Without Free Speech, All Speech Becomes Government Speech

without-free-speech,-all-speech-becomes-government-speech

04-11-19 06:42:00,

By Barry Brownstein

When I viewed this video, I wondered if it was a hoax. I thought it must be a group of actors trying to make a point about how far restrictions on speech have gone. Unfortunately, the video captures reality in Scotland in 2019.

The video picks up an exchange between a Scottish high school teacher and a student. The class was asked to sign up for a website, and according to the student, the teacher commented on how old fashioned the website was for listing only two sexes. The student, Murray, remarked, “But sir there’s only two genders,” and the teacher insisted they continue the discussion outside the classroom.

National School Authority Policy

Murray recorded the encounter on his phone. Here are some of the lowlights of the recorded dialogue:

Murray: “Why did you kick me out of class? It’s not very inclusive of you.”

Teacher: “I’m sorry, but what you were saying is not very inclusive, and this is an inclusive school.”

Murray: (referring to the teacher’s viewpoint that there are more than two genders): “That’s your opinion.”

Teacher: “That is my opinion, and that is an opinion which is acceptable in this school.”

Teacher: “Will you please keep that opinion [referring to Murray’s view that there are two genders] to your own house, not in this room?”

Murray: “So you got to put your opinion out in class, but my opinion has to stay inside my house?”

Teacher: “I am not putting my opinion out. I am stating what is national school authority policy.”

Teacher: “I know what you think, and I know what the authority thinks.”

Following the UK “national school authority policy” on the number of genders, children are taught there are 100 “gender identities.”

Murray wasn’t sent to a reeducation camp, but the school suspended him for several weeks.

As for the teacher, he’s trying to be a proper government functionary. Perhaps he’s dreaming of retirement or at least the day when students like Murray will no longer dare to challenge him.

 » Lees verder

Lavrov’s speech at the UN Security Council on September 25, 2019 | The Vineyard of the Saker

lavrov’s-speech-at-the-un-security-council-on-september-25,-2019-|-the-vineyard-of-the-saker

27-09-19 02:07:00,

Russian Foreign Minister Sergey Lavrov’s remarks at the UN Security Council meeting on Cooperation between the United Nations and regional and subregional organisations in maintaining international peace and security: the contribution by the CSTO, CIS, and SCO in countering terrorist threats, New York, September 25, 2019

Mr Secretary General,

Members of the Security Council,

Colleagues,

Today, we are all faced with the problem of terrorism, which has grown more acute than ever. International terrorists, led by ISIS and al Qaeda, continue to sow terror and destruction around the world. As a result of their actions, the situation in the Middle East, including in Syria and Iraq, remains extremely alarming. The terrorist threat emanating from that region is spreading rapidly across the African continent, including through Libya. Central, South, and Southeast Asia are also becoming the scene of inhuman acts of terrorism. The problem of foreign terrorist fighters (as discussed by the Secretary General and our colleagues earlier today) who return to their homeland or their countries of residence, or move to third countries, is coming to the fore. An ever-smaller number of countries remain untouched by terrorism. In this regard, I would like to highlight the fact that several years ago, the Federal Security Service of the Russian Federation created an international database of terrorism, with about 50 states and several international organisations, including Interpol, involved in the project now. This database really helps track the movement of foreign terrorist fighters around the world. We invite everyone to join this important effort.

This state of affairs dictates the need to consolidate the efforts of the international community to counteract international terrorist networks. In 2015, President of Russia Vladimir Putin proposed an initiative here to form a broad international anti-terrorist front which would rely on the UN Charter, the norms and principles of international law, without political motivation or preconditions. This initiative is gaining an even greater relevance today. The double standards applied by some states are complicating the response to modern threats, including terrorism. Deviating from the principles of a consistent collective action against international terrorism is fraught with dire consequences.

It is unacceptable, I must emphasize this specifically, to use terrorist associations for selfish political goals. There can be no excuse for this.

 » Lees verder

A Profound Speech From Alan Watts – What If Money Was No Object ? (Video)

a-profound-speech-from-alan-watts-–-what-if-money-was-no-object-?-(video)

18-08-19 09:05:00,

We are having a Full Moon in Aquarius which is exact on August 15th at 12:29 pm, Universal Time. It will appear the fullest on the night of August 14th in the Americas and on the night of 15th everywhere else.

This is the peak of the Lunar cycle which began two weeks prior with a New Moon in Leo. The energies of it build up as the Moon increases its light and are strongest in the days before and after. However, it will still be a part of the backdrop over the following two weeks.

