"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" 

The primary site for this blog mirror is HERE. Dissecting Leftism is HERE (and mirrored here). The Blogroll. My Home Page. Email me (John Ray) here. Other mirror sites: Greenie Watch, Political Correctness Watch, Education Watch, Immigration Watch, Food & Health Skeptic, Gun Watch, Socialized Medicine, Eye on Britain, Recipes, Dissecting Leftism and Australian Politics. For a list of backups viewable in China, see here. (Click "Refresh" on your browser if background colour is missing) See here or here for the archives of this site

31 March, 2011

Federal Trade Commission trying to censor health claims

An allegedly religious organization called "Daniel Chapter One" (DCO) sells dietary supplements which they say help to prevent cancer
"DCO never claimed their supplements were FDA approved or that their use was supported by any oncologist, including the FTC’s paid expert. DCO, which is organized as a religious nonprofit corporation, has consistently promoted their dietary supplements as part of their “Christian spiritual and physical wellness ministry.” You may say that’s just a cover, but I don’t see how anyone — and certainly not the FTC — can objectively determine which religious messages are false, given that all religions rely on things that cannot be empirically proven.

The FTC’s case at trial rested on the belief that speech regarding the health benefits of any product is per se illegal unless it is supported by an FDA clinical trial. The FTC is thus trying to expand the FDA’s authority, without constitutional or congressional consent, to cover products, like dietary supplements, that are not within the FDA’s congressionally defined jurisdiction.

Making any speech illegal until a government agency approves it is a VERY slippery slope.

Shut Palestine Intifada page, Israel tells Facebook

We read:
"The Israeli government is demanding that Facebook remove a page calling on Palestinians to take up arms against Israel. The page, entitled Third Palestinian Intifada, has more than 340,000 fans.

In a letter to Facebook founder Mark Zuckerberg, Israeli cabinet minister Yuli Edelstein says the page includes calls to kill Jews and of "liberating" Jerusalem through violence.

The page features a fist in the colours of the Palestinian flag. It calls on Palestinians to take to the streets after Friday prayers on May 15 and begin an uprising. "Judgment Day will be brought upon us only once the Muslims have killed all of the Jews," it reads.

Edelstein says the page incites to violence and violates Facebook content regulations.

Facebook had no immediate response to a request for comment, however the Bloomberg news service reported that it had received an emailed response from the company.

"While some kinds of comments and content may be upsetting for someone ­ criticism of a certain culture, country, religion, lifestyle, or political ideology, for example - that alone is not a reason to remove the discussion," Facebook spokeswoman Debbie Frost reportedly said in the statement.

"We strongly believe that Facebook users have the ability to express their opinions, and we don’t typically take down content, groups or Pages that speak out against countries, religions, political entities, or ideas."

Facebook has now caved in but a new page has been set up which is substantially the same -- highlighting the folly of censorship attempts in the age of the internet.

As conservatives often say, the answer to disapproved-of speech is more speech, not censorship. So let's see if someone sets up a page saying that Mecca should be nuked. I'm guessing that it would get a big following. What's good for the goose is good for the gander.

30 March, 2011

Some very explicit hate speech from a prominent Louisiana Democrat

We read:
"Although stopping just short of announcing her candidacy for governor, Carolyn Fayard appeared to be a candidate on the stump Thursday night when she was the featured speaker at the Washington Parish Democratic Party banquet at the old K.C. Hall.

Fayard, who last year lost in her bid to replace Mitch Landrieu as Lieutenant governor, delivered a politically charged message to a crowd that approached 150.

“I hate Republicans. I hate Republicans,” Fayard said, drawing some nods and voices of approval from the crowd. “They are cruel and destructive. They eat their young.

“They don’t think. They don’t allow people to think. They are bullies.”

Wow! There's reams of evidence that hate drives the Left but they rarely admit it so openly.

I don't suppose that she meant it literally in saying that GOPers eat their babies but imagine the furore if a Republican had said that about Democrats

And the claim that Republicans don't allow people to think is amusing. It's Democrats who are always trying to suppress speech that they disapprove of. She's just one angry lady and anger is not good for rationality.

Much-read British Columnist Under Investigation For Criticizing Terrorists

Melanie Phillips tells of the complaint against her:
In Great Britain, the historic cradle of liberty and sanctum of freedom of expression, it appears that you can no longer refer to Arab depravity in the slaughter of an Israeli family — including a three month-old baby — as they slept without someone going to the police to get you arrested for racism.

This is what happened to me. I wrote on my blog about the ‘the moral depravity of the Arabs’ who had murdered Udi and Ruth Fogel and their three children, 11-year-old Yoav, four-year-old Elad and three-month-old Hadas in their home in the Samarian neighbourhood of Itamar, near Nablus, by cutting their throats while most of them were asleep.

I also pointed the finger for this atrocity at the ‘savagery’ of the Palestinian Authority, whose educational materials along with the mosques and TV stations under its control incite frenzied hatred of Jews; which teaches its children that the highest aspiration is to murder Israelis; and which glorifies those who perpetrate such unspeakable acts by naming squares and public places after them.

Next thing I knew was that the Guardian ran a story saying I was being investigated by the UK Press Complaints Commission, which had received two complaints about my remarks – and I had also been reported to the Bedfordshire police for racism.

This came as something of a surprise. If I was indeed being investigated, no-one had seen fit to tell me about it. Indeed, at time of writing I still have not heard whether either of these bodies is investigating these complaints at all.

Stranger still was the involvement of the Bedfordshire police. I do not live in Bedfordshire, an area north of London. I have never had anything to do with the place. What could my remarks about the Itamar massacre possibly have to do with Bedfordshire?

A clue lay in the involvement in the Guardian story of a prominent British Muslim activist named Inayat Bunglawala. It was he who had reported me to the Bedfordshire police – and he lives in Bedfordshire.

It would appear that having taken exception to my blog, Bunglawala went to his local police force to complain about my views and expected them to take action against me as a result.

This is unlikely to come to anything but is another commentary on the sad state of Britain today and the psychopathic response of Muslims to Muslim violence

29 March, 2011

Realistic Nevada official criticized

Apparently the Obama administration can raid firms and check on the legality of their employees but everyone else must pretend that there are no illegal Hispanic employees.
"Commissioners in central Nevada's Nye County have voted unanimously to reprimand the county assessor, after she sent emails to the sheriff questioning the citizenship of workers building a new county jail.

Assessor Shirley Matson asked for an investigation of the workers' citizenship or work visa status in a March 11 email to Sheriff Tony DeMeo, the Las Vegas Review-Journal reported.

She wrote that her staff and the public "can plainly see that the construction employees are all Mexican/Latino non-English speaking and I'm getting complaints."

That email was among many between Matson and the sheriff, sent after Matson was elected to a four-year term in November. The sheriff told Matson her remarks were blatantly racist and her request was unconstitutional.

County commissioners agreed in a special meeting Friday that Matson violated the county's personal conduct policy. But they determined they could do little more than issue a public reprimand because she's an elected official.

Commissioner Dan Schinhofen said Matson's apparent viewpoint is: "They look Hispanic, so they must be illegal. Do you see where that could be seen as a bigoted statement? It's bigoted to me."

Matson told commissioners it never dawned on her that her statements might be construed as racially insensitive. She said her email to DeMeo had nothing to do with the issue of illegal immigrants, but was an attempt to protect the county. She recounted working for a San Diego construction company that was fined millions of dollars for hiring illegal immigrants.

More details and commentary here

Wrong to call a pedophile 'a dirty scum pervert'?

We read:
"Up to a dozen [British] police officers are being investigated after making inappropriate comments on their Facebook sites.

Their remarks include comments about wanting to beat up rioting students and describing a suspected paedophile who flashed at children in a play area as `a dirty scum pervert'.

The comments were made by Essex policemen and women who apparently did not realise that their accounts could be read by members of the public.

They were reported by an unnamed man, who said last night: `Police officers are expected to maintain professional standards even when they are off duty - but this lot seem to have forgotten all that.'

The Essex Police professional standards department has launched an inquiry. `A number of officers have been given words of advice about their use of Facebook,' a spokesman said.


28 March, 2011

Canadian academic to be tried for hate speech

He's already been acquitted in one court. He is just a standard antisemitic conspiracy theorist who stated his views on a website. Democrat hero General Wesley Clark appears to have similar views.
"Former University of Saskatchewan instructor Terrence Tremaine will have his day in court for charges of spreading hate speech, reported the Leader-Post.

On Mar. 11, Regina Provincial Court Judge Bruce Henning decided that the crown had provided enough evidence at a preliminary hearing to proceed to a trial. A court date has not yet been set.

In the past Tremaine has declared himself to be the leader of the National-Socialist Party of Canada, an unregistered political party which is dedicated to white sovereignty.

Doug Christie, a lawyer practising in B.C. who once called anti-hate legislation “a massive waste of police resources” according to the Leader-Post, will represent Tremaine in court.

Christie’s previous clients include the late First Nations Leader David Ahenakew, who faced charges of inciting hatred which were later dismissed.

If they don't get him in the next trial, the will most probably keep going to other courts until they get the verdict they want.

That's what they did with Ahenakew. He praised Hitler and called Jews a disease. He was at first convicted of hate speech but they kept appealing the verdict until they finally got him off -- on the grounds that his comments did not show an intent to incite hatred. Only a Canadian could conclude that!

But Ahenakew was a minority person, you see. There are opposite rules for whites and minorities in Canada.

