Apparently freedom of expression is a luxury, not a right, that can be exercised unfettered only by the 'chosen ones' of the politically correct.
This is the subject of my article today at Columbia Conservative Examiner.
Give it a read. This is one of the most important, yet controversial, subjects of our time.
Showing posts with label freedom of speech. Show all posts
Showing posts with label freedom of speech. Show all posts
Saturday, May 02, 2009
Monday, January 26, 2009
'2009: The Year to Defend Free Speech'
All over the world at this hour free speech is being attacked as perhaps never before in the history of modern civilization. Liberal politicians and extremist Muslims have forged an alliance of sorts that views speaking one's mind on matters such as religion and politics a dangerous endeavor that should be forbidden.
Several high profile cases provide the perfect examples.
Last year National Review columnist Mark Steyn was placed on trial in a human rights tribunal in Canada for merely suggesting that the Muslim attack on European culture is dangerous.
In the Netherlands, freedom-fighter Geert Wilders is presently under indictment for 'speaking against Islam.'
During the 2008 Presidential campaign, Barack Obama blacklisted and punished radio and television stations that ran ads by the McCain campaign that were critical of Obama's ideas.
This, along with the Democrats' intention to squelch conservative speech on the airwaves using a variety of means, including but not limited to 'the (UN)Fairness Doctrine, bodes an ill omen for freedom of speech.
We are even hearing rumblings among the Left that any conservative who vehemently opposes and/or speaks out against the Obama vision for socialism in this country is to be considered 'a traitor.'
The following article at National Review, written by two courageous patriots, Geert Wilders and Robert Spencer, lays out in stark detail the world-wide attack on free speech and what we can do about it.
2009 will be a watershed year for human liberty.
Several high profile cases provide the perfect examples.
Last year National Review columnist Mark Steyn was placed on trial in a human rights tribunal in Canada for merely suggesting that the Muslim attack on European culture is dangerous.
In the Netherlands, freedom-fighter Geert Wilders is presently under indictment for 'speaking against Islam.'
During the 2008 Presidential campaign, Barack Obama blacklisted and punished radio and television stations that ran ads by the McCain campaign that were critical of Obama's ideas.
This, along with the Democrats' intention to squelch conservative speech on the airwaves using a variety of means, including but not limited to 'the (UN)Fairness Doctrine, bodes an ill omen for freedom of speech.
We are even hearing rumblings among the Left that any conservative who vehemently opposes and/or speaks out against the Obama vision for socialism in this country is to be considered 'a traitor.'
The following article at National Review, written by two courageous patriots, Geert Wilders and Robert Spencer, lays out in stark detail the world-wide attack on free speech and what we can do about it.
2009 will be a watershed year for human liberty.
Saturday, November 15, 2008
Obama Receives Spike in Death Threats
Texas Fred reports on a story from the AP that says Barack Obama has received more death threats than any other President-elect in U.S. history.
It should be noted that ALL Presidents-elect receive these threats after a Presidential election. It comes with the territory.
But what is curious is the fact that Obama has received more than anyone else.
Now let me be very clear about this. Only a nutcase would personally threaten a United States President, Barack Obama included. Such a thing is simply over the top, and 99.99% of Americans, including me, would never even think about participating in such a brazen act.
To be sure, the 56 million Americans who voted against Barack Obama have been very emotional, sometimes heated, in our outrage that someone with Obama's political ideology could actually get elected to the White House.
We can expect the heated debate to continue.
But personal threats?
Deranged and unstable persons can often be pushed over the edge by forceful rhetoric. And the widespread fear of Obama and a Democratic majority in Congress may well have pushed the most unstable among us over the edge to the point of doing something stupid.
In the New Testament, for example, Jesus uses vivid and stunning imagery to describe the importance of avoiding placing oneself in a position to be tempted to do wrong. He said, 'If your hand offends you, cut it off. Better for your hand to burn in hell than your entire body. And if your eye offends you, gouge it out, for better to go to heaven blind than for the whole body to burn in hell.'
The imagery is metaphor, that is, not to be taken literally.
But the emotionally disturbed have been known to read those statements of Jesus and proceed to mutilate themselves, as if doing so will keep them from sin.
Those of us who are Jeffersonian libertarians have often stated that we would never fire the first shot against forces of tyranny who seek to rob us of our rights and property. Tyrannical government will always have to make the first move.
But we will not hesitate to defend ourselves against the forces of anti-freedom who wish to rob us of our guns, our property, our freedom to speak our minds, including engaging in heated political debate, our right to worship as we please, print what we please as citizen journalists, and to assemble to discuss our shared values.
These are clear rights given to all human beings by God and enumerated in and protected by the Constitution of the United States.