Full Moon’s are a period in which we feel a push-pull between two opposing signs, in this case being the Sun in Leo and Moon in Aquarius. It can reflect either a conflict or integration of both signs. We can feel this opposition happening individually within us and/or we can also experience it play out around us with some people (or circumstances) expressing the Leo side and others expressing the Aquarius side.

Leo is associated with self-expression, creativity, love, affection, children, courage, vitality, passion, leadership, generosity, and playfulness. Ruled by the Sun, it is also about shining in our power and being in alignment with what really lights us up and gets us excited.

The negative expressions of Leo can be egotistical, self-absorbed, authoritarian, dramatic, stubborn, jealous, and hot-tempered.  As it is associated with seeking praise and attention, it can be demanding of respect and be too loud and boisterous without considering or caring about how others respond to that.

The best way to approach Leo energy in a positive way is to be in our authentic and heart centred version of ourselves; whether it be in our creations, how we perform, or how we express other Leo traits previously mentioned. When we do this, we are more likely to receive a supportive response from those on the receiving end.

Aquarius is associated with friends, social networks, the group, the team, humanity, and being in the best interest of the collective. Associated with Uranus, it can be unconventional, idealistic, innovative, original, inventive, technological, reforming, and even revolutionary. It tries to figure out how to do things in a better way and takes the future into consideration. Although it is idealistic,

 » Lees verder

Killing Free Speech In France, Germany, And On The Internet

killing-free-speech-in-france,-germany,-and-on-the-internet

09-08-19 07:30:00,

Authored by Judith Bergman via The Gatestone Institute,

In May, France called for increasing government oversight over Facebook. Now Facebook has agreed to hand over to French judges the identification data of French users suspected of hate speech on its platform, according to France’s Secretary of State for the Digital Sector, Cédric O.

Previously, according to a Reuters report, “Facebook had refrained from handing over identification data of people suspected of hate speech because it was not compelled to do so under U.S.-French legal conventions and because it was worried countries without an independent judiciary could abuse it”. Until now, Reuters noted, Facebook had only cooperated with the French judiciary on matters related to terrorist attacks and violent acts by transferring the IP addresses and other identification data of suspected individuals to French judges who formally demanded it.

Now, however, “hate speech” — as speech that fails to comply with current political orthodoxy is conveniently labelled — appears to have become comparable to terrorism and violent crime. How autocratic, yet Cédric O apparently loves it: “This is huge news, it means that the judicial process will be able to run normally”.

It is highly probable that other countries will want to have a similar agreement with Facebook; it also appears likely that Facebook would comply. In May, for instance, as France was debating legislation that would give a new “independent regulator” the power to fine tech companies up to 4% of their global revenue if they do not do enough to remove “hateful content” from their network, Facebook’s CEO Mark Zuckerberg commented:

“I am hopeful that it [the French proposal] can become a model that can be used across the EU”.

France is the first and so far only country to have entered into such an agreement with Facebook.

The new agreement could signal the de-facto end of free speech on Facebook for French citizens. Self-censorship in Europe is already widespread: a recent survey in Germany showed that two thirds of Germans are “very careful” about what topics they discuss in public — Islam and migrants being the most taboo.

 » Lees verder

In “Jaw-Dropping” Speech Malaysian PM Says “No Evidence” Russia Shot Down MH17

in-“jaw-dropping”-speech-malaysian-pm-says-“no-evidence”-russia-shot-down-mh17

02-06-19 09:16:00,

In unexpected statements Malaysia Prime Minister Mahathir Mohamad has questioned the methodology behind Dutch investigators who produced what the West considers the authoritative report on the tragic shoot down of Malaysian Airlines flight MH17 in 2014 while flying over war-torn eastern Ukraine. He criticized that the Dutch-led Joint Investigation Team (JIT) seems “to be concentrated on trying to pin it on the Russians”.

The Malaysian leader told reporters at the Japanese Foreign Correspondents Club (FCCJ) in Tokyo on Thursday “They are accusing Russia but where is the evidence?”  Mahathir said his country accepted that a “Russian-made missile” shot down its civilian airliner, killing all 283 passengers and 15 crew members on board, but that “You need strong evidence to show it was fired by the Russians.”

Malaysian Prime Minister Mahathir Mohamad (left) shakes hands with Japan’s Prime Minister Shinzo Abe in Tokyo on Friday. Image source: AFP

He ultimately questioned the objectivity of the investigators in what major regional media described as a “jaw dropping speech”.

