleventh was an inside job. They blew up a third building in broad daylight. Building 7.

Your leaders betrayed you.

You elected an aristocracy. They are beholden to special interests. They were brainwashed through the Council on Foreign Relations. Your leaders are planning to merge the United States into a one world banking system. They want to put computer chips in you.

These men have evil hearts. They have tricked you into supporting corporate fascism. We gave them the keys to our country. We were not vigilant with our republic.

There is hope. BUT WE MUST TAKE OUR REPUBLIC BACK.

RELATED:

• Mother of detained Marine vet says he’s a patriot, not a threat
  
• Statement from attorneys on Brandon Raub detention
• Chesterfield police: Raub resisted officers, was taken for evaluation
• Chesterfield Marine veteran to remain detained over Facebook posts
• Chesterfield man, Marine veteran, detained over Facebook posts

[American Patriot]

A man has been ordered to take down his American Flag....


Man says apartment complex called his US flag a ‘threat to Muslim community’



by Alice Barr / KHOU 11 News
khou.com
Posted on June 18, 2014 at 11:07 PM


Gallery


See all 3 photos »



WEBSTER, Texas -- A Webster man says his apartment complex manager told him his American flag was a “threat to the Muslim community,” and that he has to take it down. But he’s not giving up without a fight.


Stepping onto Duy Tran's balcony in Webster, one thing is clear: "It means a lot to me," he said.


He's talking about his American flag that he proudly put up when he moved in just a few days ago. But then an apartment manager at the Lodge on El Dorado told him he had to take it down.


"What really stunned me is that she said it’s a threat towards the Muslim community,” said Tran. “I’m not a threat toward anybody."


We tried to ask a manager if that's exactly what was said, but she just handed us a statement, refused to answer any questions, and called an officer to escort us off the property, before we could press any further:


"While the Lodge on El Dorado admires our resident's patriotism, we must enforce our property rules and guidelines. Such guidelines maintain the aesthetics of our apartment community and provide for the safety of all residents. The apartment community already proudly displays our country's flag in a safe and appropriate manner at the entrances to our community."


But we saw other patriotic symbols hanging from other balconies in the complex, and Tran doesn't plan to budge.


"I’m gonna leave my flag there, as an American, until she shows me proof that I don’t have the right to leave my flag there," said Tran.


To Tran it's about so much more than stars and stripes.


"I have friends that died for this country," he said.


So he says this fight is the least he can do.


We have not heard of any residents complaining about any flags at the complex, or any of the patriotic items we saw. In fact, we spoke to several neighbors who say they want Tran's flag to stay.

[Ryan Ruck]

Sounds like it's time for him to fly one of these...

[American Patriot]

Lol!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

[vector7]

University of Chicago Students Say Free Speech Does Not Apply Equally To Everyone

http://bastionofliberty.blogspot.com...ber-alles.html

Saturday, February 18, 2017
Preferences Uber Alles

**** If there’s anything about Leftists’ rhetorical tactics that constitutes a generic foundation for their campaign, it would be their elevation of what they prefer over any conception of rights or law. (Yes, they do use the word rights quite a lot in referring to the things they demand, but not according to any meaning you or I would recognize.) Now and then they wave it in our faces, as in this case:

**** Students at the prestigious University of Chicago say that free speech should not apply equally to everyone. The students objected to the school’s Institute of Politics’ invitation to former Donald Trump campaign manager Corey Lewandowski. They claim that allowing him to speak “normalizes bigotry” and provides a platform for fascism....

**** The coalition of students from U of C Resists, Graduate Students United, Students Working Against Prisons, and UChicago Socialists claim that the school’s “commitment to free expression” doesn’t require the institution to host him due to his alleged ties to white supremacists and similarly alleged calls to violence against minority groups and refugees....