But as patriots who love our country and who wish to see ALL human beings free, we would never initiate any harm to anyone unless in self-defense and in response to an overt threat to our lives and liberties.
I write this today in order to differentiate us and what we are about from those who are intent on doing harm to others unprovoked. Strict Constitutionalists believe that murder is evil. We are guided by clear-cut principles, moral principles, that allow killing only under certain specified conditions, self-defense being the primary condition.
It should be noted that ALL Presidents-elect receive these threats after a Presidential election. It comes with the territory.
But what is curious is the fact that Obama has received more than anyone else.
Now let me be very clear about this. Only a nutcase would personally threaten a United States President, Barack Obama included. Such a thing is simply over the top, and 99.99% of Americans, including me, would never even think about participating in such a brazen act.
To be sure, the 56 million Americans who voted against Barack Obama have been very emotional, sometimes heated, in our outrage that someone with Obama's political ideology could actually get elected to the White House.
We can expect the heated debate to continue.
But personal threats?
Deranged and unstable persons can often be pushed over the edge by forceful rhetoric. And the widespread fear of Obama and a Democratic majority in Congress may well have pushed the most unstable among us over the edge to the point of doing something stupid.
In the New Testament, for example, Jesus uses vivid and stunning imagery to describe the importance of avoiding placing oneself in a position to be tempted to do wrong. He said, 'If your hand offends you, cut it off. Better for your hand to burn in hell than your entire body. And if your eye offends you, gouge it out, for better to go to heaven blind than for the whole body to burn in hell.'
The imagery is metaphor, that is, not to be taken literally.
But the emotionally disturbed have been known to read those statements of Jesus and proceed to mutilate themselves, as if doing so will keep them from sin.
Those of us who are Jeffersonian libertarians have often stated that we would never fire the first shot against forces of tyranny who seek to rob us of our rights and property. Tyrannical government will always have to make the first move.
But we will not hesitate to defend ourselves against the forces of anti-freedom who wish to rob us of our guns, our property, our freedom to speak our minds, including engaging in heated political debate, our right to worship as we please, print what we please as citizen journalists, and to assemble to discuss our shared values.
These are clear rights given to all human beings by God and enumerated in and protected by the Constitution of the United States.
But as patriots who love our country and who wish to see ALL human beings free, we would never initiate any harm to anyone unless in self-defense and in response to an overt threat to our lives and liberties.
I write this today in order to differentiate us and what we are about from those who are intent on doing harm to others unprovoked. Strict Constitutionalists believe that murder is evil. We are guided by clear-cut principles, moral principles, that allow killing only under certain specified conditions, self-defense being the primary condition.
Tuesday, June 10, 2008
NRO Weighs in On Its Embattled Reporter
National Review Online, the Internet version of the venerable conservative magazine National Review, has offered its defense of its embattled reporter Mark Steyn.
Steyn has been on trial before a human rights tribunal in British Columbia for 'inciting Islamophobia' resulting from the reprinting of excerpts from Steyn's book in the Canadian magazine Mclean's.
The book catalogues the growth and influence of radical Islam in Europe.
Muslim groups in Canada were offended. And thus, they began a search for a venue that would take seriously their charge of Islamophobia, and they found one in the human rights tribunal in British Columbia.
As you will see for yourself in the report issued by National Review, the government's case against Steyn has been a joke. The entire fiasco would be laughable were it not deadly serious. Freedom of speech and freedom of the press are at stake.
Even so, most of the media, including most bloggers, have been totally silent on Steyn's plight and Canada's shame.
The article linked below, written collectively by the editors at National Review, is must-reading for anyone who values basic, fundamental human rights.
http://article.nationalreview.com/?q=NTY3NGU4ZDJmNDM1OWVkZmYwMjUzYTJiM2JlYmQ5Y2Q=
Steyn has been on trial before a human rights tribunal in British Columbia for 'inciting Islamophobia' resulting from the reprinting of excerpts from Steyn's book in the Canadian magazine Mclean's.
The book catalogues the growth and influence of radical Islam in Europe.
Muslim groups in Canada were offended. And thus, they began a search for a venue that would take seriously their charge of Islamophobia, and they found one in the human rights tribunal in British Columbia.
As you will see for yourself in the report issued by National Review, the government's case against Steyn has been a joke. The entire fiasco would be laughable were it not deadly serious. Freedom of speech and freedom of the press are at stake.
Even so, most of the media, including most bloggers, have been totally silent on Steyn's plight and Canada's shame.