Australia’s prime state run news service ABC News noted the Malaysian PM’s speech has sent shock waves through the region as it questioned everything Australia’s own leaders have said. “From the very beginning we see too much politics in it,” Mahathir said in reference to the official Dutch-led investigation. 

A total of 38 Australians were killed in the Boeing-777 shoot down and crash, and the majority were Dutch nationals. The ABC report summarized of the “bombshell” charges leveled by PM Mahathir:

“Based on these findings, the only conclusion we can reasonably now draw is that Russia was directly involved in the downing of MH17,” Australia’s then-prime minister and foreign minister Malcolm Turnbull and Julie Bishop said in a joint statement.

“The Russian Federation must be held to account for its conduct in the downing of MH17 over eastern Ukraine, which resulted in the tragic deaths of 298 passengers and crew, including 38 people who called Australia home.”

But in a bombshell speech to the Japanese Foreign Correspondents Club (JFCC) on Thursday, Dr Mahathir was having none of it, accusing those who blamed Russia of scapegoating the nation for “political” reasons.

 » Lees verder

Putin’s speech focuses on domestic issues as media pushes missile warning (Video)

putins-speech-focuses-on-domestic-issues-as-media-pushes-missile-warning-video

22-02-19 02:50:00,

This is the official translation of Russian President Vladimir Putin’s State of the Union Address to Russia’s Federal Assembly as first published by the Kremlin’s website.

Members of the Federation Council, State Duma deputies, citizens of Russia,

Today’s Address is primarily devoted to matters of domestic social and economic development. I would like to focus on the objectives set forth in the May 2018 Executive Order and detailed in the national projects. Their content and the targets they set are a reflection of the demands and expectations of Russia’s citizens. People are at the core of the national projects, which are designed to bring about a new quality of life for all generations. This can only be achieved by generating momentum in Russia’s development.

These are long-term objectives that we have set for ourselves. However, work to achieve these strategic goals has to begin today. Time is always in short supply, as I have already said on numerous occasions, and you all know this all too well. There is simply no time for getting up to speed or making any adjustments. All in all, I believe that we have already completed the stage of articulating objectives and outlining tools for achieving our goals. Departing from the targets that were outlined would be unacceptable. It is true that these are challenging objectives. That being said, lowering the requirements for specific targets or watering them down is not an option. As I have already said, these are formidable challenges that require us to undertake major efforts. However, they are in step with the scale and pace of global change. It is our duty to keep pushing ahead and gaining momentum.

If someone prefers to work in the business as usual mode, without challenges, avoiding initiative or responsibility, they had better leave immediately. I already hear that some things are “impossible,” “too difficult,” “the standards are too high,” and “it will not work.” With such an attitude, you had better stay away.

Besides, you cannot fool the people. They are acutely aware of hypocrisy, lack of respect or any injustice. They have little interest in red tape and bureaucratic routine. It is important for people to see what is really being done and the impact it has on their lives and the lives of their families.

 » Lees verder

Trump’s Speech: An Assessment – PaulCraigRoberts.org

trumps-speech-an-assessment-8211-paulcraigroberts.org

07-02-19 02:10:00,

Trump’s Speech: An Assessment

Paul Craig Roberts

Readers are requesting my take on President Trump’s state of the union speech. Briefly, judging by the polls taken by his hostile critics—CNN and CBS—the speech was very successful with 76% of the public expressing approval. And this despite several years of demonization of Trump by the presstitutes, Democratic Party, former intelligence and FBI officials, and a number of generals.

The speech was successful, because Trump spoke common sense and appealed for unity. He emphasized restoring America’s greatness, a Reagan theme, and he made it clear that the Democrats’ policy of trying to discredit him and get him out of office was preventing the government from moving ahead with issues that need addressing. I believe everyone knows this, including the Democrats and the presstitutes.

When I say the speech was successful, I mean for Americans. Foreigners witnessing the chant—USA-USA-USA—saw the “exceptionalism” that has been Washington’s excuse for doing so much damage to others in the 21st century. It is not clear what viewers made of the congresswomen in white with their hostile demeanor. Were the white clothes meant to signify their purity in contrast to Trump’s corruption or were the white suits a sign of disapproval like the white dress of the KKK meant disapproval of the black politicians put in power by Reconstruction? What did the Democratic Party gain by displaying female members of Congress as Trump foes?