Naughty human Rights staffer in New Zealand

Maori versus Maori
"The Human Rights Commission says it is taking Ngapuhi activist David Rankin's complaint about one of its staff members "very seriously".

Mr Rankin alleges the staff member wrote derogatory and potentially defamatory comments about him on her Facebook page.

"In the latest example, the staff member wrote on a public page 'David Rankin - pokokohua! I can't wait to tell him to his face!' This translates as wanting to boil my head, which is one of the most offensive statements any Maori can make to another Maori."

In his letter, Mr Rankin said the behaviour amounted to hate speech and brought the entire commission into disrepute.

A commission spokesman told NZPA Mr Rankin's letter arrived today and chief commissioner, Rosslyn Noonan, had asked the commission's executive director to investigate and report back to her by next Friday.

I suppose it is vaguely incorrect for a Human Rights staffer to say that she would like to tell a Maori activist to boil his head but it's not inciting violence so one would expect it to be protected as free speech

27 March, 2011

Sounds like Ford has got a glass jaw

We read:
"In the advertising world, the gentle ribbing of competitors is almost a given. Whether its dish soap, paper towels, computer companies or automobiles, poking a little fun at your main rivals is the name of the game. But sometimes a company or its advertising agency goes a little too far, and that sometimes means the long arm of the law is dredged up and forced into service.

Such is the case with corporate rivals Nissan and Ford. Apparently, Nissan ran an advertisement in Brazil for its Tiida (known as the Versa here in the States) that may be most notable for its complete lack of any actual Nissan products. Instead, the commercial revolved solely around the Ford Focus, and specifically its base asking price, which is 3,000 reais ($1,806) higher than the Tiida.

No harm in pointing out that your product is cheaper than a competitor's, right? Well, apparently that depends on how you go about it, as Ford took exception to the use of the two rather irritating rappers and a gaggle of scantily clad bikini models drinking champagne and dancing provocatively around the Focus, explaining how they live in the lap of luxury by overcharging customers. Yeah, it's kind of funny.

Mockery is clearly not a factual claim so a claim of defamation would be hard to sustain.

"Glass jaw" is a boxing term -- meaning someone who is easily knocked out

A troll goes to jail

I rather like this. Tough action in my home town. That smile won't last long in jail
"A man charged over Facebook vandalism for plastering child pornography over sites set up to pay tribute to two slain schoolchildren has been jailed.

The Brisbane District Court was told Bradley Paul Hampson, 29, posted offensive messages and photographs on Facebook "RIP tribute" pages for a 12-year-old boy stabbed at a Brisbane school and a nine-year-old Bundaberg girl abducted and murdered in February last year.

Hampson, of Tarragindi, on Brisbane's southside, today pleaded guilty to two counts using a carriage service, the internet, to cause offence and one each of distributing and possessing child exploitation material between February 14 and June 4 last year.

Prosecutors said Hampson "posted" photographs of one victim with a penis drawn near their mouth and highly offensive messages, including "Woot I'm Dead", "Had It Coming" and others too offensive to publish.

Judge Kerry O'Brien jailed Hamspon for three years, but ordered he be released after serving 12 months.

Trolls have posted some some obscene and offensive comments on this site in times past, and given me a bit of work in deleting them, so I would be happy if all such haters were deterred in some way

They deliberately harass people and there is not much you can do to avoid them. What I did was set up moderation for all comments until they got tired of their comments not appearing. But moderation impedes debate so I am pleased that I no longer have to use it.

When they impose themselves on you, it is very different from making comments that you are free to avoid. It is akin to gatecrashing or trespass on private property.

26 March, 2011

Feminist harpies turned on by stockings

"A family clothing chain that used the image of a dead woman lying under a couch on the cover of its latest catalogue has been accused of sexualising violence against women.

The front page of the Rivers catalogue features a dead woman wearing high heels and fishnet stockings and bears the title "10 Deadly Deals", the Herald Sun reported.

Feminist group Collective Shout, who campaign against the objectification of women in advertising, have called for a boycott of the popular chain.

The group has also complained to the Advertising Standards bureau about a previous cover which featured a naked young women crouching in knee-high stockings with the headline "Get Excited".

"The fishnet tights and high heels and the dead woman under the couch, they're all cues to sexualise an act of violence,'' Ms Liszewski said.

In a statement, Rivers said their female marketing director had chosen the image. "All of our staff are scratching our heads and wondering how on earth the website in question manages to conjure up such weird and draconian interpretations of our catalogue covers,'' it read.


Australian army launches investigation into soldiers' anti-Afghan taunts

We read:
"An investigation has been launched into Facebook posts by Australian soldiers in Afghanistan. Soldiers are accused of describing Afghans as "ragheads", "dune coons", "sand niggaz" and "smelly locals" on Facebook.

In videos, photos and comments posted on the social networking site, troops also allegedly mock the people they have been sent to help.

A video has been posted showing the bombing of a bridge in Afghanistan, which was aired on Seven News last night. When an Afghan bystander is frightened by the bomb, someone can be heard to say "scared the f--- out of that muftee" and "f-----' boom".

Several soldiers list their employer as "F------ Ranga", some under their ADF listing. [A reference to Australia's red-headed Leftist Prime Minister. "Ranga" is common slang for a redhead. It is short for Orang Utan]

One Facebooker wrote that he he had just done an interview with the army and was waiting for a place in cavalry. A soldier replied: "I'm in Afghan ... now. running over c---- yeeha." He later comments: "dune coons, sand niggaz. f--- em all".


My contacts tell me that Afghans are generally unloved by troops serving there. The fact that any one of them could turn on you at any time with firearms or grenades does not promote respect and the very common use of boys for sex is a downer too.

The latter would be fiercely condemned as pedophilia in any one else -- but for Muslims it is OK, of course. Don't blame the troops if they don't buy that "OK", however.

Under those circumstances some contemptuous language about Afghans is to be expected. And soldiers do tend to express themselves in an unsophisticated way.

Even Afghan army troops supposedly working with allied troops have been known to launch treacherous attacks on allied troops. The reports of that have even made it into the media. What would your attitude to Afghans be in those circumstances?

I personally think that the Afghans are uncivilizable, though they were at least not dangerous when they were a British Protectorate. It was of course the Left which created the Afghan problem. Soviet Russia invaded Afghanistan and it was the Muslim fanatics who drove them out again -- thus giving the fanatics great cred.

25 March, 2011

Incorrect tits

"A promotion for a lads' holiday to Ayia Napa [in Cyprus] showing a woman clad in a skimpy bikini alongside the text 'awesome views' has been slammed by a watchdog. The photograph, which was displayed in the window of a men's clothing shop, featured only the woman's chest.

The images sparked a host of complaints on the grounds they were 'offensive' and 'objectified women'.

The firm claimed it had received only a small number of objections which it said could be resolved by removing part of the imagery. But the Advertising Standards Authority (ASA) ruled the promotion could not appear again in the same form.

'We considered that the image was likely to cause serious offence to some and was not suitable to be displayed in an untargeted medium where it could be seen by children.'


Leftist "homophobia" in Australia

The ABC is Australia's public broadcaster -- and is as Leftist as you would expect from that. The Liberal Party is Australia's major conservative party. "Liberal" is a much abused word.
"The ABC has apologised today after it broadcast an anti-gay jibe against a Liberal MP. A hailstorm of criticism erupted today after a Q&A panel session with federal member Christopher Pyne last night ran a viewer's tweet: "Does Pyne really light up when he's talking about men in uniform?"

Though he is married with children, Mr Pyne has been dogged for years by sideswipes over his sexuality. In 2009, Kevin Rudd referred to him as "the member for skirt that is, the member for Sturt".

When Mr Pyne was appointed manager of Opposition business, Julia Gillard expressed surprise that the then Coalition leader, Malcolm Turnbull, hadn't given the job to Tony Abbott instead. Faced with a choice between a doberman and a poodle, she said, Mr Turnbull had opted for the poodle.


24 March, 2011

That incorrect doll again

We read:
"They saw it as a harmless stunt to highlight the more hysterical elements of the politically correct bandwagon. But perhaps it proved their point a little too well. Two prospective Tory councillors have resigned from the Conservative Party after being suspended for posting pictures of themselves holding golliwog dolls on Facebook.

Married couple Bill and Star Etheridge, who campaign against political correctness, say they were trying to promote ‘healthy debate’ about whether the doll was a racist symbol. But the pair were summoned before a disciplinary committee after a colleague made a complaint.

Mr Etheridge, 41, who was due to stand alongside his wife for the Tories in the Dudley Council elections in May, has now joined UKIP as he claims his right to express his views is being stifled by the Conservative Party.

He said: ‘We just wanted to stimulate debate and gollies are a perfect example of an innocent child’s toy that’s been transformed into something sinister by the politically correct brigade. ‘We need to get back to a point where people can say what they think and not live in fear. That’s real democracy.’

Mrs Etheridge, 39, a mother-of-three, said she and her husband had wanted to promote debate, not cause offence. She added: ‘It’s just a child’s toy and the politically correct brigade are the ones who have turned it into a racist symbol. I grew up in Bury in Lancashire, so I have a lot of black and Asian friends and as children we had golly dolls and we never once thought of them as racist.

‘Some people say it is offensive, but they’re generally do-gooders who are offended on behalf of other people.’

Golliwog dolls have been around for more than a century and first appeared as friendly characters in children’s books in the 1890s.


