Free Speech – Your Rights and Responsibilities on This Site

Un Mensaje Importante

Important note for ALL members here. READ THE LINKED ARTICLE:

https://news.yahoo.com/man-charged-online-threat-lynch-181738490.html

Allow me to quote myself here:

Words are our bullets. Once we fire them, they stay fired.

Wolf Moon

Note that I DO NOT take down threats or “maybe threats” made against individuals. I leave everything up as EVIDENCE. Those who make such statements are welcome to clarify – the clarifications will stay up, too.

If I believe there is a chance that a person MAY be making such threats in an attempt to get this blog closed, or has been manipulated to that end, I will ban them either temporarily or permanently, in an ABUNDANCE OF CAUTION. I may also ban identified provocateurs as well.

I believe that the PUBLIC has a right to statements made PUBLICLY. Once a threat has been made, it is in the PUBLIC’S INTEREST (and the interest of this site) that it remain PUBLIC. I believe that the social meme of HIDING such information was slowly introduced by COMMUNISTS, and our media and law enforcement MISTAKENLY went along with it. The meme has also infected social media, after being propagated through LAWYERS.

HIDING TRUTH IS ANTI-JOURNALISM.

This is an ALINSKY TACTIC to make us FEAR THE TRUTH, and in particular to FEAR FREE SPEECH.

We cannot recover free speech without practicing it and TESTING ITS LIMITS CONSTITUTIONALLY.

ONLY DOXXING POSTS (true doxxing, not “deadnaming”, which is a form of transmania censorship) will be HIDDEN, not removed, after being recorded. All other evidence will be kept public, based on TRUE JOURNALISTIC PRINCIPLES, GUARANTEED BY THE FIRST AMENDMENT.

Also, we LOVE LAW ENFORCEMENT, so DO THE MATH on whether any email address and IP information will be given upon request to RESPECTED law enforcement (meaning not that MURDERING, DISCREDITED, “STAND-DOWN” HILLARY SHERIFF IN FLORIDA, or politicized SDNY losers and haters acting in bad communist faith).

Please note that what may seem like a joke to one person may seem like a threat to others.

EXAMPLE: “milkshakes

Conversely, well-wishes that traitors receive DUE PUNISHMENTS BY LAW are tolerated if not approved. Your words stand on their own – it is not my job to clarify, mollify, frame or explain them. It is my job to give you free speech and preserve a public record thereof.

Long story short, TL:DR, don’t make threats because they will not be taken down.

W

https://www.theqtree.com/wp-content/uploads/2019/07/rosie_advice_image.jpg
ROSIE’S RULE
0 0 votes
Article Rating
Subscribe
Notify of
guest
180 Comments
Inline Feedbacks
View all comments

patfrederick

wow gonna reread this but my first impression is we’re back to self censorship…
“Please note that what may seem like a joke to one person may seem like a threat to others.”
and my freedom of speech is totally dependent on someone else’s feelings…
not that I want to threaten anyone, but sometimes a cigar is JUST a cigar and a joke is a joke. And let’s be honest, if the left wants to, they can find SOMEONE to be offended and triggered and fearful of everything that is said.
If free speech means I have to accept you burning my flag, why then am I walking on eggshells?

Harry Lime

I know, it’s frustrating…99% of the threats and offensive content comes from the left, including hollyweird, the media and lefty politicians with their ability to reach millions…and rarely, if ever are they held to the same standard. Concrete milkshakes and acid attacks are deemed reasonable responses to anything they disagree with and it’s only gonna get worse…

patfrederick

exactly…I watch someone burn our flag and I can say (grinding my teeth together) that’s freedom of speech. but why can’t I say, to me that’s a threat–that person wants to burn down our entire government–why isn’t MY voice enough?
it’s a delicate line crossed by the left so many times.

ozzytrumpster

Only one side gets called out

SteveInCO

Pat,
Unless I misread this very badly, he intends to leave the offending piece UP, unless it’s doxing. It won’t be censored.
He may very well report something serious to law enforcement. And if he starts to suspect you are an agent provocateur, he might ban you. But your words won’t be removed.

patfrederick

so IS there an “offending piece”? have I missed something entirely?
if there isn’t then this seems like intimidation…
(I totally understand the blog’s host right to police his site…but the NEED for it seems intimidating)

SteveInCO

No, I don’t believe there is; I was speaking hypothetically. I should have used the subjunctive more strictly.

patfrederick

no need to get moody lol

SteveInCO

Heh, with you around that’s difficult. 😀

ozzytrumpster

Especially when he’s having a bad hair day

ForGodandCountry

WTF
Why would LE be “constantly watching” this space?

rayzorbak

They have it ALL…… did you not understand?

andyocoregon

Great job if you can get it. Sit around all day reading blog comments. Maybe even make a few anonymous comments of your own. Make a six figure annual income plus great benefits. Where can I apply? 🙂

ozzytrumpster

To identify conservatives and other subversives. Study the enemy. Pick them off if you can when they cross even imaginary lines. Let them know they are watched. Psycops

SteveInCO

If somebody says Obama should be hanged if he gave our deepest secrets to China, I’m not going to turn over anything.

No reasonable person would consider that a threat; they aren’t threatening to do it themselves AND it’s “should be” which means “he deserves to be.” And I’d see a strong implication here that he’d be tried and convicted under due process.
That being said, of course…in many cases we’re not dealing with reasonable people.

ozzytrumpster

News of note. Brian cates talking of the fortituious earthquake that destroyed nokos Neue mountain and all the Chinese Neue physicists and Neuclear specialists. Said at the time it walked like a duck, talked like a duck etc. rod from god
And now Iran has had a well timed and placed “act of nature” quake.

GA/FL

Flag burning is an ACTION – accompanying – SPEECH!
Leftist judge got it wrong as HECK!!!

GA/FL

AGAIN – flag burning AIN’T SPEECH – it’s an ACTION!!!!!!!

SteveInCO

True…but who is damaged by that action?
It doesn’t break my arm nor pick my pocket. It just pisses me off. But (as we like to say) I don’t have a right not to be offended.

GA/FL

They are offending the whole country and its framers…. and should lose something for their dishonor. There should be a law that all flags belong to the USA and its citizens, soldiers, law enforcement and a destructive act against them….because they are destroying PUBLIC PROPERTY.

SteveInCO

Sorry, I simply can’t agree with this. As aggravating as it is, there’s simply no warrant for chucking someone into jail for burning something (unless he does it so unsafely it becomes a hazard of burning other property or people).
By your logic someone can claim “it offends the whole country” if (say) someone uses the “N word” and clap that person in jail.

GA/FL

I know….I know….I know.

GA/FL

OK – I think they should be sentenced to community service – not incarcerated. They have offended and injured the country/community of citizens by burning a US flag. If someone is so inclined to repeat it, double the service. If they repeat it again, excommunicate them!

SteveInCO

Again…point to the injury.
And, again…we don’t have a right not to be offended.
But what we can do is ostracize the fucktard.

GA/FL

Deport, exile, expatriate, expel, declare persona non grata, banish, vanquish, remove citizenship….

SteveInCO

We as people can do what we want to, to ostracize someone…but everything you are talking about is a government penalty, so I can’t accept those for a no-injury crime.

scott467

“Sorry, I simply can’t agree with this. As aggravating as it is, there’s simply no warrant for chucking someone into jail for burning something (unless he does it so unsafely it becomes a hazard of burning other property or people).”
_________________
It may not warrant incarceration, but it can certainly warrant a fine.
You get a fine for jaywalking, for parking in the wrong spot.
That’s an infinitely lower standard than lighting an uncontrollable fire in a public place, not only subverting but literally destroying the primary symbol of our country and our society in the process.