**** In addition to the letter, the student coalition set up a “Bigotry is not Normal” event to protest Lewandowski, in which over a hundred students claimed to have participated on Wednesday. Students set up protest fliers with statements like “This is not dialogue it’s a war.” [sic]

**** Charming, eh? Of course, were these snotnoses ever to find themselves in the middle of a real war, complete with bombs, artillery, and high-velocity lead, they’d discover how dramatically it contrasts with the safe, placid environment of an American university. Yes, even a university in Chicago.

**** But let’s get back to today’s main point. Clearly, the Leftist groups cited in that article don’t hold that freedom of expression is a right. Their position is identical to that of the late Marxist theorist Herbert Marcuse:

**** The whole post-fascist period is one of clear and present danger. Consequently, true pacification requires the withdrawal of tolerance before the deed, at the stage of communication in word, print, and picture. Such extreme suspension of the right of free speech and free assembly is indeed justified only if the whole of society is in extreme danger. I maintain that our society is in such an emergency situation, and that it has become the normal state of affairs. Different opinions and 'philosophies' can no longer compete peacefully for adherence and persuasion on rational grounds: the 'marketplace of ideas' is organized and delimited by those who determine the national and the individual interest. In this society, for which the ideologists have proclaimed the 'end of ideology', the false consciousness has become the general consciousness--from the government down to its last objects.

**** “This is not a dialogue it’s a war” is merely a compact, rationale-free reformulation of Marcuse’s statement above. War, of course, is the customary refuge of those who seek to abolish individuals’ rights. It certainly constitutes an “emergency situation,” especially if the survival of the nation can plausibly be said to be at stake. It’s been used to justify the seizure of powers to which previous, peacetime governments didn’t dare to aspire...and which subsequent governments, whether in war or in peace, treated as theirs by bequest.

**** Yet at the heart of the Marcusian thesis lies nothing more than a preference: the preference that one’s political opponents should be prevented from expressing their views. This cannot be justified on any grounds:

A right is not a preference.
It is not a permission.
It’s a principle of justice.

**** Louis Thiers, himself an opponent of the concept of rights as Americans understand them, put it nicely:

**** Either rights exist, or they do not exist. If they exist, they involve absolute consequences...Furthermore, if a right exists, it exists at every moment. It is absolute today, yesterday, tomorrow, the day after tomorrow, in summer as in winter, not when it pleases you to declare it in force.

**** Therefore, if there is a right to express oneself, even the lowest and foulest of human creatures possesses it. More to the point, not even an “emergency situation” can abrogate it. But that cross-cuts the Left’s preferences...and to the Left, its preferences are all that really matter.

**** Ultimately, the Sturm und Drang polluting our contemporary political discourse is about power. Many others have said that. I’ve said it often enough myself. All the same, it’s important enough to keep it in mind that it bears repeating. But it’s not about which of two forces shall possess a certain sheaf of powers; it’s about one side’s lust for absolute and unbounded power over all persons and things, and the other’s desire to be free.

**** Americans were once noteworthy for their relative lack of interest in politics. That was a long time ago: before the Progressives of the late Nineteenth and early Twentieth Centuries got their cart in gear. Back then, Americans could afford to take little or no interest in politics, because political power was a sharply restricted thing.

**** A man can afford to take no notice of that which takes no notice of him. When that condition changes – when the instruments of power start to reach into ever more of life, society, and enterprise – he must change his ways as well. As the political penetration of his affairs advances, so also must he become more aware of it, more involved in it, and better defended against its depredations.

**** If the Left, which has proclaimed that “The personal is political,” has decided upon war, then all methods shall be deemed licit and only the ultimate outcome shall matter. The politicization of the nation is complete. No one can remain apolitical. No subject is inherently outside the zone of conflict...and no one can assume that others will respect his right of free expression. This tirade of a few days back ceases to be merely a cri de coeur and becomes a tactical doctrine.

**** And we don’t have to like it.

Posted by Francis W. Porretto 1 comment: Labels: political combat, political dynamics, rights