CA: The Orange County Human Relations Commission We read: "OC Human Relations is a non-profit agency whose mission is to foster mutual understanding among residents and eliminate prejudice, intolerance and discrimination in order to make Orange County a better place for ALL people to live, work and do business."

That sure sounds reasonable but they have a funny way of going about it. Because they have no power other than making statements, they behave in a very non-judicial way and are in fact very bigoted themselves. As you might expect, Muslims can do no wrong and criticism of Muslims is hate speech.

Attorney Karen Lugo takes up the story:
Most stunning is the commission’s ability to hear complaints, consider a sanction, and indict a speaker without even notifying the subject that there is a complaint; one that may result in a public condemnation of his actions. Our Constitution provides protection from governmental deprivation of life, liberty, and property without something called due process.

Reputation is legally considered to be one’s property. One of the important requirements of legal due process is notice that an official decision is being considered that may result in an adverse ruling. Another important constitutional provision is the Fifth Amendment right to face one’s accuser. But these busybody organizations operate outside these constitutional parameters and have the power to sanction and condemn without notice, process, or diligent inquiry. Left unchecked these governmental, but unaccountable, bodies represent a grave threat to protected American freedoms and individual rights.
The latest caper of the OCHRC is to glad-hand a rally of Muslim extremists and decry protests against Muslim extremism. I referred to the rally previously on this blog. And it is that which has fired up Karen Lugo (above). Her full post has more details and there are other comments here and here

The lack of impartiality on the part of the OCHRC is a threat to free speech, even though making misleading statements to the media is all they can do. The media, of course, tend to lap such statements up, tending to give the impression that the OCHRC is an impartial body.

23 March, 2011

Congressmen Use Kiddie Porn as an excuse to control the net

We read:
"This week, several members of the U.S. House of Representatives continued the government's infatuation with controlling the Internet by using the frequently used rationale "we're doing it for the children."

Democrat and Republican lawmakers are busily creating a House bill that will mandate Internet service providers to keep computer records -- including identification information -- of users to be used by federal law enforcement agencies during their child pornography investigations,

According to the Federal Bureau of Investigation, if the bill is passed in both houses of Congress and signed into law by President Barack Obama, it will help FBI agents investigating child-pornography cases.

While proponents of the bill claim there is bipartisan support for such a law, opponents say it is an attempt by big government politicians to "backdoor their way to controlling the Internet and those who use it," said political strategist Mike Baker.

House Judiciary Committee Chairman Lamar Smith (R-Texas) is expected to introduce a draft of the bill in April. He stated that his legislation will require Internet service firms to maintain records of users’ Internet Protocol, or IP, addresses for a mandatory period of at least 24 months.


Must not tell the truth about Mexican cops

We read:
"US Ambassador to Mexico Carlos Pascual has resigned from his post, following a diplomatic row triggered by his remarks made in one of the US embassy cables leaked earlier by whistle-blower website WikiLeaks.

The development came after a cable leaked by WikiLeaks showed that Pascual had doubted the Mexican government's ability to win in the drug wars launched by Mexican President Felipe Calderon soon after taking office in 2006.

In the leaked cable, Pascual had based his doubts on grounds that the Mexican law enforcement agencies were often at odds with each other while co-ordinating their efforts to tackle the violent drug gangs. He also alleged that the Mexican security forces were slow and risk-averse.


22 March, 2011

How a lawyer advocates violence

Cautiously, of course. The words of that mini-Chomsky and great hater, Brian Leiter follow:
"Meanwhile, the Republican criminals in Wisconsin forced through their attack on workers' rights, leading to an uproar in Madison. At some point these acts of brazen viciousness are going to lead to a renewed philosophical interest in the question of when acts of political violence are morally justified"

Calling lawmakers who are fulfilling their election promises "criminals" is typical Leiter/Chomsky. It is basically senseless and mere hate-speech -- as is the accusation of "brazen viciousness"

Leiter does not of course advocate violence explicitly but what he says is a threat nonetheless and is apprently intended as such. It is perfectly obvious that a redefinition of what counts as acceptable violence could lead to a greater social and legal acceptance of violence -- as long as the violence comes from the Left of course

Group challenges arrest for “linking to other websites”

Using powers meant to defeat terrorism:
"The Obama administration's aggressive crackdown on websites accused of child pornography crimes, copyright infringement or selling counterfeit goods is being challenged by an online activist group that says federal authorities 'overreached' by arresting someone for 'nothing more than linking to other websites.'

The Department of Homeland Security (DHS) and Immigration and Customs Enforcement (ICE) arrested Bryan McCarthy, 32, earlier this month and charged him with one count of copyright infringement."

Bloggers are great linkers. This is not a good omen for any blogger who might attract disapproval from the Obama administration

More commentary here

21 March, 2011

US backs Sikh prisoner’s right not to trim beard

Not cutting your hair is one of the marks of a true Sikh but many Sikhs in the West backslide about that
"The US Justice Department has sued the state of California in defense of a Sikh prisoner's right to practice his religion, including by not cutting his beard.

Backing legal action taken on inmate Sukhjinder S. Basra's behalf, Assistant Attorney General Thomas E. Perez said California's policy for inmate grooming 'substantially burdens the rights of an inmate to practice his Sikh faith.'"

Andre Birotte Jr., US attorney for California's central district, added: "The rights guaranteed by the Constitution extend to all people in the United States. "By protecting those rights -- even for those incarcerated -- we strengthen those rights for all," he added.

I think the DOJ is right about this -- though a true follower of Guru Nanak (Sikhism) wouldn't be in prison anyway.

Note: Sikhs are good guys. They have been fighting the Muslims for around 600 years. They are also the only major Indian religion that rejects the caste system. The present Prime Minister of India is a Sikh. I have known a lot of them over the years and have always been favourably impressed by them.

George Bush was very pro-Sikh

Some respect for free speech among the Swedish people

But precious little among the politicians who make the laws. Good thing he got a jury trial.
"A Swedish politician facing charges for producing a poster depicting the Muslim prophet Muhammad naked together with his nine-year-old wife was found not guilty by a jury in Malmö on Wednesday.

Carl P Herslow, leader of the Skåne Party (Skånepartiet), a small right-wing populist regional party, is charged with agitation against an ethnic group (hets mot folkgrupp). The poster included the text: 'He is 53 and she is nine. Is this the kind of wedding we want to see in Skåne?'.

Herslow admits producing the poster but contested the charges. He said the aim of the poster was to stimulate a debate about Islam, which he argued was incompatible with democracy and equality.

Prosecutor Bo Birgerson, representing the Chancellor of Justice (Justitiekanslern - JK) - the country's top legal official, who is responsible for prosecution of cases involving freedom of speech - said that the distribution of the poster showed disrespect to Muslims.

But after deliberating less than an hour the jury, which are only used in Sweden in freedom of speech cases, told the court that Herslow was not guilty of agitation against an ethnic group.

Do you think Herslow would have been put on trial for a poster mocking Jesus Christ?

20 March, 2011

Christian symbols have a win in Italy

We read:
"The Vatican has welcomed as "historic" a ruling by the European Court of Human Rights that said displaying crucifixes in schools in Italy does not breach the rights of non-Catholics.

The European Court of Human Rights ruled that displaying crucifixes in schools in Italy did not breach the rights of non-Catholic families, overturning a previous decision.

The Strasbourg, France-based court initially ruled in November 2009 that displaying crucifixes in schools across Italy breached the rights of non-Catholics, drawing howls of anger from Church and political leaders in the staunchly Roman Catholic country.

In its new ruling, passed by 15 votes to two, the court said: "While the crucifix was above all a religious symbol, there was no evidence before the court that the display of such a symbol on classroom walls might have an influence on pupils."

The court may have realized that Italians would have defied a ban anyway. Italians are very attached to their statuary.

Instead of "statuary", I originally wrote "graven images" above. My fundamentalist Presbyterian background does show at times. Below is a picture of the interior of my old Presbyterian church. It is very beautiful but there is neither cross nor crucifix there.

T-shirt gets student pulled from class in Missouri

We read:
"Michelle, 12, was pulled out of her class at North Kirkwood Middle School on Wednesday and taken to the guidance office for wearing a T-shirt that read: "Jesus, He scares the hell out of you."

Kirkwood School District spokeswoman Ginger Fletcher said Thursday that the word "hell" was viewed as profanity and against school policy. Fletcher said that when students come to school in such clothing, they are asked to turn the clothing inside out, cover it with a sweatshirt or change into different clothing.

But Ramirez and her family said Thursday that the word was meant biblically, not profanely. "To us, hell is a place," said Christina Ramirez, Michelle's mother.

Michelle, a member of the student council who wants to become a youth pastor, said the shirt meant that Jesus "doesn't let evil into you." She said she has worn the shirt many times before and it was never disruptive as the school claimed it could be on Wednesday. "It wasn't disruptive until they said something about it," Michelle said.

Calling "hell" a profanity is just a weak excuse for censoring Christian speech

19 March, 2011

Book banning in Britain

More love of censorship from Britain: UK anti-terror laws threaten anyone who possesses the works of the IRA or al-Qaeda – even for the purposes of study.
"The Politics of Terror is an International Relations course unlike any other. Before the first lecture, we all received an email from the tutor entitled ‘compulsory reading’, which outlined the legal implications of studying terrorism. All students become familiar with warnings of plagiarism, but this is something different. Since 2006, under new counterterrorism legislation, you can be investigated for possessing materials that are likely to be of use to a terrorist. And possessing materials for academic reasons is not an automatic defence.