SteveInCO

OK…provided the statue reads “starting an uncontrollable fire in a public place” rather than “burned a flag.”
In other words, the penalty should be the same as if I burned a bunch of my old smelly socks. If not, you’re just using public safety as a thin excuse for enforcing your prejudices on people. I can’t hack that, not even when I share that prejudice.

scott467

“OK…provided the statue reads “starting an uncontrollable fire in a public place” rather than “burned a flag.”
_______________
It certainly could read that way, I mean, is it legal to light something on fire in a public space ANYWAY?
You can’t just go around lighting stuff on fire in the public square.
We can’t even burn LEAVES on our own property!
That used to be a fall tradition, the smell of burning leaves… I haven’t experienced that in what… at least 30+ years now?
And for what?
For political idiocy in the guise of ‘environmental protection’, which is a Leftist religion.
.
“In other words, the penalty should be the same as if I burned a bunch of my old smelly socks. If not, you’re just using public safety as a thin excuse for enforcing your prejudices on people. I can’t hack that, not even when I share that prejudice.”
_______________
Not using public safety as a thin excuse, it just occurred to me while writing my earlier response that we’re missing the forest for the trees.
If I tried to light a bed comforter on fire in the middle of town, they’d arrest me for arson. But light a flag of the same size on fire, and it’s some kind of ‘protected act’? WTH?
The rest of my point was a graduated escalation.
If jaywalking can get you fined, if parking in the wrong spot can get you fined, then certainly lighting something as big as a flag on fire — infinitely more hazardous than overstaying your parking meter time! — could be similarly fined.
But the greater point is the point made by Samuel Adams, that actions which undermine society or subvert civil government should not be tolerated.
It’s very simple.
It’s was Sam’s argument. He wouldn’t tolerate islam for the exact same reason.
The flag is a symbol representing our country and our society. Burning (destroying) the American Flag as a ‘political protest’ is an overt attack and act of subversion against the country and the civil society for which it stands.
It is likewise an act of subversion against civil government, and the Constitution, and the nation itself.
It’s ridiculous to even have this argument, as if we’re fighting over the head of pin, or straining at a gnat if you will, while the Left and the islamists are attempting to burn down our whole nation, every day, in every way possible.
The Left, like an aggressor, will keep pushing, until SOMEBODY pushes back — HARD.
Hard enough to make them think twice about ever trying it again.
Until that happens, they’re just going to keep turning up the heat.
So the decision is this: do you fight back NOW, while you’re still strong and able to win easily?
Or do you wait until victory would be legitimately in doubt?
And if the latter, what is the rationale to risk losing the country?

ozzytrumpster

They are teaching Americans to hate. See poem by rudyard Kipling when the English began to hate

GA/FL

Great poem!

GA/FL

Great poem! Hate can grab a nation when the injustice, evil and pain is great enough.

ozzytrumpster

But it’s cold and deadly hate full of contempt and utterly merciless

scott467

“True…but who is damaged by that action [of burning the flag]?”
____________________
Society is damaged.
Without some kind of cohesiveness, there is no society.
The flag is the primary ‘symbol’ of our country and the ‘society’ within its borders.
If you are burning the flag, you are symbolically DESTROYING the country and the society for which it stands.
That’s the easy and obvious argument.
Too bad a bunch of Harvard and Yale Law grads couldn’t figure that out on the (not)Supreme Court.
Apply the same standard as Samuel Adams did for toleration of ‘beliefs’:
……………………………………………………
The Rights of the Colonists — Samuel Adams:
“In regard to religion, mutual toleration in the different professions thereof is what all good and candid minds in all ages have ever practised, and, both by precept and example, inculcated on mankind. And it is now generally agreed among Christians that this spirit of toleration, in the fullest extent consistent with the being of civil society, is the chief characteristical mark of the Church. Insomuch that Mr. Locke has asserted and proved, beyond the possibility of contradiction on any solid ground, that such toleration ought to be extended to all whose doctrines are not subversive of society.
The only sects which he thinks ought to be, and which by all wise laws are excluded from such toleration, are those who teach doctrines subversive of the civil government under which they live“.
“So Adams sets forth a test for ascertaining which religions should be tolerated and that test is whether the “doctrines”–or teachings–of a given religion are “subversive of society.”
Adams contended that religions “are excluded from… toleration” when they “teach doctrines subversive of the civil government.”
http://www.breitbart.com/big-government/2015/09/20/founding-father-samuel-adams-say-ben-carsons-opposition-muslim-president/
………………………………………………….
If only (not)Supreme Court justices would read the Founding Fathers… it would solve all kinds of problems, instead of products of Yale and Harvard just winging it, making it up as they go.

singingsoul1

Let’s face it there is no true free speech.
Of course in a civil society free speech would be no problem because ethical compass would be in tact.
Parents used to teach kids civility and how to navigate in a civil society.
Society has changed our culture have changed . We are what we think if we say them or not.
I have noticed over the years people who are in your face saying as they see it even if it insults have problems if they are called out.
One rule for me and another for others therefore free speech is a farce.
I believe self censure is up to every person of course we are guests on a board we abide buy rules.
Rules are everywhere and that is how a civil society stays civil. We all grew up with rules.
We also have choices and we make choices all the time. I personally have boundaries for myself and am not perfect.
I do not like violence and avoid it.

ForGodandCountry
gil00

Theres no room to avoid the dont poop where you sleep creedo!

gil00
ozzytrumpster

It’s me

Marica

LOL ozzy!!!

GA/FL

A woman after my own heart! My children called me ‘mean mommy.’ (well, that’s not all)
But none of them ever got on drugs or got pregnant or ran away from home.
They knew I loved them and wanted the best for them.
They also knew they couldn’t get away with anything.
One time the youngest was a bit late coming in at night…..sneaked up the stairs quiet as a mouse…..
….drove into the drive way no lights on…..
..sneak, tip toe….shut the back door…..
… … … sneak up the hall …
…up the stairs into her room….
… …sneak….creep, creep….
quiet as can be….across the room……
…..got into bed ….
only to find a mean mad mommy asleep waiting for her!!!

ForGodandCountry

LMAO
Perfect.
Thank the good Lord my parents never thought of that!!

GA/FL

Her shriek could have been heard a mile away!
Never was a minute late ever again!

Deplorable Patriot

In our parish, one of the matriarchs died, and her kids told a story on her that no one had ever heard. She was a bit of a night owl, and a pretty heavy smoker. The kids would get home late, and the house was dark…and then they’d see the lit cigarette in the front window. Mom was waiting….

GA/FL

A lot of depression era, WWII era Moms were smokers. Mine was. She smoked until the last day of her life.

Deplorable Patriot

I don’t know that this woman was that old. She would have been a teenager probably during the war. Her husband was older, I remember that.

Deplorable Patriot

Funny, the women of the parish usually provide lunch after a funeral. She was the first one to tell her kids to have lunch catered because the women of the parish shouldn’t have to cook for her.

ozzytrumpster

That clown in the gutter would have been less scared

ozzytrumpster

Lol. Scared her half to death . Which was the plan

singingsoul1

DA/FL
I used to tell my kids that ” I am your mother not your friend as a mother I need to teach you how to live in society and in this culture.” I said this after I heard but my friends………….!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
One of my sons told me later “that a person can have many friends but only one mother.”
The test if I did a good job is when I see how my grandchildren turned out. I see with two adult children 50 & 52 that much what I taught them they pass on to their kids. They turned out that is all I can ask for and they are contributing adults in society. One son and his wife have no children and they are close to my daughter’s child and she loves them and they her.

GA/FL

Good job, Mom/Grandmommy!!!

B.b.S.s.Saint

using your mean parent voice and growl is now considered child abuse! Our pups need more growl and bark and less negotiation and bribery. It was beautiful to see the pups all stop moving and sit! Had to leave a fast food restaurant last week ‘cuz an uncontrolled pup was brought in and chaos ensued. The family on the other side of them got up and left too. Grandma was begging and mom was bribing or not helping grandma and had to be bargained with.

daughnworks247

We are an unruly bunch.

scott467

“wow gonna reread this but my first impression is we’re back to self censorship…”
__________________
Yes, same here, though I realize that’s not how Wolf means it.

