You know I was just talking with my mom about Rat Magazine. She was cleaning out stuff in her house and something reminded her of it. I wish we still had copies. What was Rat Magazine? A friend of mine , Tim, in Elementary School had two parents who were journalists. He often had complaints about the school, and they helped him create and publish his own school newspaper independently. I wrote for him a few times, he even gave me a 20-page training packet. I got the PE teacher in trouble for lying about why he made us do square dancing every year. He claimed the principal forced him to do it, which as it turns out, wasn't true. He didn't realize I was going to put what he said in print. My 5th grade teacher came up to me after it was printed and said "David you know the principal doesn't dictate the PE curriculum right?" I shrugged and said I was just quoting what he said. I was 10, I didn't know anything about lesson plans, I didn't even realize the guy was lying. Funny, we never had to do square dancing again. This isn't about me, though Tim is the hero of the story.
Tim was pretty bold for a fifth-grader not only did he secure advertisers for Rat Magazine from local businesses. He would personally hand out the copies, a standard sheet of paper front and back, on the sidewalk after school. Looking back it is insane how angry the teachers got about being criticized by children and how hard they worked to try and shut down the project. As an adult looking back, it was pretty cool that Tim had the passion to do this all at 11 years old. You would think it might even be encouraged. But no, it also led us to realize how stupid are teachers were. One teacher claimed we couldn't distribute copies because we were in a school zone???? and somehow she had a say over everything that happens in school zones. Others would come and rip the copies out of Tim's hand. Next headline? RAT MAGAZINE SEIZED!!!!!! Not surprising his journalist parents weren't too happy to hear about this crackdown on the freedom of the press and people getting physical with their son. This is where it gets nuts.
Tim and his parents got the ACLU to sue the school district pro bono, AND THEY WON! Tim wasn't doing any of this on school time, he was handing it out after school was over, and on the sidewalk that the school doesn't own. You can't exactly rip it out of his hands either. I remember the get-together we all had to celebrate. Mind you, I was just a tag along, I wrote twice and would mostly hang out with people at the meetings. Again Tim is the hero of the story. The teachers couldn't do shit about it after that. Ha! I don't know how this anecdote from my childhood slipped my memory for so long. I think at 11 years old I didn't realize how cool what Tim was doing was and didn't think a lot about it.
Doesn't sound like this would be able to happen elsewhere in the "free world."
Free speech does not exist to protect popular ideas; it exists to protect unpopular ideas. Nobody cares if you argue over whether Italian or Mexican food is better. But if you put up a sticker saying "white lives matter," you can be put in prison for 2 years in England.
Meanwhile, given the college campus fracases recently, calling for the genocide of Jews will "depend on the context." So an actual instance of hate speech will go unpunished (not that I think that should be against the *law*, but if there's one statement that *could* be...)
Maddow is a regime propagandist who constantly spews disinformation during her two minutes hate. She and many others claimed that you won’t get covid if you get jabbed. The Disinformation Governance Board chair Nina Jankowicz is a classic commissar: https://yuribezmenov.substack.com/p/nina-jankowicz-ministry-of-truth-scary-poppins-
2. Criminalisation for potential crime ("pre-crime").
3. Up to a life sentence for "hate speech."
4. Anyone can file a claim for anything they don't like or claim to have been hurt by, and get money for doing so. Just imagine that floodgate opening.
5. Certain activist groups have asked that it be extended to small platforms with as few as a hundred users, not just the social media giants. I run two forums (one for wetshaving and one for people with CLL) and I would become liable for anything posted there.
If this gets passed then it will be the next government's first job to reverse it.
The very term, "hate speech" is just a leftist dog-whistle that has been used by the Democratic Party and its supporters to gin up fear.
The Democratic Party is the single greatest threat facing the United States today. They have no respect for the Constitution nor the citizens of the United States. Their sheer, utter disdain for the Bill of Rights is breathtaking.
Before it's too late... and I am not allowed to make it clear:
All true but sadly the First Amendment only means what five Supreme Court justices say it means. If the Democrats get control of the Court through packing and/or retirements, we’ll be in the same situation as the other countries. Such are the wages of sin we’re reaping from the “elite” law schools.
“NOW is the time for all good men to come to the aid of their country,” isn’t just an aid to typing students, it’s an important mantra for ALL AMERICANS decided to whom your precious vote should go.
Only candidates who have demonstrated an understanding of the vital role the 1st Amendment, indeed the entire Bill of Rights, plays in our liberty, and has pledged to preserve it, deserve your vote.
Other considerations should be set aside for now because we ALL WILL LOSE EVERYTHING if candidates who don’t respect our liberty win.
Why are we surprised? What did we expect when we rolled over and allowed the novel concept of "hate crime" to be codified? "Hate speech" logically follows.
The scariest part of this article, just 42 of voters think freedom of information should be protected... It's so ugly that we've reached such a low level of intelligence/education that this is the case.