More frightening still, this is not just theory. In May 2008, a student at Nottingham University, Rizwaan Sabir, was imprisoned for six days while he was investigated, after downloading an edited version of the al-Qaeda handbook from a US government website.

Our course handbooks summarise the situation very well. It states that ‘students are encouraged to search for literature beyond the reading lists…and engage critically with it’. And then underneath, in bold capitals, it says: ‘ALL STUDENTS HOWEVER SHOULD BE FAMILIAR WITH THE CURRENT LEGAL SITUATION REGARDING POSSESSION OF MATERIALS “LIKELY TO BE OF USE TO A TERRORIST”.’

None of us had ever begun a course by considering what could or could not be studied, researched or downloaded for the purposes of studying....

The idea that restrictions on academic freedom are going to protect us from terrorism is based on the exaggeration of the threat, and a patronising mistrust of students. Students who want to access information on how to make bombs and carry out terrorist attacks will continue to be able to do so. The document that Sabir downloaded is readily available online. Waterstones sells the collected speeches, interviews and statements of Osama bin Laden. This counter-terrorism legislation doesn’t make us safer, but only constrains the ability of students to conduct research, and to acquire the comprehensive understanding of terrorism which is clearly lacking in the Houses of Parliament.


Airport protester sues over detention

We read:
"A 21-year-old Virginia man who wrote an abbreviated version of the Fourth Amendment on his body and stripped to his shorts at an airport security screening area is demanding $250,000 in damages for being detained on a disorderly conduct charge. ...

Among other things, the federal lawsuit claims wrongful detention and a breach of the First Amendment and Fourth Amendment."

He seems to have a pretty good case to me

18 March, 2011

‘No Speak English, No Service’: Restaurant Owner Removes Controversial Sign After Bombarded With Threats

The owner of the diner didn't threaten anyone. His staff just didn't understand Spanish. It took the Fascist Left to threaten violence.
"For Greg Simons, the owner of the Reedy Creek Family Diner on US 150 in Davidson County, North Carolina, language barriers affect his bottom line. So after some Spanish-speaking customers visited his diner about a month ago, and then left after an uncomfortable situation with the wait staff, Simons decided to put an end to such miscommunications once and for all.

He posted a sign in his restaurant which read, “No Speak English, No Service.” But just yesterday, he was forced to take the sign down after he was bombarded with complaints and threats. Someone even threw a brick through his window, according to The Dispatch, a Davidson County newspaper. “We started getting threatening phone calls and people using colorful language if you will,” Simons said.

The bottom of the sign read, “We only speak and understand American.” In addition to being translated into Spanish, the phrase “No Speak English, No Service” appeared on the sign in German, French, and Russian. Some have criticized Simons’ sign as discriminatory and racist. But Simons waved that criticism aside, saying that everyone’s money is green.

“It doesn’t really make any sense to me. Why would I want to alienate any customers?” he asked. Simons told The Dispatch, “Nobody here is bilingual. If you can’t tell me what you want, I can’t give you what you need. It’s nothing about race; it’s a language barrier. We don’t speak any Spanish.”


Illuminated crucifix taken down after sole complaint

The following is a report of a very weak-kneed response in Australia. Australia has no 1st Amendment so there was no legal need to respond at all
"A single complaint has forced the removal of an illuminated crucifix display in Warrnambool, potentially ending a four-decade Easter tradition. Resident Graham Keith told The Standard he objected to the "religious advertising" at the west Warrnambool water tower and said it should be removed.

The company behind the display, Wannon Water, has confirmed the cross will be taken down following the complaint. "The complainant claimed that the cross on the tower was inappropriate as Australia has a secular constitution and therefore a religious symbol has no place on a publicly owned structure," said Wannon Water managing director Grant Green.

"Following consideration of this issue, Wannon Water resolved not to proceed with a long-term lease of air space on the water tower to Warrnambool City Council," he said. The council moved the cross to the water tower in October after its former position was deemed structurally unsound.

Unless the council is able to find a new location, the annual display - which began in 1967 - may be lost forever.

Like Britain, Australia is a very irreligious place so that may be part of the reason why the placing of the cross was not defended.

17 March, 2011

UCLA Girl on Asians in the Library

I might have passed over this story except that the foolish woman concerned is now getting death threats. The story is basically about culture clash but there is very little comment to that effect in the coverage of the matter.

UCLA has a large number of Asian students, mostly Han Chinese. And although I myself think very highly of the Han, it is true that they come from a different culture with a different conception of manners. The differences are probably traceable to the more crowded situation in which they normally live in China.

And the UCLA girl (Alexandra Wallace) not only noticed these differences but complained about them on YouTube! Basically, her complaint was that the Chinese were too loud in the library and thus distracted her from her reading and study. She was probably making an accurate observation but you are not of course allowed to say anything derogatory about any ethnic group in an American university!

So now the sensitive and humane Left are making death threats against her! So who are the thugs now? The KKK always were Leftists and it is those making the death threats who are the lineal descendants of the KKK now, not the foolishly outspoken woman.

It is my observation that the Han try quite hard not to cause any offense to the majority culture in which they live, so it is regrettable that ethnic criticism is censored. It would in general be a help to Han people to know of ways in which they were unwittingly offending.

The video of Ms Wallace and details of the story here. I have also reposted the video below.

Modelling agencies must not tell the truth about ethnicity

In this story from Australia, the stupid young woman should be thanking the agency for levelling with her about her chances of work in the city concerned. But instead she seems to blame them. Talk about shooting the messenger!
"An Indian-Australian model told by a national modelling agency that her work chances were "limited" because she was not Caucasian, is speaking out against the company in a bid to stop the discrimination continuing.

After living and working as a model in the United Kingdom for two years, Kema Rajandran emailed a short biography and photos to Chadwick Models in Perth on Monday, and was "truly disheartened" at the response she received a short time later.

"We think you are very photogenic and would be suitable for our Casting Division," the email from the academy coordinator read. "Please note however that as you are of non-caucasian heritage that your work opportunities in Perth would be extrremely [sic] limited."

Ms Rajandran said given the "extremely multicultural society of Australia", she was shocked at the response, and hoped that by her speaking out about it, the practice of culling models based solely on their appearance would change.

Chadwick's Perth manager Tanya Muia said she was "gob-smacked" that the agency could be labelled as racially discriminating against Ms Rajandran, and that they were simply relaying her chances of finding work in a tight Perth modelling market.

When creatives are looking for an actor to star in a commercial, they initially just leaf through a big book of photos provided by the agency. If they choose to pass over darker ladies, that's just the way the cookie crumbles. A creative decision is entirely subjective and not subject to any rules or regulations.

The agency does however after a while get an idea about which models are likely to be chosen. It's part of their job to notice that. And they were kind enough on this occasion to pass their observations on. For their own sake the agency should perhaps have shut up and let the stupid woman waste her time.

16 March, 2011

Leftist sensitivity on display

I think we can assume with some safety that the three individuals (I hesitate to call them men) mentioned below are on the Left. Most of the entertainment industy is:
"A writer for the US animated comedy program Family Guy has apologised after making a joke linking Japan's massive earthquake-tsunami disaster to the 1941 attack on Pearl Harbour.

In a message on Twitter about Friday's earthquake, scriptwriter Alec Sulkin wrote: "If you wanna feel better about this earthquake in Japan, google 'Pearl Harbor death toll."'

The reference to imperial Japan's sneak attack on US forces in Hawaii, which killed about 2500 people, set off a storm of criticism over the internet.

Sulkin apologised and deleted the message, explaining that he wrote it when he believed the death toll was lower.


Rapper 50 Cent has sparked outrage after mocking the Japanese earthquake victims. As the death toll continues to climb from the devastating 9.0 earthquake the singer took to his Twitter account to comment on the catastrophe. 'Look this is very serious people I had to evacuate all my hoes from LA, Hawaii and Japan. I had to do it. Lol,' he Tweeted.

He added shortly afterwards, 'Nah this is nuts but what can anyone do about it. Let’s pray for anyone who has lost someone.'

The rapper later admitted that he Tweets for shock value, saying: 'Some of my tweets are ignorant I do it for shock value. Hate it or love it. I’m cool either way 50cent.”

He sent out his remarks on the social networking site as millions on the west coast of America were put on a tsunami alert following the disaster in Japan. 'Wave will hit 8am them crazy white boys gonna try to go surfing.' he tweeted.

American comedian Gilbert Gottfried also made vile jokes about the devastating disaster.

'I just split up with my girlfriend, but like the Japanese say, "They'll be another one floating by any minute now," Gottfried, 56, tweeted on Saturday.

He added: 'What does every Japanese person have in their apartment? Flood lights.'

Gottfried has now been fired from insurance company Aflac as the voice of the duck in the ad campaigns. 'Gilbert’s recent comments about the crisis in Japan were lacking in humor and certainly do not represent the thoughts and feelings of anyone at Aflac,' a spokesman for the firm told TMZ.

All three are proof of how unwise censorship is. By letting them say what they want, we get to see the shallowness and ugliness of their character.

15 March, 2011

Racist to say a Frenchman is French

Nutty England:
"A football fan is to appear in court for making an alleged racist comment - after calling a player FRENCH. Everton supporter David Sibson, 57, was thrown out of their Goodison Park ground for shouting that the team's French striker Louis Saha was "a useless French lazy b******".

He was reported by a fan sitting nearby. Mr Sibson had his season ticket taken away by the club. Police investigated and he now faces a public order charge before JPs.