Harry Lime

“I realize that’s not how Wolf means it.”
Exactly. Wolf is just warning us of the possible consequences…but the possible consequences are not coming from him. The Left will try to destroy anyone who is not a full blown commie at this point. It’s just a reminder to choose your tone carefully. Even joking will put a target on your back. I do my best to keep anything resembling a threat out of my humor. Wolf has made it perfectly clear that he will not censor comments.

scott467

“The Left will try to destroy anyone who is not a full blown commie at this point.”
__________________
Which in a way is good. It removes any reason to even try to accommodate or appease them.
Because what’s the point?
.
“It’s just a reminder to choose your tone carefully. Even joking will put a target on your back.”
_________________
Better to wear clothing with targets all over. That way they won’t just concentrate on your blind-spot (i.e., your back) 😉
I don’t know how to choose a tone that will appease an inconsolable and implacable enemy… because I don’t think there IS any ‘tone’ that will do so.
So all the pressure is off. I can just speak freely, and put the pressure on THEM to deal with it.
.
“I do my best to keep anything resembling a threat out of my humor.”
________________
I can’t help or predict what the enemy will ‘read into’ my comments, so how can I possibly speak in such a way that would ‘protect’ them from their own idiocy?
.
“Wolf has made it perfectly clear that he will not censor comments.”
________________
I don’t know why anyone would WANT their comments censored in the first place.
What’s wrong with speaking your mind, and if someone doesn’t like what you say, then let them speak better words and show me my error?
I just don’t know where all this bending over backwards so as not to offend the most offensive people on the planet (Leftists) comes from.
I don’t CARE if they don’t like me, or what I say.
In fact, that’s at least half of the point. If they like or agree with what I’m saying, then I must be doing something wrong 😁

singingsoul1

There are always people going to be offended no matter how civil one is . Are we responsible how people feel any given day? I believe people are in charge of their own feeling no one else.

Harry Lime

Here is what I said broken down into bullet points:
1) The Left will try to destroy you.
2) Be smart
3) I don’t make threats on-line
4) Wolf does not censor
The fact that you were able to extract so much from this simple message is a skill I wish I had. And I’m being serious…I agree with almost everything you have said here.
The only point I tend to personally disagree with is “Better to wear clothing with targets all over.” I don’t have time for that kind of activity and believe that there are more effective ways to fight the battle from my personal perspective. The Left has become so unhinged that to fight every battle would be exhausting. I’m not a journalist, politician, activist, nor do I publish a political blog. So I have to choose my battles wisely or I wouldn’t be able to function on a day to day basis. Don’t get me wrong…I say what I believe but I can’t promote what I believe 24/7 or the attacks would be relentless and I wouldn’t be able to do the things I love to do…I would be in battle constantly and probably have my business targeted for extinction. And then I would be of no use to anybody.
But for those in the business of making their opinions known, those making a living from and those in office, (that is why we pay them or elect them) I believe you are correct.

Exfiltration of Wealth

“Shakin’ it over here, boss!”

holley100

lol one of my favorite movies.

scott467

“lol one of my favorite movies.”
____________
Mine too!

andyocoregon

#MeToo!

Hoofhearted

#Me Four! And a man of upright principles that made him a good husband, an excellent actor, an exciting racer, a wise team owner and a benevolent character who gave to other people…..hmmm sounds familiar.

A Fortiori

Those of us who frequent this little oasis know that our enemies would like not only to scatter us asunder, but also to humiliate and defame us in the process. It is for this reason that we need to exercise constraints beyond refraining from speech that is not legally permissible. Yes, we can express our anger, and we can do so in strong terms. But it is not necessary to express strong feelings in ways that enable us to be painted as potentially violent miscreants.

ForGodandCountry

I wish you posted more frequently.

scott467

“But it is not necessary to express strong feelings in ways that enable us to be painted as potentially violent miscreants.”
_________________
The problem is that they are going to do that regardless.
So where does that leave us?
Self-censoring.
It puts us in the position of thinking how the enemy could ‘gotcha!’, and then never saying anything that could ever be misconstrued or misrepresented or twisted or taken out of context or…
You can’t say ANYTHING that meets that standard.
In the end, all we do is accomplish the enemy’s objective FOR them.
I thought that best remedy for speech we disagree with is MORE speech and BETTER speech.
We can’t “hide” who we are or what believe.
But we can certainly DEFEND it.
And even better, something which our ‘side’ just can’t seem to grasp… we can go on OFFENSE, and make the enemy play defense.
Defense is a thousand times harder than offense, and defense hardly ever scores any points.
All we ever do is play DEFENSE.
I hate defense.
I play offense ALL the TIME, because even if the enemy scores a point, I’ll score TEN to every one of theirs.
But if I’m playing DEFENSE, that’s like winning the coin toss and giving them the ball — for the WHOLE GAME.
That’s no way to win!

pgroup

“… we can go on OFFENSE, and make the enemy play defense.”
You mean we can be like that crazy guy who crossed the frozen Delaware River in a snowstorm on Christmas Eve, just to catch the enemy drunk and feeling safe because nobody would be out in this weather? That guy?
I love America. And so did he even though it didn’t yet exist when he did that.

ozzytrumpster

I’ve been keeping a chain on my inner bitch. Shes not commenting so much

grandmaintexas

Me too, and frankly, she’s chewing on her chains.

ozzytrumpster

Yep and the steel is showing signs of wear. Teeth otoh seem fine

grandmaintexas

I heard today that there won’t be any arrests, most likely, until a 2nd Trump term. I’m effing ticked off. I feel manipulated as hell. Is this just a reelection ploy? Wth?????
Justice delayed is justice denied.
My patience is wearing very thin.

ozzytrumpster

Heard the citizenship question is not going in the census. WTF.
It may be our vsg is setting traps or lulling fears

grandmaintexas

I’m feeling a lot of cynicism right now.

ozzytrumpster

OTOH see my reply up post. No ko got a rod from god which deep sixed their neuclear prog and now Iran has had a well timed quake.
Other news
Mike pence plane turned back to dc. Talk cancelled
Putin cancels something to stay at kremlin
Latest greatest Russian sub on fire 14 dead .?sunk.
Airforce 2 bugging out of dc withno stated destination. ? Flotus evac

grandmaintexas

IKR?

Weather Watcher

I’m beyond frustrated…..I live in CA…….it’s dark here…after hearing about the no citizen question on the Census…..I’m looking and praying for the Rapture…….I can’t wait long enough for the arrest to happen – just bring in the Rapture………then I won’t have to care anymore.

ozzytrumpster

The right partner can get you rapture.
Seriously though I want payback first

daughnworks247

I’m downright sad because of the continued losses at the DOJ.
DOJ is the one who gave Wilbur Ross the opinion about the citizenship question. To drop it within a week is disgusting. If we don’t change the DOJ, if we don’t remove the double standard…..we’re going to lose people. They’ve been patient for too long. Not sure how to counteract the obvious feeling of betrayal.

NebraskaFilly

That isn’t “settled” yet. It goes back to the original court.

NebraskaFilly

But now I see on OANN that the Admin is backing down……? PDJT confirmed he is officially dropping the question???? WTF???

ozzytrumpster

Trust him. He’s up to no good. (For the demoncraps)

scott467

“I’ve been keeping a chain on my inner bitch.”
________________
You should know by now… that will only make her mad!
😁

ozzytrumpster

Madder

elena1950909deplorable

On the picture of antifa, as they call themselves, you forgot to put swastika, because tactics of that terrorist group mirror Hitler’s stormtroopers (brown-shirts) tactics, not commies…Commies until they in power, as when Stalin came to power, don’t band free speech…

Covadonga

I could almost write a short book in response to this comment, but time won’t allow.
You know those lists people have made of the eerie similarities between Lincoln’s assassination and Kennedy’s? Well, the first several pages of Victor Suvorov’s The Chief Culprit contains an equally eerie list of the similarities between Stalin’s life and Hitler’s.
Suvorov proved WWII was a plot launched by Lenin/Stalin to take over the world. They, along with the conspiracy of Western banksters who had put Lenin and his Bolsheviks in power, put Hitler in power.
Hitler trusted the Communists who came over to his side. In The Ominous Parallels, Leonard Peikoff provided the quote. I don’t have it in front of me, but something like “A Social Democrat will never make a good Nazi – too squeamish, but a Communist will always make a good Nazi.”
But, in the event, many of them he welcomed remained loyal Communists – double agents.
This, along with Lend-Lease, and the sheer size of the USSR and its army are the 3 things that doomed Hitler.
After the war, OSS/CIA/banksters said we obviously needed experts on fighting Communism to help us with the nascent Cold War. Here’s a wonderful idea: let’s bring a lot of SS war criminals and other Gestapo people over from Europe, give them fake identities and American citizenship! They’ll be our new consultants! After all, nobody knows how to fight Communists like SS war criminals and other Gestapo people! What could go wrong?!
Among the many fatal flaws in this plan, the Skull and Bones types had an affinity for picking Gestapo types who had been serving as double agents for Stalin, and who continued doing so in their new, New World digs. All around, a male, pale, and Yale fail. See John Loftus and Mark Aaron, The Secret War Against the Jews.
This is a big reason all the early battles in the Cold War went against us, making us hunker down for the long haul, until Reagan came in.