And now we watch as those same countries tie themselves into knots as they struggle to exclude Jews from those 'protected from hate speech' groups. Just imagine the prisons that would need to be built if every "from the river to the sea" protestor - explicitly calling for the genocide of Jews, the very definition of "incitement"- were prosecuted and jailed under these new hate speech laws.
Agree that it's great that we have the First Amendment, but it's meaningless without the Second. This is why Britain, Ireland, and Canada don't have a prayer and are rapidly descending into fascism.
The real question is, will the next generation of Americans even have the stones to fight? China and their proxies are laughing as they feed our children fentanyl, hormones, and Hamas. Progressives: China good. Trump bad.
Without free expression, we're not free. The zealots making these decisions, and benefiting from them, are all-powerful, while at the same time making everyone else subjects. I don't believe they're speaking for everyone in the groups they say they represent, but a radicalism that increases division. Opining that a man cannot be a biological woman; objecting to blizzards of curricula that tear down the West as a "colonizer" that must be "abolished"--that's not considered ethnic cleansing, just the essence of justice and goodness; objecting to the weaponization of justice, the refusal to punish crime based on race; or criticizing Palestinian-based anti- semitic "activism" in the West, would be silenced and punished as "hate speech." Responding to actual hate and intimidation would be punished as hateful. That's because Western society and whites are the only "unprotected groups," remarkably convenient that, given Gemini's peek at the future.
Canada legislated, repealed (thank God), and almost re-legislated another law so broad in its wording as to be simultaneously meaningless and terrifying in its applicability. The chronically online among us north of the 49th are familiar with the Canada Human Rights Act Section 13(1) pasted below.
> It is a discriminatory practice for a person or a group of persons acting in concert to communicate telephonically or to cause to be so communicated, repeatedly, in whole or in part by means of the facilities of a telecommunication undertaking within the legislative authority of Parliament, any matter that is likely to expose a person or persons to hatred or contempt by reason of the fact that that person or those persons are identifiable on the basis of a prohibited ground of discrimination.
“Any matter that is likely to expose … hatred or contempt.” Think about the myriad of cases where this could be used. You theoretically could have been charged under this law by hosting a watch party of “American History X”, “Schindler’s List”, hell, even the “Chapelle Show” with how things are.
You know I was just talking with my mom about Rat Magazine. She was cleaning out stuff in her house and something reminded her of it. I wish we still had copies. What was Rat Magazine? A friend of mine , Tim, in Elementary School had two parents who were journalists. He often had complaints about the school, and they helped him create and publish his own school newspaper independently. I wrote for him a few times, he even gave me a 20-page training packet. I got the PE teacher in trouble for lying about why he made us do square dancing every year. He claimed the principal forced him to do it, which as it turns out, wasn't true. He didn't realize I was going to put what he said in print. My 5th grade teacher came up to me after it was printed and said "David you know the principal doesn't dictate the PE curriculum right?" I shrugged and said I was just quoting what he said. I was 10, I didn't know anything about lesson plans, I didn't even realize the guy was lying. Funny, we never had to do square dancing again. This isn't about me, though Tim is the hero of the story.
Tim was pretty bold for a fifth-grader not only did he secure advertisers for Rat Magazine from local businesses. He would personally hand out the copies, a standard sheet of paper front and back, on the sidewalk after school. Looking back it is insane how angry the teachers got about being criticized by children and how hard they worked to try and shut down the project. As an adult looking back, it was pretty cool that Tim had the passion to do this all at 11 years old. You would think it might even be encouraged. But no, it also led us to realize how stupid are teachers were. One teacher claimed we couldn't distribute copies because we were in a school zone???? and somehow she had a say over everything that happens in school zones. Others would come and rip the copies out of Tim's hand. Next headline? RAT MAGAZINE SEIZED!!!!!! Not surprising his journalist parents weren't too happy to hear about this crackdown on the freedom of the press and people getting physical with their son. This is where it gets nuts.
Tim and his parents got the ACLU to sue the school district pro bono, AND THEY WON! Tim wasn't doing any of this on school time, he was handing it out after school was over, and on the sidewalk that the school doesn't own. You can't exactly rip it out of his hands either. I remember the get-together we all had to celebrate. Mind you, I was just a tag along, I wrote twice and would mostly hang out with people at the meetings. Again Tim is the hero of the story. The teachers couldn't do shit about it after that. Ha! I don't know how this anecdote from my childhood slipped my memory for so long. I think at 11 years old I didn't realize how cool what Tim was doing was and didn't think a lot about it.
Doesn't sound like this would be able to happen elsewhere in the "free world."
America is in fact, quite exceptional.
The scariest part of this scary anti-free-speech development is how readily such a large portion of the population accepts it.
Free speech does not exist to protect popular ideas; it exists to protect unpopular ideas. Nobody cares if you argue over whether Italian or Mexican food is better. But if you put up a sticker saying "white lives matter," you can be put in prison for 2 years in England.