The ex MoD worker, of Cheadle Hulme, Cheshire, said: "I'm facing a criminal prosecution just for calling a Frenchman French. If that is racist then I suppose I'm guilty."

An Everton official said: "It's not simply a black or white matter. We'll stamp down very hard on racial abuse of any kind."

Calling the footballer a lazy so-and-so was not the problem, it seems. The problem was in calling him French!

This is part of the problem I made a few comments about yesterday. Just mentioning any ethnic identity has come to be regarded as a slur. Saying "Frenchmen are all pansies" would be a slur but saying: "You are French" surely is not.

The Left have managed to frighten most people away from any mention of race and ethnicity. A gag has been placed on a whole area of discussion and debate -- unless you are a Leftist, of course. Any Leftist utterance is ALWAYS protected free speech, no matter how scurrilous it may be.

Brazilian humor goes down badly in Britain

Did you know that Burger King is now owned by a Brazilian company? Their chief exec., Bernardo Hees, is a Brazilian
"Burger King's global boss was facing criticism yesterday after he said that British women were "unattractive" and that English food was "terrible".

Bernardo Hees, 41, who became the fast food chain's chief executive in September, made the unguarded remarks while addressing a group of students at the University of Chicago.

Mr Hees recalled that while studying for an MBA at England's University of Warwick, the hard work he put into his studies was easy because there were a few distractions. "The food is terrible, and the women are not very attractive (in England)," he said.

"Here in Chicago, the food is good, and you are known for good-looking women," he was quoted as saying in the Chicago Maroon, the University of Chicago's student newspaper.

Mr Hees' comments quickly drew condemnation from British restaurant chefs and female students.

In my experience, his comments about British food are spot on. It's hard to believe how bad British food can sometimes be.

14 March, 2011

Racist slur claim in Australia

Background: The Liberal party in Australia really is concerned about individual liberty -- It is Australia's major conservative party.
"A Liberal Party operative has been accused of making a racist slur in the background of a press conference by Opposition Leader Barry O'Farrell .

Mr Woolcock allegedly said "Chinese always ask for more money" as mainly Chinese parents at Hurstville Public School lobbied Mr O'Farrell for more funds for the school.

Channel Ten reporter Hamish Macdonald reported the remark on his blog. He described how Mr O'Farrell was approached on Wednesday by a group of Chinese parents who "half-jokingly" asked about "more money for the school". "[Mr Woolcock] leaned over to us, speaking quietly, and said, 'The Chinese always ask for more money,"' he wrote.

Mr Woolcock, a veteran of Liberal campaigns dating back to Malcolm Fraser, denies the remark. "He says he didn't say it, so that's the end of that," said a Liberal spokesman. "He's very experienced; he's not stupid …

The Australian Chinese Community Association of NSW said it was unfair to characterise the community as always asking for money. "I would describe the Chinese community as a very responsible citizen," association vice-president Phoebe Alexander said.

If I said that NASCAR fans drink a lot of beer, would that be a slur or would it just be the truth?

Just because you make a generalization about some group it does not make it a slur.

I am a great admirer of the Han Chinese people but I still think that this is a true generalization: "Chinese tend to be bad drivers". They're not all bad drivers, obviously, but China does have about ten times the rate of road accidents that we have in the West.

As far as I can see, the test of a generalization should be its truth and nothing else. If I say false things about Chinese it could be racist or it could simply be mistaken. It is not racist simply because it is about Chinese.

Inquiring about Muslim extremism is hate speech?

An American Muslim says so:
" I hereby award Congressman Peter King (R-NY) an Oscar for "King's Hate Speech" - for his lifelong bigotry, and for fostering hate.

The Congressional hearings chaired by Peter King are supposed to determine the extent of radicalization amongst American Muslims and the response to the threat or lack thereof, of the Muslim leaders. The hearings are premised on questionable claims the Congressman has been touting for years: That American Muslims, especially their "leaders," have not been cooperative in the fight to eradicate the scourge of 'homegrown' terrorism. That mosques in America are a run by disloyal and radical imams with ties to foreign and illegal entities. And finally, that American Muslims and their faith is a threat to America's religious and national fabric.

Peter King's enquiry would seem perfectly legitimate considering the hatred toward the West that continues to pour out of Muslim mouths worldwide. What is the Muslim writer above afraid that Peter King might find out?

Muslims will no doubt be able to defend themselves against any accusations if they can. Is our Muslim friend afraid that they will not be able to defend themselves against accusations of bias and bigotry because the accusations of bias and bigotry are true?

NO enquiry is hate speech as far as I can see. It is just an enquiry. It would only be hate speech if it came to false and damaging conclusions. I think our Muslim friend is afraid it might come to true and damaging conclusions. At the very least, he is prejudging the issue.


Gotta love this quote from another opponent of the King enquiry: "And David H. Schanzer, director of the Triangle Center on Terrorism and Homeland Security at Duke University and the University of North Carolina, says a research project he led found 'Muslim-Americans uniformly reject violent extremism."

UNIFORMLY -- meaning that NOT ONE Muslim supported violence! It's not even clever bullsh*t!

But I am afraid that is what we have to expect from Duke U. these days. Their collective big leap to believe a false accusation against their lacrosse players shows what mental midgets they have teaching there.

The fact that other enquiries have produced such absurd conclusions shows how badly the King enquiry is needed, it seems to me.

13 March, 2011

Germany strips Egyptian imam of asylum rights over hate speech

It's a long time since there has been free speech in Germany (since before the rise of the Nazis) so I suppose it makes the best of a bad situation to apply the restrictions to Muslims too
"An Egyptian-born imam lost a court fight Wednesday to stave off his expulsion from Germany after he was accused of preaching hatred towards Christians and Jews.

The superior administrative tribunal in Muenster, northern Germany, agreed to a federal government demand to strip his political asylum. A lower tribunal must now review whether to order his actual deportation to Egypt.

He has filed papers insisting that he ceased preaching in favour of jihad, or holy war, in 2000. He asserts that a German transcript of him calling for violence against Jews and Christians is a mistranslation of what he said in Arabic.


Serb must not be heard in Canada

Some Serbian female persons

Remember Serbia? The Christian Yugoslavs Bill Clinton bombed to help out the Muslim Yugoslavs? One of the chief intellectual defenders of Serbia and a great critic of Muslims is Srdja Trifkovic. So obviously he would sully Canadian purity if he were allowed to set foot in Canada. The fact that America does not seem to be harmed by his words and presence just proves how much better Canada is, you see
"A guest lecture sponsored by the Serbian Students Association (SSA) of the University of British Columbia was cancelled Thursday after Srdja Trifkovic was denied entry into Canada.

Trifkovic, known for his contentious views on Islam and the Bosnian Genocide, was set to deliver a lecture entitled, “The Balkans: Uncertain Prospects for an Unstable Region.” On Thursday, it was reported that Trifkovic spent five hours detained at Vancouver International Airport before he was sent back to the U.S.

News of the controversial academic’s arrival roused tension both on and off campus. The Ubyssey reported that at least one student raised concern with university administration, and the Institute for Genocide Research Canada sent a letter of protest

Canada admits representatives of Islamic theocracies, terrorist front groups, and Hamas-lovers like George Galloway. But a critic of Islam must be stopped! His views must not be heard.

Personally, I think all the groups in the former Yugoslavia are a pretty vicious lot (except the Slovenes), but they should still be allowed to defend their views and state their case.


I am not sure I should be talking about this but when academics note something they tend to go on and ask: "Why is it so and how did it get that way?"

So I am inclined to ask why Yugoslavs have been so vicious towards one another? And let me spell out "vicious" a little. We are talking of gouging the eyes out of prisoners and soldiers grabbing babies out of their mothers' arms and throwing the babies down wells. Being a Yugoslav has long been a risky business.

I think it goes back to the Ottoman occupation, which prevailed in Yugoslavia for some centuries. The Ottomans (Muslim Turks) were not even very nice to one-another. Ottoman emperors usually had lots of sons due both to the Muslim custom of multiple wives and their maintenance of concubines in harems. So when an emperor died, there was a big race to see which son would be the next emperor. And as soon as the new emperor was established, he would murder all his brothers -- to prevent future challenges.

So they were the charming people who ruled Yugoslavia for some centuries. And I think that their example caused all Yugoslavs to behave likewise.

So how did the Slovenes escape? They were rescued early on by the (Christian) Habsburgs (aka the Holy Roman Empire) immediately to their North so did not have as long to suffer under the Muslims.

I note that the situation is similar in India. Indians are generally polite and gentle people but Hindu Indians LOATHE their Muslim minority and murder some of them from time to time.

Why? Because the Muslims spent centuries trying to conquer India but succeeded only in parts of the North. And their treatment of Hindus over whom they ruled was very harsh in the usual Muslim way. So Hindu Indians have good historical reasons to hate Muslims.

12 March, 2011

Another week, another free-speech defying ban in Britain

We read:
"This particular ban involved a set of British Humanist Association (BHA) adverts featuring the slogan, ‘If you’re not religious, for God’s sake say so’. The reason for this rather oblique command is that the BHA wants people in the UK to respond to the 2011 UK census question ‘What is your religion?’ by ticking the box marked ‘no religion’.

Unfortunately for the BHA, the owners of advertising space in UK rail stations, aided and abetted by advice from the Advertising Standards Authority (ASA) and the Committee of Advertising Practice, have not only correctly discerned a ‘religious nature’ to the BHA’s campaign, they have also decided that such ads are likely to cause ‘widespread’ and ‘serious offence’. And where there’s offence to be caused, censorship is sure to follow.

