Lies and Character Assassination in the War to Destroy the First Amendment

Now that the corporate state has decided to destroy any social network not on the reservation, we are seeing a spate of stories attacking the founder of Gab, Andrew Tobra. 

Meanwhile, according to the attorney general of Pennsylvania, the First Amendment begets “hate crimes.”

After the propaganda media successfully pegged Steve Bannon as something akin to a Ku Klux Klan Grand Wizard, the Canadian leftist org LeadNow called for Bannon’s free speech to be shut down. 

LeadNow’s website says its mission is “a more open, accountable, and representative democracy,” but this doesn’t apply to Steve Bannon or anyone to the right of Justin Trudeau. 

Jeffrey Scott Shapiro, a former DC prosecutor who worked with Bannon, emphatically declared last year the former Trump strategist is not a racist. Shapiro, who is Jewish, described Bannon’s philosophy as “egalitarian America First.” Bannon said he has “zero tolerance” for “racist or anti-Semitic views.” 

For the corporatist media and the state, however, America First is code for racist, sexist, and generally belligerent, possibly even violent and terroristic thoughtcrimes. 

Remarkably, this surrealistic rearrangement of reality and logic is accepted by millions of Americans. It will be a determinate next Tuesday. 

creatdive commons by-sa_RGB-350x122

7 thoughts on “Lies and Character Assassination in the War to Destroy the First Amendment

  1. Things like racism and the made-up term “hate crime” nonsense is the excuse for control measures. You have a right to be racist and/or hate whoever you want. It’s called having a mind of your own. You also have a right to express that hate.

    The first amendment is inapplicable, as congress is not making laws abridging free speech and expression. The corporate people are the ones using exercising the right to free association and property as their premise for censorship/banishment.

    “Hate speech begets hate crimes.”

    Bullshit. That is equating hate as equivalent to or causal of violence.

    1- There is no such thing as a hate crime. It’s simply crime, which has widely varying numerous reasons. Whether they hate the victim or not is irrelevant. Either it’s a violation/abuse of some kind or it isn’t. Hate by itself is not a crime, but actions can be.

    2 – People are individuals with self determination. Just because someone is hating doesn’t mean they or others have to act on it. If someone does act on your hate, you are not responsible/accountable.

  2. “The Fascist State organizes the nation, but it leaves the individual adequate elbow room.” Benito Mussolini

    *Religious Freedom is our First Freedom*

    Amendment I – Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof; or abridging the freedom of speech, or of the press; or the right of the people peaceably to assemble, and to petition the government for a redress of grievances.

    1. “Religious Freedom is our First Freedom”

      Individualism, self determination/self ownership is. Humans are inalienably individuals with unique minds of our very own. We are not a hive species with a genetic predisposition to dependence upon a hierarchy. We’re individuals who think for ourselves. Religion is about personal beliefs and values, and is just one of those things we decide for ourselves.

      Government violates this right to self determination/self ownership because it forces everything. This is one example of how EVERYTHING government does is violence.

      The bill of rights is a cruel joke, contextualizes everything according to limited or false terms. It is like saying that in order to protect your right to seek/earn food, government will guarantee your access to milk eggs and bologna sandwiches. You don’t have a right to guaranteed access to milk eggs and bologna sandwiches. You have a right to do whatever you have to in order to feed yourself, unless it violates someone, of course. It is not limited to milk eggs and bologna sandwiches, nor is guaranteed access a right. If someone doesn’t want to to sell you food, go elsewhere.

      The whole bill of rights is like that. It’s absurd.

    2. “Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof; or abridging the freedom of speech, or of the press; or the right of the people peaceably to assemble, and to petition the government for a redress of grievances.”

      This does not protect your rights. This cherry picks examples of differing rights and lists them as protected from congressional interference. It also adds rights that do not exist. It’s a mess.

      You have a right to individual free will because you have to think as an individual because god/nature says that’s what humans are/do. You are inalienably an individual with free will choice, self determination. You decide what’s best for you and how you want to spend your time on earth, what you believe and value, etc.

      Freedom of/from religion is one example of this. You cannot believe what someone tells you to. You have to decide that as an individual. But the right itself is about free will, and not only regarding philosophy/religion.

      You have a right to talk about whatever you want to, to express your beliefs and ideas. Humans have the gift of language and reason. This is an extension of the right to free will and self determination, another example thereof. You cannot tell someone what to think and say or write, express, etc.

      There is no freedom of the press as a special right. It is another example of exercising the freedom of expression.

      The right of people to peacefully assemble is one example of the right to free association.

      The right to petition a government for redress of grievances is nonsense, has nothing to do with rights. You weren’t born with a government attached. It is not a natural condition of you being a human. There is no government gene in your body. You were not signed into existence by law. Petitioning government for redress of grievances is a term or condition of government, much like a stipulation in a contractual agreement. It is similar to an auto lease maintenance agreement; Pay me X to burrow my car for 3 years. If it breaks, take it to mechanic shops A or B and they’ll fix it at no additional cost to you.”

      So, it’s recognizing a right to free will and self determination in regard to specific things, in addition to a right to freely associate in a specific manner, and stipulates that congress won’t interfere in these matters as per these terms. It also says that Congress will not breech specific terms of government; petitioning.

      The right to individual free will and self determination is everything that humans think and do. It is not limited to just religion or expression. If you are going to try to protect that right with government against itself, then define it, then stipulate that government can never ever at any time or place violate your right to self determination.

      The way the amendment reads, it is like protecting the right to eat specific foods, never mind all of the other types of foods.

      The right to freely associate is whatever you want to do (except violate others) with whoever is willing. It is not subject to government conveniences or stipulations, is inalienable human social behavior independent of government existence, petitions or grievances.

      Congress not interfering isn’t the same as protecting. It is simply saying that it won’t disrupt these specific things. It’s bullshit for government convenience, not really about protecting your rights.

  3. If you want to protect free speech from corporate censorship and banishment, the people are going to have to ban together and demand it as consumers with boycotts, bankrupt them and not just punish their bank accounts, …which requires the masses zealously value free speech.

    Either social media is supplying a platform for free speech that the people demand, or they aren’t. If they are, there is a sale. If not, someone else is supplying free speech platforms and will get the sale. If there is no one to supply platforms for free speech, then save your money and time for a platform that does. BUT BY NO MEANS SHOULD YOU TOLERATE BUYING CENSORSHIP.

    That is your fix. The problem is that no one values free speech enough to shut them down. They think its about some bullshit on paper/parchment or value convenience of their gadgets and networks more than freedom.


  5. I almost forgot about this huge action I had in my files. Trump also signed it again earlier this year as well.

    Sep. 14, 2017 A permanent emergency Trump becomes third president to renew extraordinary post-9/11 powers

    Proclamation 7463 declared a state of national emergency that has persisted for 16 years and continues to enlist 18,000 guard and reserve Exactly 16 years ago Thursday, President Bush signed Proclamation 7463, giving himself sweeping powers to mobilize the military in the days following terrorist attacks that crashed planes into the World Trade Center, the Pentagon, and a Pennsylvania field. It allowed him to call up National Guard and Reserve troops, hire and fire military officers, and bypass limits on the numbers of generals that could serve.

Leave a Reply

This site uses Akismet to reduce spam. Learn how your comment data is processed.