Meanwhile, given the college campus fracases recently, calling for the genocide of Jews will "depend on the context." So an actual instance of hate speech will go unpunished (not that I think that should be against the *law*, but if there's one statement that *could* be...)
Maddow is a regime propagandist who constantly spews disinformation during her two minutes hate. She and many others claimed that you won’t get covid if you get jabbed. The Disinformation Governance Board chair Nina Jankowicz is a classic commissar: https://yuribezmenov.substack.com/p/nina-jankowicz-ministry-of-truth-scary-poppins-
Restriction on "Hate speech" is like "Islamophobia" in that it only exists to stifle speech. 100% contrived and absolutely not needed.
Bullet points about the Canadian legislation:
1. Retrospective application of a new law.
2. Criminalisation for potential crime ("pre-crime").
3. Up to a life sentence for "hate speech."
4. Anyone can file a claim for anything they don't like or claim to have been hurt by, and get money for doing so. Just imagine that floodgate opening.
5. Certain activist groups have asked that it be extended to small platforms with as few as a hundred users, not just the social media giants. I run two forums (one for wetshaving and one for people with CLL) and I would become liable for anything posted there.
If this gets passed then it will be the next government's first job to reverse it.
The very term, "hate speech" is just a leftist dog-whistle that has been used by the Democratic Party and its supporters to gin up fear.
The Democratic Party is the single greatest threat facing the United States today. They have no respect for the Constitution nor the citizens of the United States. Their sheer, utter disdain for the Bill of Rights is breathtaking.
Before it's too late... and I am not allowed to make it clear:
I HATE the Democratic Party.
I HATE Joe Biden and his administration.
All true but sadly the First Amendment only means what five Supreme Court justices say it means. If the Democrats get control of the Court through packing and/or retirements, we’ll be in the same situation as the other countries. Such are the wages of sin we’re reaping from the “elite” law schools.
Disinformation Governance Board -> Straight outta 1984
“NOW is the time for all good men to come to the aid of their country,” isn’t just an aid to typing students, it’s an important mantra for ALL AMERICANS decided to whom your precious vote should go.
Only candidates who have demonstrated an understanding of the vital role the 1st Amendment, indeed the entire Bill of Rights, plays in our liberty, and has pledged to preserve it, deserve your vote.
Other considerations should be set aside for now because we ALL WILL LOSE EVERYTHING if candidates who don’t respect our liberty win.
Why are we surprised? What did we expect when we rolled over and allowed the novel concept of "hate crime" to be codified? "Hate speech" logically follows.
The scariest part of this article, just 42 of voters think freedom of information should be protected... It's so ugly that we've reached such a low level of intelligence/education that this is the case.
And now we watch as those same countries tie themselves into knots as they struggle to exclude Jews from those 'protected from hate speech' groups. Just imagine the prisons that would need to be built if every "from the river to the sea" protestor - explicitly calling for the genocide of Jews, the very definition of "incitement"- were prosecuted and jailed under these new hate speech laws.
This is gonna be fun....
Agree that it's great that we have the First Amendment, but it's meaningless without the Second. This is why Britain, Ireland, and Canada don't have a prayer and are rapidly descending into fascism.
The real question is, will the next generation of Americans even have the stones to fight? China and their proxies are laughing as they feed our children fentanyl, hormones, and Hamas. Progressives: China good. Trump bad.
Without free expression, we're not free. The zealots making these decisions, and benefiting from them, are all-powerful, while at the same time making everyone else subjects. I don't believe they're speaking for everyone in the groups they say they represent, but a radicalism that increases division. Opining that a man cannot be a biological woman; objecting to blizzards of curricula that tear down the West as a "colonizer" that must be "abolished"--that's not considered ethnic cleansing, just the essence of justice and goodness; objecting to the weaponization of justice, the refusal to punish crime based on race; or criticizing Palestinian-based anti- semitic "activism" in the West, would be silenced and punished as "hate speech." Responding to actual hate and intimidation would be punished as hateful. That's because Western society and whites are the only "unprotected groups," remarkably convenient that, given Gemini's peek at the future.
Canada legislated, repealed (thank God), and almost re-legislated another law so broad in its wording as to be simultaneously meaningless and terrifying in its applicability. The chronically online among us north of the 49th are familiar with the Canada Human Rights Act Section 13(1) pasted below.
> It is a discriminatory practice for a person or a group of persons acting in concert to communicate telephonically or to cause to be so communicated, repeatedly, in whole or in part by means of the facilities of a telecommunication undertaking within the legislative authority of Parliament, any matter that is likely to expose a person or persons to hatred or contempt by reason of the fact that that person or those persons are identifiable on the basis of a prohibited ground of discrimination.
“Any matter that is likely to expose … hatred or contempt.” Think about the myriad of cases where this could be used. You theoretically could have been charged under this law by hosting a watch party of “American History X”, “Schindler’s List”, hell, even the “Chapelle Show” with how things are.