Nobody is allowed to offend anybody in Britain, apparently. Doing all sorts of violent crimes is OK however. Read how much this Muslim guy got away with before they finally locked him up. I'll bet his victims felt pretty offended.

With government priorities like that I pity people who have to live in Britain. No wonder so many emigrate.

Bus Driver Fired for Flying Confederate Flag on his own personal vehicle

We read:
"It has the words “redneck” emblazoned across it. And its owner, school bus driver Ken Webber, displays it proudly on his personal pick-up truck. It‘s a symbol of states’ rights, he says. What is “it,” you ask? The confederate flag, of course:

But that’s not how his employers, the Phoenix-Talent school district, saw it: “The Phoenix-Talent school district said the flag violates their harassment policy, even though it’s displayed on his personal vehicle,” according to a news report.

Webber says he was fired for not removing the flag from his vehicle.

Webber plans to take the school district to court for violating his first amendment rights.

The Rutherford Institute of Charlottesville, Va., sent a letter Wednesday to First Student Bus Transportation Services demanding that Ken Webber of Medford, Ore., be reinstated. The institute says flying the flag is covered by his First Amendment right to free speech.

As a public school body, they do have to obey the 1st amendment and lots of things that are not strictly speech have been held as protected under the 1st amendment -- so he's got a pretty good case. Calling it "harassment" is absurd. Maybe someone should show them what real harassment is.

11 March, 2011

Congressional panel votes to repeal Internet regulations

The internet does NOT need regulating
"A Republican-controlled Congressional panel has voted to repeal new Federal Communications Commission rules that prohibit phone and cable companies from interfering with Internet traffic on their broadband networks. The House Commerce Subcommittee on Communications and Technology voted 15-to-8 along party lines Wednesday to overturn the FCC's new 'network neutrality' regulations."


A remarkably silly U.S. diplomat

Diplomats just don't say such things normally. And to call any Japanese lazy is really stretching it
"A senior U.S. diplomat supervising Japan affairs has been replaced for allegedly making disparaging comments about the inhabitants of a southern Japanese island where U.S. troops are based, the U.S. Embassy and an assistant secretary of state said Thursday.

Kevin Maher caused an uproar by reportedly telling a group of American University students in December that Okinawans were lazy and used their hosting of U.S. bases to extort benefits from Tokyo.

The comments have been widely reported in the Japanese media, and Japan's foreign minister called them hurtful and deeply regrettable.

Maher has been replaced by Rust Deming, the deputy chief of mission in Tokyo, as director of the State Department's Office of Japan Affairs, the U.S. Embassy said in a statement. Maher will continue to work for the State Department.

Okinawa hosts tens of thousands of U.S. Marines and other troops, more than any other part of Japan. Okinawans have often complained that they bear too much of the burden for Japan's security alliance with Washington.

It is argued here that the "lazy" reputation of Okinawans began as a result of their passive resistance to U.S. occupation and that Okinawans going about their own business outdo Americans as hard workers. More details here also.

And apparently the guy has a Japanese wife and half-Japanese children -- who will never now be welcome back in Japan. Really smart! Feel sorry for his family

10 March, 2011

Tyranny Fighters, FIJA take on Orlando judge’s order

Must not let juries know of their legal right not to convict if they consider the law to be an oppressive one
"On March 2 the ACLU filed suit on behalf of the Fully Informed Jury Association (FIJA) against a Florida judge who banned free speech outside the courthouses in his jurisdiction.

... Meanwhile, veteran rights activist Julian Heicklen has announced he will violate the ban on March 11 by distributing jury rights pamphlets outside the Orlando courthouse as a direct challenge against the judge's Administrative Order banning such activity."


Heroic Massachusetts defiance of the Supreme court?

"A Supreme Court ruling upholding the right of a controversial Kansas church to picket military funerals will not prevent Massachusetts authorities from enforcing a state law keeping protesters at least 500 feet away from a funeral service, Attorney General Martha Coakley said.

“This Supreme Court decision makes it no more likely . . . that there would be a successful challenge to our statute,’’ Coakley said by phone Friday, adding that she will advise police to continue to enforce a 500-foot buffer zone around funerals to keep protesters from disrupting them.

Apparatchik Coakley is just trying to inflate her own importance here. In the case heard by SCOTUS, the picketers complied with a police request that they picket 1,000 feet from the church during the funeral service -- and the court quoted that as a factor in its judgment. So the Massachusetts law adds nothing to that. By setting a standard, the law would in fact seem to allow Fred Phelps and his gang to get closer! Martha didn't mention that!

9 March, 2011

Must not mention Obama's father?

That Obama's father was an extreme Leftist who hated the British is a matter of record but the Leftist writer below finds all sorts of deep and devious reasons why anybody would mention that.

How about a really simple reason: Obama was obsessed with his father (He authored a book called "Dreams of my Father") so it is reasonable to suspect that he has similar views to his father. It is after all not at all unusual for fathers and sons to have similar views -- though there are exceptions to every rule of course
"Huckabee, to the surprise of most everyone, started squawking that President Obama grew up in Kenya, where he was influenced by his father’s and grandfathers’ anticolonial Mau-Mauism to despise the British Empire—and, by implication, all white power.

Only after being called out did the Fox News host say he “misspoke” on the growing up in Kenya part

All this garbage started last year with Dinesh D’Souza’s repulsive headliner for Forbes, which maintained that Obama’s “anti-business” policies could be explained only by his “Kenyan anti-colonialism.”

But here’s a simpler theory: The right spews this bizarre “anticolonial” claptrap because it gives them a chance to say “Mau Mau,” which conjures a more fearsome threat than the N-word itself.

The Leftist writer above would probably not have known this but political attitudes are to a considerable extent genetically inherited. Even if a son knew nothing of his father, he would still be highly likely to have similar political views to his father. If your father was a miserable whiner, you are likely to be a miserable whiner too.

Update. Two small personal notes

I suspect that I got my political values from my father. He was a kindly man but hard work was his religion. "Bludgers" were the lowest of the low to him. He would have regarded the welfare parasites who infest most of the developed word today as not much better than maggots.

And my son is also conservative, though less emphatically than I am. He has however recently moved to an elite university to do his doctorate in mathematics and that university is a hotbed of socialism. So he has quizzed some of the socialists around him and is amazed at the shallowness of their thinking. So encountering real socialists has definitely moved him in a direction that I approve of.

Even old guys are not allowed to use old-fashioned language

We read:
"After 54 years working for American Airlines, Freddy Schmitt says he just wants the same thing the US Army gave him six decades ago -- an honorable discharge.

Instead, the 82-year-old WWII vet was handed his walking papers after allegedly using a derogatory term for gays during a workplace bull session about "Don't Ask Don't Tell."

The fact that Schmitt was defending gay soldiers' right to serve -- "Back then, a faggot coulda saved my life" -- hasn't changed the airline's decision.

Neither has his blemish-free employment record, nor the pleas of former JFK co-workers upset over the axing of their buddy known as "Papa Freddy."


8 March, 2011

That flag again

The soulful one himself above. He must be good: Having the official NAACP defending use of the Stars and Bars really boggles the mind
"Some NAACP supporters plan to boycott the Detroit arm's annual fundraiser over an honor for Kid Rock they say doesn't mesh with the civil rights group's goals.

The rocker is set to receive the Detroit branch's Great Expectations Award at the annual dinner, which typically attracts about 10,000 people, on May 1 at Cobo Center.

But Adolph Mongo, a longtime political consultant and head of Detroiters for Progress, said he and others will sit out over Kid Rock's use of the controversial Confederate flag during performances. "It's a slap in the face for anyone who fought for civil rights in this country," Mongo said Thursday. "It's a symbol of hatred and bigotry."

NAACP officials defended the honor. "Kid Rock ... has consistently lifted up the Great Expectations of many persons … concerning the future of the city," Donnell R. White, interim executive director of the Detroit Branch NAACP, said in a statement.

Kid Rock and his representatives couldn't be reached. But in a 2008 interview with the Guardian in Britain, he said the flag to him represents southern rock 'n' roll.


Connecticut legislation seeks to unconstitutionally restrict political speech by employers

We read:
"A Connecticut legislator is seeking to restrict the speech of employers on 'religious or political' topics in pending legislation (House Bill 5460).

The bill reads, “No employer, and no ... representative ... of such employer, shall require its employees to attend an employer-sponsored meeting with the employer or its agent, representative or designee, the primary purpose of which is to communicate the employer’s opinion concerning religious or political matters.'

This content-based regulation of speech violates the First Amendment by singling out political and religious speech for special restrictions."

As long as it's in work time or paid time it should be permitted

7 March, 2011

Hate-spouting Australian Leftists horrified when conservatives give some abuse back

The following message was Left on the answerphone of turncoat Australian politician Tony Windsor, who posed as a conservative to get elected to the Federal parliament but then turned around and now keeps a Leftist government in office:
"You're a liar, a dog, a rat, a big MP dog... and you wait you're not going to get voted in again. I hope you die, you bastard," the caller said.
I would call that righteous anger at a fraud but the Left call it a "death threat". Andrew Bolt comments:
Hpw suddenly sensitive they are, the journalists and Labor politicians now feigning shock at the "hate speech" of conservatives.

I'm not sure what's funnier about the Tony Windsors, Julia Gillards, Michelle Grattans and the rest of them. Is it their wild exaggerations? Their even wilder hypocrisy?