scott467

Okay, let’s take a look at the article:
A North Carolina man has been charged with posting an anonymous threat on social media to lynch a Muslim-American candidate for a state Senate seat in Virginia.
There is no such thing as a ‘muslim-American’, it’s a made-up term to spotlight a protected victim-class. How do you know? When was the last time you ever heard MSM call any ‘victim’ a Christian-American?
.
A warrant for the arrest of Joseph Cecil Vandevere, 52, of Black Mountain, was issued after his June 20 indictment, federal court records show. Federal authorities hadn’t yet arrested Vandevere as of Monday afternoon, according to Lia Bantavani, spokeswoman for the U.S. attorney’s office for the western district of North Carolina.
The indictment identifies the victim only by the initials “Q.R.,” but Virginia state Senate candidate Qasim Rashid posted a screenshot of the threatening tweet in March 2018 and flagged it for Twitter. Rashid also said he reported the threat to the FBI
.”
Still haven’t seen the ‘threat’, which should have been the “lede”. Instead we’re just getting a refresher course in scaring people into self-censorship, just to ‘be on the safe side’, since we have no idea what actually happened — only that there is a protected-class ‘victim’ who appears to be a ‘tattler’ and using our own legal system to implement lawfare against regular Americans.
That’s what it looks like so far.
Media indoctrination to scare Americans into never voicing any kind of dissatisfaction with protected-class / victim-class Leftists / hostile invaders. And that is certainly the LESSON being taught.
.
Rashid, an attorney who works on immigrant rights cases and won a Democratic primary last month, told The Associated Press on Monday that he is pleased law enforcement officials are treating the tweet as an act of “extremism.”
Oh… a member of the BAR… a lawyer, someone who shouldn’t even be allowed to hold public office, according to our Founding Fathers.
And also a muslim, who shouldn’t even be allowed into our country, according to Founding Father Samuel Adams, “sets forth a test for ascertaining which religions should be tolerated and that test is whether the “doctrines”–or teachings–of a given religion are “subversive of society.” Adams contended that religions “are excluded from… toleration” when they “teach doctrines subversive of the civil government.
http://www.breitbart.com/big-government/2015/09/20/founding-father-samuel-adams-say-ben-carsons-opposition-muslim-president/
.
I think this is how you protect free speech and a genuine exchange of ideas,” he said.
So the lawyer thinks the way you PROTECT free speech is to refer anyone who exercises it to the police for prosecution. How very Sharia of you, muzzie.
.
The charge against Vandevere — interstate communication of a threat to injure a person — carries a maximum sentence of five years in prison.
Oooooh… very SCARY!!! We still don’t have any idea what the ‘threat’ was… but we all need to be VERY, VERY SCARED to ever say ANYTHING even potentially negative toward any member of a protected-class — which means everyone but YOU, Whitey.
That is the PRIMARY lesson being taught here by Yahoo News, dues paying member of the Leftist / Antifi / DNC Propaganda Ideology Group (L.A.D – P.I.G.)
.
Online court records don’t list an attorney for Vandevere, whose Twitter account was called “DaDUTCHMAN5.” Twitter has suspended that account.
Let THAT be a lesson to ANYONE who would even THINK of expressing displeasure with any member of a PROTECTED-CLASS!!!
.
Vandevere also has used the aliases “Da Dutchman” and “Bob Smith,” according to the two-page indictment, which says the offense occurred in Buncombe County, North Carolina.”
That’s roughly a million times more in-depth reporting than we ever get about suspects who don’t fit their ‘narrative’.
.
The tweet directed at Rashid included a picture of a lynching and read, “PLEASE … VIEW YOUR DESTINY.”
Seriously?
If that is to be considered a ‘threat’, then what is it called when Kathy Griffin literally CUTS the HEAD off of someone who is purposely supposed to look like the President of the United States?
Multiply that by a thousand other violent threats by all manner of Leftists, both infamous and regular NPCs, not to mention actual threats followed by actual violence, with impunity, daily, by Leftists.
‘View your destiny’ is NOT a ‘threat’, it’s a ‘taunt’. There’s a big difference. Mr. Vandevere expressed nothing about taking any ACTION toward the person, so how can there be any ‘threat’?
It’s literally no different than if a crystal ball gazer sent a meme of someone slipping and falling on ice, and wrote: “PLEASE … VIEW YOUR DESTINY.” Does that mean the ‘medium’ is going to push the person down, or is it a warning to be careful of ice, or is it just a crackpot sending messages like ten thousand other crackpots do every day?
Does “PLEASE … VIEW YOUR DESTINY” mean the crackpot ‘medium’ is threatening?
Where is the “threat”?
Words have meaning, much as lawfare types want us to forget:
……………………..
threat
noun
1. a declaration of an intention or determination to inflict punishment, injury, etc., in retaliation for, or conditionally upon, some action or course; menace: He confessed under the threat of imprisonment.
2. an indication or warning of probable trouble: The threat of a storm was in the air.
3. a person or thing that threatens.
……………………..
So far, “PLEASE… VIEW YOUR DESTINY” certainly does not meet the definition of ‘threat’.
It just doesn’t.
Whether you include a picture of someone being ‘lynched’ or you include a picture of Oscar the Grouch.
Can you even imagine if SHARIA was held to the same standard this muzzie is attempting to hold Freedom of Speech?!?
.
Hey @twitter this white supremacist @DaDUTCHMAN5 is threatening me with lynching b/c I am a Muslim. Please tell me this violates your terms & conditions?” Rashid wrote, adding the hashtag “WhereWasHeRadicalized?”
Why doesn’t Mr. Vandemere sue Rashid for defamation? Mr. Vandemere is not a public figure… and Mr. Rashid just trashed him, calling him a ‘white supremacist’, filed a false police report, and tattled to Twitter like a baby who needs someone to protect him.
………………………
Defamation
noun
the act of defaming; false or unjustified injury of the good reputation of another, as by slander or libel; calumny:
………………………
Rashid, 36, said he has reported approximately a dozen threats against him to law enforcement over the past few years. This is the first time one of his complaints has led to a criminal charge, he said.
So he is a serial complainant, regularly wasting time and resources of public authorities, because he doesn’t believe he should have to tolerate anyone who encroaches on his special protected-class victim status “b/c I am a Muslim”.
So he just keeps doing it, until somebody eventually gets charged. Why isn’t Mr. Vandemere’s attorney suing the pants off this guy?
.
It spikes any time there is (anti-Muslim) rhetoric from the political leadership of this country,” he said. “It’s almost predictable.”
______________
Awwww…. poor little muzzie takes a cheap shot at DJT…. never saw that coming…
How many people has Mr. Vandemere maimed or killed?
And how many people have Muzzies maimed or killed… today? Or yesterday?
Or tomorrow?
Who’s the real ‘victim’ here, and who is the aggressor?
.
And that was the end of the propaganda lesson article.
Message: hey all you dumb hill billy crackers, you better not even HINT at ANYTHING potentially negative toward protected-class people (i.e., everybody but YOU), or this is what will happen to you.
As for Freedom of Speech?
R.I.P.
Because if this is the new standard, then it’s already gone.

ozzytrumpster

It’s better if they get bit by their own traps. Potus has a gift for making this happen

Rodney Short

You had me l the way up to dumb hil bily crackers,back to lurking I go.
Have a nice day….

scott467

“You had me l the way up to dumb hil bily crackers,back to lurking I go.
Have a nice day….”
____________________
That was the ‘message’ the Yahoo Fake News article was sending.
You think the Left doesn’t think of everyone in ‘flyover country’ and conservatives (generally) as every derogatory term you can think of?
I only mentioned three.
The Left doesn’t limit themselves to three, and they say a lot worse about us than that.