As for Trump’s economic claims, they were largely based in the official data. As I have emphasized for many years, it is the official data that are false.

Let’s move to more important questions about the speech.

A country without defended borders is not a country. If a country has no respect for its borders, why does the country need a military to repel invaders? Clearly, for the Democratic Party the United States is some kind of universalistic place where people from other lands come and go at will unimpeded. Having borders is nationalism, and nationalism has been redefined from the patriotism it once was to fascism. For Democrats, as for Macron and Merkel, patriotism is the refusal to defend the country’s borders. In other words, the Democratic Party is now without any doubt the party of The Camp of the Saints.

 » Lees verder

Free speech for CNN, but not for Assange: The media’s double standard

free-speech-for-cnn-but-not-for-assange-the-medias-double-standard

17-11-18 09:05:00,

Two journalists on the bad side of Donald Trump were vindicated this week. One had his White House credentials restored. Another got proof that Uncle Sam wants him behind bars. Guess which one had all the support from the MSM.

CNN’s Jim Acosta was kicked out of the White House because the US president didn’t like the way the journalist bombarded him with confrontational questions. Less than a week later, a Trump-appointed judge ordered his access restored, at least for the time being. A big win for the freedom of speech in America.

WikiLeaks’ Julian Assange is in a self-imposed confinement in Ecuador embassy in London because he believes that if he leaves the British will snatch him and ship to the land of the free to be prosecuted as a spy. His situation did not change much this week, except that his suspicions of a secret indictment were corroborated by an Assistant US Attorney, in an apparent slip of the pen.

Somehow many of the people and media outlets, who stood by Acosta in defense of his right to pester the US president – sorry, hold the US president accountable – were nowhere to be seen when it came to defending Assange’s right to publish America’s dirty little secrets.

The irony of the situation however is cherished by some commenters on Twitter.

—Jim Acosta: I have a first amendment right to do whatever the hell I want.

—Julian Assange: The DOJ is about to lock me up for my reporting.

— Michael Moates (@freedom_moates) November 16, 2018

Funny how the media has been outraged over Washington Post’s Jamal Khashoggi for the past several weeks, and CNN’s Jim Acosta as of late, but can’t seem to be bothered about Julian Assange – who only published truthful information.

So much for “freedom of the press”. https://t.co/dHwn1c3YKN

— Sarah Abdallah (@sahouraxo) November 16, 2018

The corporate media has rightly come to the rescue of Jim Acosta…but the same outlets will say NOTHING about the totally fabricated attack on Julian Assange—this is nothing but the government silencing a critically important journalist https://t.co/1KbJYBMgiv

— Jordan (@JordanChariton) November 16,

 » Lees verder

Europe’s War On Free Speech Continues

Europe’s War On Free Speech Continues

28-10-18 01:19:00,

Authored by Ryan McMaken via The Mises Institute,

A European court has ruled that people can be fined and prosecuted in criminal court for saying things about religious figures. Specifically, saying things about the Muslim prophet Mohammad is verboten, and state punishment is appropriate:

The European Court of Human Rights has ruled a woman convicted by an Austrian court of calling the Prophet Mohammed a paedophile did not have her freedom of speech rights infringed.

The woman, named only as Mrs. S, 47, from Vienna, was said to have held two seminars in which she discussed the marriage between the Prophet Mohammad and a six-year old girl, Aisha….Mrs S. was later convicted in February 2011 by the Vienna Regional Criminal Court for disparaging religious doctrines and ordered her to pay a fine of 480 euros plus legal fees.

The court’s primary reasoning, it appears, is that the woman’s comments ought to condemned because they might “stir up prejudice and threaten religious peace…” Notably, however, Mrs. S is not accused of saying anything that encourages violence either generally or in any specific way.

In other words, human rights go right out the window if the exercise of those rights might cause other people to feel bad.

This sort of thing is shocking to Americans, of course, but it’s old hat by now in Europe (and Canada) where one can face large fines , and even imprisonment for saying unpopular things.

Just some examples include:

  • A candidate in the European elections was arrested in Britain for quoting a passage from Winston Churchill about Islam.

  • Gert Wilders, a politician in the Netherlands, was tried on five counts including “criminally insulting Muslims because of their religion.”

  • Both Mark Steyn and Ezra Levant were dragged in front of the Canadian Human Rights Commission on charges of being “Islamophobic.”

Moreover, it reflects a larger disdain for private property that is so widespread in Europe. Consider, that the comments made by the woman in question were apparently made at “two seminars.”

 » Lees verder