Or is their comically transparent attempt to de-legitimise the righteous anger of voters furious at being lied to by this inept Prime Minister, now inflicting on us the colossally useless "carbon tax" she swore before the election never to give us?

Listen to independent MP Tony Windsor, who helped to install Gillard, now playing a message left on his phone by a constituent declaring in foul language he'd be glad if Windsor died. A "death threat", whimpered Windsor. Yes, tut-tutted the media, failing to notice it was no such thing.
Andrew Bolt then goes on to give some examples of the hate and abuse coming from the Australian Left towards conservatives

Never believe anything a Muslim representative says?

That would seem to be safest policy. First read the story below written by one Zaki Hasan -- from the Puffington Host, unsurprisingly.
"For some background, this is footage of a protest rally in Orange County outside of a fundraiser held by ICNA -- the Islamic Circle of North America -- to raise money for the poor and orphans in the area. As attendees -- mostly families, including young children -- from the local Muslim community file into the center where the event is being held, you can hear the jeers of derision and hate: "You beat your women?" "You rape your children?" "Why don't you go beat up your wife like you do every night?" None of that, unfortunately, is all that surprising, but what is surprising is the people who are there to cheer them on.

Witness this quote from Deborah Pauly, a local councilwoman, speaking to the gathered horde:
Let me tell you what's going on over there is pure, unadulterated evil. And I don't care... I don't even care if you think I'm crazy any more. I have a beautiful daughter. I have a wonderful 19-year-old son who is a U.S. Marine. In fact, I know quite a few Marines who would be happy to send these terrorists to an early meeting in paradise.
All that from an elected official who represents a community that I'm reasonably certain has at least a few Muslims living in it. And she's saying it about women, children, and families who are there to help the poor. You take rhetoric like this, draped in the trappings of patriotism but anti-American to its deeply-bigoted core, and you wonder if people like Pauly and her ilk, be they the protesters or her fellow politicos, would even grasp the clear irony that her speech and those like it embody the very same hatred and bigotry she seems to think she's railing against when calling her fellow citizens -- her neighbors -- "pure, unadulterated evil." Vile. Just vile.

We know for starters that extremist Muslim groups often hide behind a pretence of being charitable organizations, with the goons of HAMAS in Gaza being a prime example of that. So is ICNA like that or is it just the innocent charity that the Muslim writer above claims? You can find one answer here. ICNA is in fact a Jew-hating Islamic supremacist organization. So the opposition to the ICNA gathering was exactly what it should have been. People need to expose these Muslim frauds and their vile practices.

There is a chance that Google might suspend this blog for the forthright post above so take note of my mirror sites. Google seem to have very rubbery standards about what Muslims and critics of Muslims can say. If this post is hate speech so is the post I have quoted. May I say that Islam is vile, just vile?

6 March, 2011

State Department Refuses to Call Killing of Two U.S. Airmen Terrorist Attack

We read:
"Although Arif Uka shouted "Allahu Akbar" before opening fire on U.S. Military members in Germany this week, killing two Airmen and severely wounding two others, the State Department is refusing to call the planned attack an act of terrorism.

State Department Spokesman PJ Crowley implied we shouldn't rush to judgement in this case, that we should "look at the evidence and look at the motivation and then you make a judgment.”

I'm speechless

Free speech much more limited in France

We read:
"The US Supreme Court made an unpleasant call, but the right call, this week when it upheld the right of the Westboro Baptist Church to wage ugly protests at solemn events. The tiny Kansas-based outfit makes its name by showing up at military funerals and shouting anti-gay slurs and waving hateful signs. But in voting 8-1 that Constitution protects the group’s self-expression, the court wasn’t just acknowledging the far reach of the First Amendment. The ruling also reflects a faith in Americans’ ability, independent of any government action, to condemn loathsome speech.

The court’s decision is in marked contrast with the case of fashion designer John Galliano, the flamboyant creative director of Christian Dior, whose anti-Semitic rant at a Paris bar was captured on film. In France, where the law reflects a deep shame over the Vichy government’s complicity with the Holocaust, hate speech isn’t just unprotected; it’s illegal. Galliano was charged with the crime of making racist comments in public, which carries a $31,000 fine and up to six months in prison.

Yet time has demonstrated, over and over again, that official action isn’t necessary to punish those who grossly violate the bounds of propriety. Galliano lost his job, and his career is likely over. The Westboro Baptist Church, despite its court victory, is similarly isolated. Ugly rants have won the group next to no followers — just a string of condemnations, far louder and stronger than a few people’s ugly shouts.


5 March, 2011

British judge launches scathing attack on emergency service 'management jargon' that costs lives

We read:
"Baffling jargon used by senior 999 staff may have cost lives during the July 7 attacks on London, a senior judge said yesterday.

In a scathing attack, the coroner at the inquest into the bombings said bureaucratic language meant emergency workers had no idea what other crews were doing. The level of confusion was such that fire and ambulance teams sometimes stood doing very little while victims lay dying amid the train and bus wreckage.

Lady Justice Hallett levelled her criticism after London Fire Brigade assistant commissioner Gary Reason spoke of a ‘conference demountable unit from the management resource unit’. In plain English, that is a mobile control room.

It was the first time any senior authority has drawn a link between ‘officialese’ and the serious failure of public services to do their duty.

Lady Justice Hallett said: ‘Management jargon is taking over and perfectly sensible, straightforward titles are being changed. ‘I don’t know whether a crew manager is somebody who is responsible for supplies or is used to fighting fires. I have no idea.’

The coroner said that clarity of thought was vital during an emergency and added: ‘People at the top need to say we have to communicate with people in plain English.’

Critics say councils use overblown language to disguise non-jobs and justify excessive salaries. The emergency services have also overhauled simple words in the cause of political correctness – such as using ‘firefighter’ rather than ‘fireman’.

‘Jargon also allows unaccountable cliques to appear as if they alone have some sort of higher wisdom. The whole point of an open society is that we should be getting rid of exclusive language.’


Fred Phelps protects us all

Amid the rising tide of political correctness, this decision was desperately needed. If speech as unpopular as Fred Phelp's is protected, we are all protected.
"This week, the Supreme Court of the United States ruled that the vulgar demonstration by members of the justly reviled Westboro Baptist Church of Topeka, Kan., at the 2006 funeral of Marine Lance Cpl. Matthew Snyder in Westminster, didn't go beyond the legal pale since it was behavior protected by the First Amendment.

The 8-1 ruling ended the efforts of the 20-year-old Marine's father, Albert Snyder, to collect damages for emotional distress he said was inflicted on him by the Westboro picketers, carrying their notorious "Thank God For Dead Soldiers" placards, and others describing Marines as "fags."

A lower court had awarded Mr. Snyder $11 million (later reduced to $5 million), a ruling that was overturned by the federal appeals court in Virginia. The Supreme Court vote — the sole dissenter was Justice Samuel A. Alito — upheld the appeals court decision.

Another reason why this is a victory for many others is that Fred has the Bible on his side (See Romans 1). If he had lost, preaching the Bible would have been endangered.

Extended commentary here

4 March, 2011

Aesthetic preferences must now be filtered?

Beauty is in the eye of the beholder but some ideas of beauty must be censored, apparently
"The search for the ultimate cute baby has descended into nastiness after mothers angry at a voting glitch started to launch cruel and racist attacks on other people's children.

Pippa Taylor was floored when someone posted a comment on a picture of her Eurasian daughter Lilli, saying "Bonds Australia not Asia".

Another mum complained on the Bonds Bumps & Baby Facebook page that someone had commented on a picture of her daughter, saying: "A child only a mother could love". Another baby was called an "ugly duckling."

Although all the negative Facebook comments were removed, some parents are so angry they plan to pull their babies out of the competition


U.S. court endorses thought crime

We read:
"So when I first read of U.S. District Court Judge Gladys Kessler’s recent ruling on Obamacare, in which she states, among other things, that “mental activity” can be treated as “commerce,” even if that activity does not lead to observable, demonstrable action, and that no distinction can be made between the actions of one’s mind and physical actions, I immediately recalled a statement in Orwell’s novel Nineteen-Eighty Four: "Thoughtcrime does not entail death: thoughtcrime IS death."

Judge Kessler, a Clinton appointee, has thus, whether she knows it or not, endorsed the notion of thought crime, or “crimethink.” The “thought crime” she is endorsing, which is not choosing to buy government-mandated health insurance after private consideration (or none at all), will not entail anything as severe as execution by the state. Instead, it would entail a hefty penalty (a special “tax”) on the recalcitrant, or even prison.


3 March, 2011

Defamation lawsuit fails in Canada

We read:
"The case began in November 1998 — yes, the wheels of justice do move slowly — when a Montreal talk show host vented against Arab and Haitian cab drivers. The comments accused the cabbies of uncleanliness, incompetence, arrogance and corruption.

One cab driver, Bou Malhab, believed the comments lowered his reputation so he started a defamation lawsuit. But he didn’t sue for himself alone; he sued on behalf of all Arab and Haitian cabbies in Montreal. After a long road through the judicial system the top judges of Canada were asked to decide on the legality of this group defamation lawsuit....

But in a 6-1 decision in mid-February, our top court judges ruled the group defamation lawsuit couldn’t succeed. In reaching this conclusion the court solidified the law that no one is entitled to compensation “solely because he or she is a member of a group about which offensive comments have been made.”

More importantly, the fact someone “feels humiliated, sad or frustrated is not a sufficient basis for an action in defamation.”