Rodney Short

The left has no God in them, they are soulless.

pgroup

Wolfie needs to give you a trophy for the longest comment on this blog. BTW, it’s very good also.

Covadonga

I don’t know what happened here, but never rule out potential jussiefication of the narrative, especially when dealing with a Muslim.
At least 90% of “hate crimes” against Muslims are inside jobs.

SteveInCO

I remember a situation on a totally different board, where one individual was the sort who would cudgel people with (probably fake) facts when they didn’t toe his socialist line. He’d actually get furious with people who didn’t have time to argue with him; meanwhile I wonder what the heck he actually did for a living. Anyhow, one time he tried to cite one study on guns to prove a point that it simply didn’t address (and that’s assuming the study wasn’t a pack of lies–a very big IF). I responded, explaining that the study didn’t say that, it said something different, something I actually also didn’t agree with. We went back and forth. I actually drew a frigging Venn diagram to explain that the cases the study was talking about only overlapped (it wasn’t a subset or superset) of what he claimed it was. Even other leftists on that board were starting to see he was just being obtuse.
I persisted, and he eventually threatened to ban me.
I reported it to the site owner, who kicked the human ulcer off of that forum.
But the site owner also completely scrubbed the entire conversation off the board, so that no one could figure out what happened and why. I’d have preferred he left it up. Show the entire world what an utter ass this person was. And I’ve seen people who get kicked off of other places simply dropped into the memory hole, and you wonder, “gee what happened to…?” (Note that this is the approach taken Over There.)
I like Wolf’s policy a lot better. We can see and understand what the problem is, and if he should happen to ban someone for insufficient cause, we’d be able to call him on it.

SteveInCO

Maybe those people just don’t like conflict or something. Yeesh.

scott467

I find the whole concept of removing posts confusing, because the possible ‘reasons’ mostly sound self-serving but done in the name of ‘protecting others’, i.e., essentially virtue-signalling.
Why did the site owner in the example you mentioned remove the posts?
Either he agreed with the goof you were debating and didn’t like the fact that you exposed and defeated him, or he was protecting himself in some way, from any potential repercussion.
What other practical reasons are there?
As for the people who post, it should be a rare thing that anyone WANTS their post removed. Certainly, anyone can make an honest mistake, but if you took the time to write a post in the first place, then clarifying it with a follow-up post makes more sense than erasing the original and starting from scratch.
And likewise, certainly anyone can be misunderstood or their words can be taken in a way that is not intended — but again, if that appears to be the case, then a follow-up post for clarification is the obvious route to take.
And it is certainly possible, in the heat of the moment, to say something you don’t really mean and would like to take back. Hopefully that doesn’t happen often, but if it does, being forthright is the best remedy, e.g., “Sorry, I’m very upset about this ____________, and I should have waited to cool down before posting. I didn’t mean _______________, it was an angry outburst, and I’m sorry.”
For everything else, so long as you are prepared to defend what you’ve said, and accept correction if it turns out that you are in error, why would anyone want a post removed?
Just about every situation is self-resolving, if the interested parties are reasonably attentive.
And if the people posting are not reasonably attentive, if they don’t care enough to clarify their thoughts, then they won’t be complaining or asking to have their posts removed anyway! 🙂

SteveInCO

In this particular instance, I suspect the site owner wanted to wipe out nasty conflict in the community he was building.
In other cases (other for a), when someone got banned their post got deleted and MAYBE replaced with the word “plonk” which was the only indication you could see later that someone got bucketed as an asshole and removed. I knew that board owner well enough to know that she didn’t believe in giving assholes the satisfaction of ANY publicity. Sort of a variant of “don’t feed the trolls.”
I don’t agree with that, clearly, but I can at least see it as a rationale.

scott467

“In this particular instance, I suspect the site owner wanted to wipe out nasty conflict in the community he was building.”
_______________
The problem is that any such ‘community’ is a phony community, by definition, if the thought police are going around spritzing and sanitizing everything with ‘conflict-be-gone’, lol!
There are plenty of phony ‘communities’ in real life… why in the world would anyone want to replicate that fraud online, especially when one of the primary advantages of ‘anonymity’ is to remove the perceived ‘need’ (peer pressure) to be ‘phony’ in the first place?
.
“In other cases (other for a), when someone got banned their post got deleted and MAYBE replaced with the word “plonk” which was the only indication you could see later that someone got bucketed as an asshole and removed.”
________________
All that accomplishes is division.
The people who were ‘online’ when it happened know exactly what happened, and those who missed it can only guess and speculate — the board owner has created division between those who are ‘in the know’ and those who are ‘other’, extending it even beyond the ‘mods’ (which are already the equivalent of ‘Secret Police’) to regular members who just happened to be ‘present’ when the ‘conflict’ occurred.
Whatever ‘good’ people are claiming to ‘seek’ by censoring or removing posts, it’s pretty pathetic compared to all the Orwellian BAD that results.
But that would only be recognized if the people running the board weren’t inclined to Authoritarianism in the first place. And in my experience, MOST people who find themselves in a position of power abuse it.
Becoming ‘Authoritarian’ or ‘Tyrannical’ with ‘power’ is easy.
Resisting the temptation to be tyrannical or authoritarian is hard.
Or so it seems, for the human species.
.
“I knew that board owner well enough to know that she didn’t believe in giving assholes the satisfaction of ANY publicity. Sort of a variant of “don’t feed the trolls.” ”
_________________
The intention may have been ‘good’, but ultimately she’s just hurting her own cause. Hiding information from others always creates suspicion and speculation which always causes division.
As for trolls, I never understood the admonition ‘don’t feed the trolls’.
A ‘troll’ is a combatant in the arena.
Combatants don’t get a free pass, they get challenged and defeated.
That’s at least HALF the fun of being on the interwebs in the first place!
Saying ‘don’t feed the trolls’ is like saying ‘Don’t enjoy the wind in your hair when you’re driving your convertible with the top down’, LOL!
Beat the living daylights out of that troll — that’s what he’s there for 🙂

SteveInCO

Agree with most of this–you’ve described the silliness of the first board owner’s stance–indeed people were wanting to know what had happened to the banned individual and why–he was a moderator! In the second case, I personally thought it would have been a good idea to leave their misbehavior in place too. In fact, oftentimes you couldn’t tell who had been “plonked”. However, one other factor I remember, was that a lot of people she banned were slandering a third party, and she didn’t believe in giving ANY air time to that. Nonetheless, she could have done better than just “plonk” even if just to say “JackassDufus just slandered SoAndSo so I have deleted their comment and kicked them into orbit.”
I tend to agree with “do not feed the trolls,” usually…since attention (even bad attention) is what they want (they may even really crave the bad attention).

ozzytrumpster

Maybe kicked them into the sewer

dreamboat annie

“ The right partner can get you rapture.
Seriously though I want payback first”

ozzytrumpster

If you haven’t made enemies you haven’t stood up for anything

daughnworks247

Bingo.

ozzytrumpster

Paraphrasing Winston Churchill

scott467

“I tend to agree with “do not feed the trolls,” usually…since attention (even bad attention) is what they want (they may even really crave the bad attention).”
________________
Well, think of it this way.
How often do you go to radical Leftist websites to pick a fight?
Speaking for myself, the answer is (almost) ‘never’. I’ve done it, just to test myself, and I can smack around as many as I directly engage with, but I much prefer the company of just about anyone besides a Leftist 😁
t’s like kicking in the door at a biker bar, and asking “which of you skirt-wearin’ sissies think you know how to fight?’
If you’re going to do it, you better be good.
Real good, lol!
It’s the same thing with any Leftist troll coming here… or to any non-Leftist / pro-Trump website.
Anybody who does that is either really good (I haven’t met one yet who was…), or he’s begging to be humiliated… because apparently he enjoys humiliation.
And who am I, that I should withhold that from him?
😁

SteveInCO

But I can also imagine the site owner saying, “Please take that outside, I want to run a quiet establishment.”
In other words he’d be as upset with you for fighting, as he would be with the instigator. And other people on the site also might not want to see it turn into constant arguing. That actually makes the site less enjoyable for most people; and constant bickering on the Eeyore Tree drove a number of people away.
The troll is trying to damage the site, and by taking the bait, you’re helping him do it.

scott467

“The troll is trying to damage the site, and by taking the bait, you’re helping him do it.”
________________
A professional troll might be, but how many really good professional trolls are there, and what are the chances that you would ever directly encounter one?
The rest are just Leftist malcontents looking to stir up trouble.
But you raise an interesting question.
The troll is there to damage the site (at least the professional is).
Like a cockroach that invades your pantry.
If you do nothing, capitulate, then the cockroach will breed and defile everything in the pantry.
Or you can kill it.
Which is the better course of action?
Capitulation, or confrontation?
If you do nothing, you’re guaranteed to lose.
If you take him on, at least you have a chance to humiliate him and chase him away — or if you’re good, you will almost certainly chase him away.
How is that bad?
I guess I don’t understand how ignoring a troll causes him to go away. I know everybody says that’s what you should do (e.g., ‘don’t feed the trolls’), I’ve just never seen that strategy succeed. Not with trolls or anything else.
If you ignore an irritant, it doesn’t go away… it gets worse!