The article linked below, written collectively by the editors at National Review, is must-reading for anyone who values basic, fundamental human rights.
http://article.nationalreview.com/?q=NTY3NGU4ZDJmNDM1OWVkZmYwMjUzYTJiM2JlYmQ5Y2Q=
Sunday, June 08, 2008
Canada Under Free Speech Muzzle
The so-called 'human rights tribunal' in British Columbia, Canada has completed its trial of National Review columnist and political commentator Mark Steyn. Steyn has been charged with 'Islamophobia' resulting from his article that was reprinted in the Canadian magazine McLean's on the subject of the growing oppressive influence of radical Islam in Europe.
It has not been mentioned as to when we can expect a verdict to be rendered.
Human rights activists have pointed to the Steyn case as proof positive that Canada has fallen victim to totalitarianism, where free speech and other basic human rights are not respected.
If Steyn loses before the tribunal in Canada, we can kiss goodbye not only free speech but freedom of the press throughout Canada. The very fact that Steyn was hauled before a tribunal for a trial has already placed a chilling muzzle on free speech in the country.
The liberal, mainstream media has been into its typical hysteria over 'Islamophobia' in the aftermath of the trial. One prominent news organization in Canada went as far as to say that the article written by Steyn resulted in mass Islamophobia, threats of violence against Muslims, and the push to convert Muslims to Christianity. The problem is that no such thing has occurred.
One would think that the arrest and trial of a journalist over a free speech/free press issue would bring forth howls of protest from the mainstream media, no matter what political ideology they lean toward. Not so. Rather, the mainstream media has vilified Steyn as a 'rebel rouser' of sorts. Oblivious to the fact that what happens to Steyn may well directly muzzle them as well, the mainstream media seems to believe that they are safe from the long arm of progressive government totalitarianism.
Perhaps the Press in Canada should think again. It may be only Steyn now. It will be THEM next.
For more information on the Mark Steyn case, click here:
http://www.freemarksteyn.com/
And here is Mark Steyn's website:
http://www.marksteyn.com/
It has not been mentioned as to when we can expect a verdict to be rendered.
Human rights activists have pointed to the Steyn case as proof positive that Canada has fallen victim to totalitarianism, where free speech and other basic human rights are not respected.
If Steyn loses before the tribunal in Canada, we can kiss goodbye not only free speech but freedom of the press throughout Canada. The very fact that Steyn was hauled before a tribunal for a trial has already placed a chilling muzzle on free speech in the country.
The liberal, mainstream media has been into its typical hysteria over 'Islamophobia' in the aftermath of the trial. One prominent news organization in Canada went as far as to say that the article written by Steyn resulted in mass Islamophobia, threats of violence against Muslims, and the push to convert Muslims to Christianity. The problem is that no such thing has occurred.
One would think that the arrest and trial of a journalist over a free speech/free press issue would bring forth howls of protest from the mainstream media, no matter what political ideology they lean toward. Not so. Rather, the mainstream media has vilified Steyn as a 'rebel rouser' of sorts. Oblivious to the fact that what happens to Steyn may well directly muzzle them as well, the mainstream media seems to believe that they are safe from the long arm of progressive government totalitarianism.
Perhaps the Press in Canada should think again. It may be only Steyn now. It will be THEM next.
For more information on the Mark Steyn case, click here:
http://www.freemarksteyn.com/
And here is Mark Steyn's website:
http://www.marksteyn.com/
Sunday, June 17, 2007
U.S. Journalists Threatened Under FOREIGN Law!
Saluda, NC (TLS). A dangerous prospect looms over American journalists as increasingly they are made vulnerable to limitations on freedom of speech under FOREIGN law!
My friends, our liberties are under attack as never before in the history of this nation. With the Google and Yahoo turncoats cooperating with Chinese Communists to prosecute citizens over Chinese speech violations, and now with lawsuits threatening to undermine the freedom of speech and freedom of the press of AMERICAN journalists who operate under U.S. law, we find ourselves bombarded on all sides.
Some of our biggest enemies in the process of those you would think would be on OUR side. Yet they entered into faustian deals to squelch liberty in the name of 'being a friendly neighbor' to tyrannical governments.
This has the potential to undermine every single liberty for which our forefathers fought and died.
Read the full story here:
http://www.worldnetdaily.com/news/article.asp?ARTICLE_ID=56207
My friends, our liberties are under attack as never before in the history of this nation. With the Google and Yahoo turncoats cooperating with Chinese Communists to prosecute citizens over Chinese speech violations, and now with lawsuits threatening to undermine the freedom of speech and freedom of the press of AMERICAN journalists who operate under U.S. law, we find ourselves bombarded on all sides.
Some of our biggest enemies in the process of those you would think would be on OUR side. Yet they entered into faustian deals to squelch liberty in the name of 'being a friendly neighbor' to tyrannical governments.
This has the potential to undermine every single liberty for which our forefathers fought and died.
Read the full story here:
http://www.worldnetdaily.com/news/article.asp?ARTICLE_ID=56207
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)