Economist accused of hate speech for criticizing Abraham Lincoln

We read:
"DiLorenzo appeared before the House Financial Service Committee on Wednesday, Feb. 9, at the invitation of committee chairman Ron Paul (R-Texas) to testify on the Federal Reserve Bank. After his testimony, Democratic Rep. William Clay, who sits on the committee, raised questions about DiLorenzo's ties to the League of the South, classified as a hate group by the Southern Poverty Law Center. [A typical Leftist "ad hominem" argument]

Clay accused DiLorenzo of working "for a Southern nationalist organization that espouses very radical notions about American history and the federal government."

DiLorenzo rebutted Clay's claim in a Feb. 11 posting on—a site that describes itself as "anti-state, anti-war, [and] pro-market"—saying that his only connection with the League was a series of lectures he delivered 13 years ago on the economics of the Civil War; DiLorenzo gave the lectures at a week-long summer seminar sponsored by three professors who just started a League of the South Institute.

According to him, the southern states that seceded from the U.S. in 1861 should have been allowed to peacefully leave the Union since the states originally came together in a voluntary, cooperative pact when they signed the Constitution. For Lincoln to wage war with the South to bring them back into the Union was tyrannical, a point DiLorenzo writes about in his 2002 publication,Lincoln Unmasked.

There's an old saying in politics: "Follow the money". DiLorenzo points out the economic reasons why Lincoln was desperate to keep control of the South. Lincoln himself said that slavery wasn't the issue -- so 600,000 men had to die to preserve the market for Northern manufacturers!

2 March, 2011

Canada’s Carleton University sued for blocking pro-life expression, arresting students

Canada's universities preach tolerance but don't practice it.
"An Alliance Defense Fund allied attorney representing members of a pro-life student group filed suit against Carleton University Friday for repeatedly blocking the group from expressing its views on campus while allowing other student groups to express themselves freely.

“Pro-life student groups shouldn’t be discriminated against because of their beliefs,” said ADF Senior Counsel David French. “The university’s own rules, not to mention Canada’s Charter of Rights and Freedoms, prevent the university from crushing the free speech of pro-life students while allowing students concerned about other issues to express themselves in nearly identical ways.”

On Oct. 4, 2010, Carleton University had the two students who are filing suit--both members of the student group Carleton Lifeline--handcuffed, arrested, charged, and fined with trespassing even though they are tuition-paying students.

The students were attempting to display an exhibit that the university administration deemed disturbing and offensive due to the images it used. In November 2010, Carleton University’s administration provided the group with an ultimatum regarding the expression of their opinions and threatened further arrests.

The lawsuit, Lobo v. Carleton University, asks the Ontario Superior Court of Justice to declare that Carleton University and its administration have breached their own internal policies regarding freedom of expression, academic freedom, and discrimination.


British Leftist politician says that calling Israelis Nazis is not hate speech

In that case, I wonder what would be hate speech? Only speech directed against the Left, I imagine. How about calling Ms. Jackson a Nazi? I wonder how that would go down? Her attitude to Jews certainly seems similar,
"You can call Israelis Nazis and compare Gaza to a concentration camp - but that is not preaching hatred, according to Labour MP Glenda Jackson.

Ms Jackson, who won her Hampstead and Kilburn seat with a majority of just 42 votes in the general election, submitted herself to a grilling by Jewish constituents at London's Belsize Square Synagogue this week.

The MP dug her heels in when asked by a Birmingham student about hate speech on campus. The student was distressed by the comments made at Birmingham Palestine Society by a visiting speaker, Mike Prysner, who compared Israel's actions with the Holocaust.

But Ms Jackson was unmoved. Free speech on campus was "precious", she said, adding: "I don't think that is hate speech,


1 March, 2011

Pro-Union Rallies Simmering with Violence and Hate Speech

Just watch the guy below. You don't even need to turn the sound on:


Freedom to mock upheld

We read:
"A judge has dismissed a lawsuit against Jerry Seinfeld by a chef who accused the comic of wrecking her reputation when he mocked her during a US TV interview in 2007.

Missy Chase Lapine sued the funnyman's wife Jessica in 2008, claiming Seinfeld's bestselling cookbook Deceptively Delicious had been "brazenly plagiarised" from her own tome, The Sneaky Chef. The suit was thrown out of court in 2009 and a subsequent appeal was dismissed the following year.

Chase Lapine also filed suit against Seinfeld for damaging her reputation after he dubbed her a "wacko" during an interview with David Letterman when quizzed over his wife's legal battle.

However, Justice Marcy Friedman refused to allow the case to go any further on Friday when she dismissed the complaint, insisting it's clear the star was joking during the interview.

A lawyer for Seinfeld says, "(The) decision is a complete victory for Jerry - and also a victory for the First Amendment and the right of comedians to tell jokes.


Posts from Brisbane, Australia by John Ray (M.A.; Ph.D.).

"HATE SPEECH" is free speech: The U.S. Supreme Court stated the general rule regarding protected speech in Texas v. Johnson (109 S.Ct. at 2544), when it held: "The government may not prohibit the verbal or nonverbal expression of an idea merely because society finds the idea offensive or disagreeable." Federal courts have consistently followed this. Said Virginia federal district judge Claude Hilton: "The First Amendment does not recognize exceptions for bigotry, racism, and religious intolerance or ideas or matters some may deem trivial, vulgar or profane."

Even some advocacy of violence is protected by the 1st Amendment. In Brandenburg v. Ohio (1969), the U.S. Supreme Court held unanimously that speech advocating violent illegal actions to bring about social change is protected by the First Amendment "except where such advocacy is directed to inciting or producing imminent lawless action and is likely to incite or produce such action."

The traditional advice about derogatory speech: "Sticks and stones will break your bones but names will never hurt you". Apparently people today are not as emotionally robust as their ancestors were.

A phobia is an irrational fear, so the terms "Islamophobic" and "homophobic" embody a claim that the people so described are mentally ill. There is no evidence for either claim. Both terms are simply abuse masquerading as diagnoses and suggest that the person using them is engaged in propaganda rather than in any form of rational or objective discourse.

Leftists often pretend that any mention of race is "racist" -- unless they mention it, of course. But leaving such irrational propaganda aside, which statements really are racist? Can statements of fact about race be "racist"? Such statements are simply either true or false. The most sweeping possible definition of racism is that a racist statement is a statement that includes a negative value judgment of some race. Absent that, a statement is not racist, for all that Leftists might howl that it is. Facts cannot be racist so nor is the simple statement of them racist. Here is a statement that cannot therefore be racist by itself, though it could be false: "Blacks are on average much less intelligent than whites". If it is false and someone utters it, he could simply be mistaken or misinformed.

Whatever your definition of racism, however, a statement that simply mentions race is not thereby racist -- though one would think otherwise from American Presidential election campaigns. Is a statement that mentions dogs, "doggist" or a statement that mentions cats, "cattist"?

Was Abraham Lincoln a racist? "You and we are different races. We have between us a broader difference than exists between almost any other two races. Whether it is right or wrong I need not discuss, but this physical difference is a great disadvantage to us both, as I think your race suffer very greatly, many of them by living among us, while ours suffer from your presence. In a word, we suffer on each side. If this be admitted, it affords a reason at least why we should be separated. It is better for both, therefore, to be separated." -- Spoken at the White House to a group of black community leaders, August 14th, 1862

The spirit of liberty is "the spirit which is not too sure that it is right." and "Liberty lies in the hearts of men and women; when it dies there, no constitution, no law, no court can even do much to help it. While it lies there it needs no constitution, no law, no court to save it." -- Judge Learned Hand

Two lines below of a famous hymn that would be incomprehensible to Leftists today ("honor"? "right"? "freedom?" Freedom to agree with them is the only freedom they believe in)

First to fight for right and freedom,
And to keep our honor clean

It is of course the hymn of the USMC -- still today the relentless warriors that they always were.

It seems a pity that the wisdom of the ancient Greek philosopher Epictetus is now little known. Remember, wrote the Stoic thinker, "that foul words or blows in themselves are no outrage, but your judgment that they are so. So when any one makes you angry, know that it is your own thought that has angered you. Wherefore make it your endeavour not to let your impressions carry you away."

"Since therefore the knowledge and survey of vice is in this world so necessary to the constituting of human virtue, and the scanning of error to the confirmation of truth, how can we more safely, and with less danger, scout into the regions of sin and falsity than by reading all manner of tractates, and hearing all manner of reason?" -- English poet John Milton (1608-1674) in Areopagitica

Hate speech is verbal communication that induces anger due to the listener's inability to offer an intelligent response

Leftists can try to get you fired from your job over something that you said and that's not an attack on free speech. But if you just criticize something that they say, then that IS an attack on free speech

"It is impossible to speak in such a way that you cannot be misunderstood." -- Karl Popper

Why are Leftists always talking about hate? Because it fills their own hearts

Leftists don't have principles. How can they when "there is no such thing as right and wrong"? All they have is postures, pretend-principles that can be changed as easily as one changes one's shirt

When you have an argument with a Leftist, you are not really discussing the facts. You are threatening his self esteem. Which is why the normal Leftist response to challenge is mere abuse.

The naive scholar who searches for a consistent Leftist program will not find it. What there is consists only in the negation of the present.

The intellectual Roman Emperor Marcus Aurelius (AD 121-180) could have been speaking of much that goes on today when he said: "The object in life is not to be on the side of the majority, but to escape finding oneself in the ranks of the insane."