SteveInCO

Or you can kill it.
Which is the better course of action?
Capitulation, or confrontation?
If you do nothing, you’re guaranteed to lose.

Nice argument from analogy, but the sort of troll I am thinking of is fundamentally different from a cockroach. He can do little harm so long as he is ignored; he accomplishes his goal by getting you to react.

cthulhu

In 2015, I had a situation where a fellow commenter and I were sending videos to each other via tinyurl. One of the ones I was sent wasn’t a video — it was a malware drop that included a keylogger. It took me three days to figure out what the heck was going on, at which point I burned all the hardware I had been operating back to the walls and slowly began to rebuild carefully and securely. I happened to mention this on the blog and the possibility of Federal charges, and the guy went nuts with ridiculously over-the-top behavior that got him banned and all his posts deleted…..which punched a major hole in my ability to sue the guy or have him criminally prosecuted.
I’m a fan of Wolf’s standpoint. Preserve the evidence.

cthulhu

My reply got widely separated from what I was replying to. I was responding to the sentences, “As for the people who post, it should be a rare thing that anyone WANTS their post removed. Certainly, anyone can make an honest mistake, but if you took the time to write a post in the first place, then clarifying it with a follow-up post makes more sense than erasing the original and starting from scratch.”
My assailant reasonably believed that if he dialed-up his attacks to 11, he might get banned to the point where he would be purged from the comment database and not just muzzled…..which suited his purposes because this would help obscure that he had been performing actual Federal crimes. He very much WANTED his posts removed, because several of them could link him to my attacker and one of them was a tinyurl to a malware site.
And, in case anyone is wondering, this refers to roughly June, 2015, at AoSHQ, and my interactions (as cthulhu) with “Ira Weatheral”….who, in real life, is very likely to be Jon Ericson of San Jose. If I could have subpoena’d the deleted records, he might be in jail and I might own his house.

cthulhu

He had a post where he expressed that it was unfair that I had “cthulhu” as a nick. I noted that I’d been “cthulhu” on a variety of systems back to 1981 and that “Ira Weatheral” had its own desirable history. I had many posts about how I was figuring out what was going on, and he had helpful suggestions — just like an arsonist fireman.
I thought we were relatively friendly rivals until things went massively bad. The last electronic account I shut down (by phone) was Discover Card — they said, “last night” when I asked them when my last access had happened. I had not had a functional computer able to contact the internet for two weeks prior.
In one of the times that he had control of my email account (on AOL — whose security was laughable), he sent a threat to my fiancee.

cthulhu

I am, BTW, thankful that I had to put up with this BS and learn security before ransomware became popular. The internet is much more nasty than it was in 2015, and I am much better prepared.

cthulhu

Responding to Wolf beyond the indenting…..if the guy is who I think he is, his wife is significantly more accomplished as a sputtering engineer — which puts her in charge of touchy $3M+ devices for semiconductor processing. In her social media, there are some indications that he “fell on his head” at some point. When he engaged me, I believe he was just a script kiddy and got the recipe for dropping the keylogger from a site he didn’t fully understand. As mentioned previously, he went into significant gyrations when it became clear that dropping keyloggers went beyond LOL and high-fiving. There are negative indications that my attack had a nation-state or professional basis.
That said, it sidelined 12 different online computers and cost me >$3K in digital forensics, not to mention a total redesign in home networks — hint for the hackers: there are currently more than three active subnetworks, all of whom are hostile to invaders. There were another half-dozen laptops that have been sidelined.
As a CPA, I have to safeguard client data. It’s not just jacking some guy named “cthulhu”. Just like it wasn’t just jacking some random guy on AOL when https://www.theguardian.com/technology/2016/jan/12/james-clapper-director-national-intelligence-phone-hacking .
Nasty, awful tools are available to anyone — not just nations/states — and the level of nastiness has gone from keyloggers to ransomware. It’s a jungle out there.

andyocoregon

Precisely why I left CTH and came here.

GA/FL

Wolfie – You are the best and wisest owner/manager/overseer ever.
It’s been such a breath of fresh air – and a joy to watch you do it!!

GA/FL

Total opposite of other places and a particular one most of us remember all too well….

michaelh

No fightin’ words, got it

ozzytrumpster

And the prize for brevity goes to Michael.
I’m sure Wolfe can get you a gold star

scott467

“No fightin’ words, got it”
________________
But from another perspective, ‘fightin’ words’ are important.
Nearly every time people have yelled at me here for saying something that might be ‘too close to the edge’ it has been in response to a direct threat to our freedom or our lives.
If someone makes a direct threat against our freedom or our lives, we have an obligation to directly confront that threat in self-defense.
And there is TREMENDOUS and NECESSARY value in doing so!
First, it lets the threat know that you are alert and you will defend yourself.
Second, it is an ENCOURAGEMENT to all of those who see it.
Just imagine if every time one of us got picked on, nobody said anything. Nobody stood up, nobody challenged, nobody said nuthin’.
Weakness PROVOKES further aggression.
By contrast, not only does a strong and direct rebuke STOP aggression, it also emboldens all of your compatriots.
Some may say that I’m just ‘shouting into the void’.
If so, then nobody is harmed, so there’s nothing to worry about, is there?
But if it’s NOT just shouting into the void, if it is echoed by a thousand other Americans shouting at the same antagonist, that has an effect.
An effect that would never happen, if we all muzzled ourselves.
Remember when that pig in cleats, Lo-retta Lynch, said people better watch what they say about muzzies?
She had to walk that back on the double-goose step:
………………………
Loretta Lynch Vows to Prosecute Those Who Use ‘Anti-Muslim’ Speech That ‘Edges Toward Violence’
https://www.dailywire.com/news/1593/loretta-lynch-vows-prosecute-those-who-use-anti-james-barrett
“UPDATE: After strong backlash against her comments on speech that “edges toward violence,” Lynch seemed to, as Politico puts it, “recalibrate” her language in a press conference Monday, underscoring that her department would only prosecute “deeds not words.” ”
………………………
And that wasn’t the only time she stepped in it as AG.
Not by a long shot.
Are WORDS not the preferred weapons that what we HAVE at our disposal.
If our WORDS are silenced — either by threats from the enemy or self-censorship in response to threats from the enemy — then what weapons does that leave us?
And whatever the answer to that question is, is it better or worse than words?
Because that’s the choice we have.
We can use words as weapons of self-defense, or we can use something more tangible.
If words are taken away, then isn’t the choice taken away, also?

ozzytrumpster

What I was trying to express a few days ago re language and it’s usurpation by the left. All double speak now. We need to take back our language. It’s not trivial, it the weft of the weave of our culture. And I want everything back that these commies have taken. Everything

ozzytrumpster

Thanks Wolfe. Got into the middle of a spat. I think I’m on fg&c’s shit list but I expect that’s not a difficult feat. Delete this if you feel it will wind things up again

scott467

“And this is why I will GO TO JAIL rather than ever obeying a “hate speech” law. ”
_________________
I don’t believe it is possible for ANY ‘hate speech law’ to withstand a direct challenge to the Supreme Court.
At least not one packed with Leftist activists.
Not if they’ve ever read the Constitution or have a shred of honesty.

