Hawaii State Government Attempts Information Blackout on Maui Fire – Refuses Media Access

Featured image is from The Dossier

The New Abnormal: The Rise of the Biomedical Security State

Persecution and Censorship is Coming!

Speaking to Unbelievers

France’s Hollande defends freedom of speech after anti-Hebdo clashes abroad

University students hold placards during a demonstration against satirical French weekly Charlie Hebdo, which featured a cartoon of the Prophet Mohammad as the cover of its first edition since an attack by Islamist gunmen, in Somalia’s capital Mogadishu, January 17, 2015. REUTERS/Feisal Omar

Phil Robertson Reinstated to Duck Dynasty Cast by A&E

After a nine day suspension for his remarks on African Americans and homosexuality, Phil Robertson, the patriarch of the popular series “Duck Dynasty,” was reinstated by A&E on Friday, Dec. 27, 2013. (Photo: Duck Dynasty Facebook)

Following Huge Backlash, Filming Will Continue Spring 2014

Sign the petition to reinstate Phil Robertson back to Duck Dynasty!

It’s not about Phil, it’s about our rights as Americans to Free Speech! Our rights as Christians to Freedom of Religion!

SIGN PETITION NOW!

It’s not an attack on Phil Robertson, but on Christianity!

Desperate MSM Moves to Kill Off Article Comments

New wave of online censorship as establishment panics about losing ability to dictate reality

Paul Joseph Watson
Infowars.com
September 27, 2013

Desperate to cling onto their ability to dictate reality, the crumbling mainstream media is beginning to kill off article comment sections in a cynical bid to silence dissenting voices.

Studies confirm that article comment sections – for better or worse – are heavily swaying public opinion. How many times have you read a mainstream news article about NSA spying, drones, gun control or any other other hot button issue where the author sides with the establishment, only to have their argument completely eviscerated by a deluge of irate respondents in the comment section?

Which Shall It Be, Freedom of Speech or Not?

photo credit: http://www.veteranstoday.com

SOURCE

Michael S. Rozeff
lewrockwell.com
August 10, 2013

Can a man speak freely in America without any fear of punishment or can he not? He cannot. Has the U.S. government concocted free speech “crimes” in order to suppress free speech? It has. Is the U.S. government investigating free speech activities with the notion that they may be terroristic? It is.

Being pro-liberty, I am pro-free speech. I think that liberty and being able to speak freely are part of what being a human being means. In addition, I think that free speech enhances human life. Favoring the human being, human life and its development, I favor free speech. This does not mean that I like or approve of everything that anyone says. I don’t, most assuredly. It doesn’t mean that groups of people may not voluntarily suppress free speech among themselves. Favoring free speech implies that I do not believe in forcibly curtailing speech.

If we wish, we can discuss free speech without reference to the U.S. constitution. The idea of free speech doesn’t depend on a constitution, but because the government is suppressing free speech and claiming that it is doing so legally, I am going to discuss some specific court cases that reference the Constitution.

Being pro-liberty, I am not in favor of a system that centralizes law-making in one man or a few men as the U.S. system under the Constitution does. What if they make bad laws? What if the system provides no effective means to alter those laws? What if the system actively suppresses and undermines the available means to alter those laws? What if great distress has to be endured for many years before laws are altered?

But in this article, I postpone speaking with my Spoonerite anti-Constitution hat on until the end. I mainly wish to explore how it is that the Supreme Court is undermining free speech under the cover of its claim to be the final arbiter of what U.S. law says. However, implicitly I am raising the question of what good a Constitution is under which rights written down in black and white can be effectively destroyed by the Supreme Court.