Deplorable Patriot

comment image
No, really, umm…it is okay to take a walk before commenting in order to have a clear head if someone here ticks you off. (I do it from time to time.) It is also okay to simply not respond to idiocy. Not every thought needs to be published. Threats of bodily harm especially.
That being said, with all the information flowing on this site, someone out there with the time and patience to gather all self-reported information about any of us could come up with pretty accurate dossiers. There are days it becomes worrisome.
Just throwing that out there. Social media is not the only place where the opposition can go to gather personal information on us.
As for the food fights, may they all resemble this one. Word is it took a week to film because Tony Curtis kept getting beaned.

TheseTruths

“That being said, with all the information flowing on this site, someone out there with the time and patience to gather all self-reported information about any of us could come up with pretty accurate dossiers. There are days it becomes worrisome.”
I often think this.

michaelh

Jam it with disinfo 😉

NebraskaFilly

IMO, if someone is so all-fired worried about that, they shouldn’t be posting on social media at all, anywhere.

Cuppa Covfefe

Pointman has a series of posts about that (doxxing, of a sort) and chiefio has a bunch more about creating a confusingly diverse internet presence. Between the two of those, there’s a lot of info to learn from. EFF also has a lot of interesting infos (even though they’re painfully liberal)…
In this response I have links about trolls, and hunting them down (which can help when looked at from the other direction) https://wqth.wordpress.com/2019/06/06/dear-maga-20190606-open-topic/comment-page-1/#comment-168011
and here’s some infos from chiefio’s site about obfuscation and even mesh networking (not the kind sold by AVM and their Fritz!Boxes): https://wqth.wordpress.com/2019/06/06/dear-maga-20190606-open-topic/comment-page-1/#comment-168026
There are ways to “salt the hash” as it were…

Cuppa Covfefe

“Brandy, throw more Brandy”….
“Rum – I never mix my pies”…
Great scene, great talent. Probably the eco loons wouldn’t let it be filmed today. No sense of humor have they…

Deplorable Patriot

Supposedly, they left the set in the evening and didn’t clean it up. Imagine what that was like after a week of no refrigeration.

Cuppa Covfefe

Wonder if they filmed in in summer… mmmmmhhh, nothing like twice-fermented brandy/rum/whatever 🙂
Would be interesting to look at the buildup of pies on the floor to figure out what day of the filming it was… Gosh, I just invented a new field: pie-fight forensics…

PHC

My apologies in advance wolfie, if this comment causes you any trouble……………………………
But I say to any an all that would infringe upon my rights; ………………….in any way………………….
Fuck you, and everything you try to do.
If you can’t handle the truth…………………read elsewhere.

scott467

I’m with PHC!
(and glad to see you!)

PHC

Likewise, Scott

ozzytrumpster

Way to go pat. Still breathing fire!
Ps how DO dragons blowout candles?

PHC

Fart on them?

ozzytrumpster

nfi

PHC

Just a guess, LOL

ozzytrumpster

If their breath is fire then their farts would surely melt diamonds
Someone posted this the other day. Hilariouscomment image

PHC

LOL
Hi wheatie
❤❤❤❤❤

ozzytrumpster

Eh… take the time to check out anonymous conservative blog. It’s going hot methinks

PHC

Ok

wheatietoo

Hi Patrick!
😍🙋
*waves furiously*
😘 *smooches*
💖❤️💖

pgroup

Still feisty as all git out, I see. Spoken like a true warrior.
Hope you’re doing well.

PHC

Doin ok, pgroup
TY

wheatietoo

Miranda Rights.
When someone is read their ‘Miranda Rights’…is that a form of censorship?
“You have the right to remain silent. Anything you say will be taken down and can be used against you in court. …”
That is a form of ‘self-censorship’ isn’t it?
It is also called…”The Miranda Warning”.
Which is right.
It’s a warning that whatever you say to law enforcement, might be used against you.
In a sense, people should be ‘Mirandized’ before they say anything on social media.
If law enforcement is ‘monitoring’ whatever we say online…and in the case of NSA data, anything we say electronically…then basically it’s like we are already in custody and anything we say can be used against us.
I am waiting for some enterprising attorney to use this as a defense.
If I were an attorney…I would try to use that:
‘My client was not read his Miranda Rights before he made those statements…therefore his statements cannot be used against him.’
Since we live in an age where ‘precedents’ create new laws…then all it would take is some Judge ruling that this is a valid defense…and voila!, online threats would get a pass, unless it can be shown that the person had been Mirandized before they said it.
If I may, I think that this is basically what our Wolfie is saying to us here:
Anything we say can be used against us.
So we have to be wise and choose our words accordingly.
In our Founders’ day…dueling was legal.
If you said something that someone was offended by, then you could be called out into a duel to defend your words.
So the term “fighting words” had a different meaning back then.
Self-censorship was a matter of life-and-death back then.
Nevertheless…our Founders valued the right of Free Speech so much that they made it a part of our Constitution.
They did so, though, with the knowledge that one might be called upon to defend their words with their life.
People might be a lot more civil these days…if dueling were still legal.
Heheh.

scott467

“When someone is read their ‘Miranda Rights’…is that a form of censorship?”
________________
I don’t think so…
That is a warning for someone who has already come into contact with police for an alleged violation of law.
That warning was required by Law for our protection from abusive practices by law enforcement.
In other words, ‘Miranda’ wasn’t another weapon in the government’s arsenal, it was a ‘defense’ or a ‘shield’ for ‘We the People’.
And ‘censorship’ is a weapon, not a protection or a shield.
That’s why I don’t think ‘Miranda’ is a form of censorship.

wheatietoo

Yes, I agree…it’s a warning meant to protect us.
Which is how I view this thread-post from Wolf.
😏😉

scott467

“Yes, I agree…it’s a warning meant to protect us.
Which is how I view this thread-post from Wolf.”
________________
I see what you did there 😁
Regarding Wolf’s point, I’m just not sure how it works in practice.
I mean, this website is hardly a bastion of radical political violence (toward anyone).
I suspect the ‘chilling effect’ (i.e., self-censorship) is a far greater danger than anything members here would ever say.
I don’t think I’ve ever seen anyone say anything here that would be considered a legitimate threat to anyone, and Wolf said the same thing in a post up-thread.
So I’m not sure what we CAN do, that we’re not already doing, or why we should try to do MORE, when nobody can recall a time when anyone did anything wrong to begin with…

scott467

I just don’t want us to lose our spirit of resistance, our willingness to push back every time they push us.
PHC was absolutely inspiring in his earlier post.
Like Jim Bowie, insisting he be carried over the line at the Alamo.
He’s not quitting… and neither am I. 🙂
[and if you happen to see this Patrick, I am praying for you each day and night 👍]
And I know you’re not quitting either, in fact, just the opposite.
I don’t like the spirit of fear, and those of us who are Christians are not to be a fearful People anyway.
And maybe counter-intuitively, I think the most outspoken people have the least to fear.
If I was a corrupt government prosecutor, and I wanted to make an example out of someone, I wouldn’t pick someone who understands the power of the pen, and that the pen is mightier than the sword.
I wouldn’t pick someone who is an effective communicator, someone who can defend himself and who wouldn’t hesitate to take the fight to the dirty prosecutor.
It used to be that, referring to the newspapers, it was considered foolish to argue with people who ‘buy ink by the barrel’.
Today, because of the Internet, we don’t even have to buy ink.
It’s (effectively) FREE.
We have all the ink in world.
But if we don’t USE it, we will LOSE it.

ozzytrumpster

In other words not be the asshole to fuck with

michaelh

To the “words are violence” crowd (mob) it doesn’t matter what’s true, what matters is what they can get away with, what sticks.
So yes: Objects in mirror are closer than they appear.
But we also have to push back against lawfare abuses of the legal framework.
Just like the shifting definition of “hate speech” or “racism” we can’t let them get away with moving the goalposts so that they always win and we always lose.
As someone once told me: Use it or lose it.

ozzytrumpster

Ok. I get it. I’m fucked.
And as such no point in a filter

scott467

“In a sense, people should be ‘Mirandized’ before they say anything on social media.”
___________________
Except how is what people say ON the Interwebs any different than what we say OFF the interwebs?
Free Speech is Free Speech, on or off the web.
Should we be ‘Mirandized’ every day before we leave home?
Sounds hyper-Orwellian, doesn’t it?
Why would it be any less hyper-Orwellian, on social media?
We have to stop with this bogus idea that any speech we dislike gets us thrown in jail.
For my whole life, the only ‘tests’ for speech that could get you in trouble were these:
1) yelling ‘Fire’ in a crowded theater
2) threatening the life of the president
3) see numbers 1 & 2
Today nobody would be charged for yelling ‘fire’ in a theater, and for sure nobody is EVER charged with threatening the life of the president… unless anyone has seen Kathy Griffin wearing horizontal black and white stripes recently?
These rules worked fine for centuries before I was born, and continued to work fine right up until about 10 years ago.
Eliminate the Left, and the whole WORLD could go back to normal.
Or don’t eliminate the Left, and the insanity will grow until it reaches terminal velocity.

wheatietoo

“Except how is what people say ON the Interwebs any different than what we say OFF the interwebs?”
__________
The difference is…it is already in writing.
So what we say online has already been ‘taken down’ and is more easily ‘used against us’ than verbal statements.
…………………
“…and for sure nobody is EVER charged with threatening the life of the president…”
__________
Several people were charged and jailed, for making threats against HusseinO.
I remember in the aftermath of that severed-head stunt by Kathy Griffin, people posted links to stories of how many people were “still in jail” from making threats against the O.

scott467

“Several people were charged and jailed, for making threats against HusseinO.”
________________
Oh, naturally.
My point was that nobody is jailed for making threats against DJT.
Why?
Why is there such a bright, clear and shining double standard of Law, in a nation that is founded on the idea that all men are equal under Law?
I keep hoping we might get an Attorney General who would have the balls to address that question, and ANSWER it.

scott467

“The difference is…it is already in writing.
So what we say online has already been ‘taken down’ and is more easily ‘used against us’ than verbal statements.”
____________________
How do you know that your verbal statements aren’t all being taken down too?
How do you know your ‘smart TV’ isn’t recording everything you say in your home, along with all the other devices that have microphones (including your computer)?
How do you know your cell phone isn’t being used to record everything you say when you’re away from home?
Free speech is free speech, or it isn’t.
Anything we do or say can be ‘used against us’, 24/7/365.
I can’t live in fear of ‘violating’ some ‘unseen eye in the sky’.
I just can’t.
I can’t live that way.
I won’t live that way.
This is OUR country, NOT ‘theirs’.
So if they want to come get me, and make me a star, then… come get me. Or, you know, try.
And I will do everything I can to make sure they regret it, before, during and after.
But I’m not going to stop being who I am.
It’s not even an act of defiance.
I just don’t have any idea how to not be who I am 😁

wheatietoo

Defiance is good.
I like defiance.
This country was founded by defiance…and thank God for it!
But who does it serve if we let our defiance make us fall into the traps that our enemies set for us?
When our patriot ancestors avoided the traps that the British set for them…it did not make them any less defiant.
They were simply being smart about their defiance.
You can defiantly stand on a railroad track and curse the railroad…and then get run over by a train.
Or you can defiantly use your smarts to avoid the traps that are being set for us.
You are free to choose.

scott467

“Or you can defiantly use your smarts to avoid the traps that are being set for us.
You are free to choose.”
_______________
But when are we using our smarts to avoid the traps, and when are we just being cowed into silence — and how do you tell the difference?
Because it seems it would be very easy to knuckle-under, while telling ourselves that we’re just being smart.
And that may be the most dangerous trap of all.
And the most common.
If it were not so, we wouldn’t be in this predicament.
It would have been stopped a long time ago, before it ever got this bad.
Were the people who let happen smartly avoiding traps?
Or were they just keeping their head down, when they needed to stand up and be counted?

wheatietoo

It’s not like we have only two settings…
Making Threats — or — Silence.
No one is saying “be silent”.
Are you saying that you’re incapable of expressing your thoughts in a way that cannot be mischaracterized as a ‘threat’?
Sure…be vocal.
Express your displeasure and disgust at what is going on.
Be defiant.
But our enemies and the enemedia are trying to characterize us as “Violent Trump Supporters”.
I don’t plan on handing them anything that they can use against me.
That would be giving them what they want.
Covington kid Nick Sandmann stood there stoically while that agitator banged a drum in his face.
In the face of that provocation…he defiantly refused to give his tormentor what they wanted.
Nick Sandmann was defiant in his silence.
You are not stupid, Scott.
I think you understand what I am saying here.

ozzytrumpster

Actually yelling fire in a crowded theatre is not frowned apron if there IS a fire

SteveInCO

‘My client was not read his Miranda Rights before he made those statements…therefore his statements cannot be used against him.

That would absolutely never fly…unfortunately.
It would exclude anything you ever said to a cop from court, even at a traffic stop, or when they’re trying to investigate a traffic accident or burglary.

wheatietoo

In a sane world, you would be right…
But we live in an age when the Supreme Court ruled that two homosexuals have the ‘right’ to get married, for example.
😜😒
It wasn’t that long ago, when that “would absolutely never fly”.

B.b.S.s.Saint

To tired for discourse tonight, so I am in the words of Twisted Sister, Not Going to Take it Anymore!!
I ask that YAH loose the Powers of the Heavenly Host and let this battle be done! May our eyes be opened to the powers and host that are surrounding us. Be strong and of good courage fellow patriot warriors. Hubby has said many times over, our forefathers would have been shooting by now. Armor up in God’s armor and pray, show up, and keep speaking out Patriots.
Don’t let today be the day that is not worth chewing through the restraints! Chew away!

B.b.S.s.Saint

You too Wolf, we live to fight another day.

thinkthinkthink

#MARTINGEDDES curated links to articles on #CENSORSHIP (pretty good)…
https://mailchi.mp/martingeddes/censorship-special-report-social-and-news-media

thinkthinkthink

comment image

daughnworks247

I have a LOT to say about censorship but here it is in spurts.
In no particular order —
1. Only one time did I run into a comment here which I was worried about and attempted to “edit”. It was the “N” word, BUT it was written in quotes and vernacular of the era. I cannot edit a word or comment, only Wolfie can do that part. Bottom line, the comment would have been easily defended.
2. The vast majority of this problem is unique to the internet. We lose context, tone, sarcasm, etc., in a printed word. If I type “that bastard (could be anyone) needs to go down”, it could be taken as a threat. OTOH, if you know me, and were standing in the kitchen next to me, a jury of my peers would never think I meant anyone harm. In extreme cases, anonymity encourages bad behavior. People tend to type things they would never say in person.
3. The incident of the “secret” Facebook group for Border Patrol agents being outed by media and Congresswoman AOC is akin to Goebbels at his peak. A private group, a secret group, indicates an expectation of privacy. The claim that the privilege should be broken because these are federal employees is wrong. Are we allowed to see all of Nadler, Pelosi, Schumer, Schiff, AND their staffs private communications? We should be —- as they are also federal employees. Does the threat continue past written communications? We have the NSA ability to turn on any phone at any time. Can anyone SAY anything anymore????????? Or have an expectation that the conversation is private?
4. It’s a problem of ethics. A general LACK of ethics and double standard of law and lack of consequences so prevalent in our society today. Lack of guilt, following “the Golden Rule”, and breakdown of trust in churches which has added to the problem.
I know three people on my street who are on SS disability who are not disabled at all. I’m paying for it and it is infuriating.
Bill Clinton can lie about Monica Lewinsky – but no penalty. I had a hard time explaining to my 11yr old why the President can LIE and get away with it, but he was grounded because he lied to me.
Obama Administration was the nail in the coffin of culpability. DOJ was turned upside down. Until there is RETRIBUTION – the problem will continue.
Censorship for conservatives and not for blue check marked liberals is the SAME issue.
We all KNOW what Comey/McCabe/Clapper/Brennan have done to the President of the USA. All these people have great jobs, they’re on television daily, lauded by others, not shunned, no penalty.
Why should the rest of us follow the rules?
The ethics and morality of the nation is slipping………. downhill……. rapidly.