Free Speech (1st Amendment) Updates

[bostonangler]

2 hours ago, Indraman said:

shutdown of political dissen

 

Even worse our president is trying to shutdown anyone who he disagrees with... Calling the media the enemy. Threatening people's security clearances because he disagrees, yet they have committed no crimes. It's bad enough when citizens react to things they do not like or agree with, but for the president to act in this manner is not very encouraging. The president needs to uphold the 1st amendment, not try and tear it down. Every president in the history of America has had those who oppose and speak out... The idea that our president doesn't understand or care about free speech should worry every single citizen. Next week he may decide what you believe is not to his liking and try to shut you down... This is a bad precedent for any president.

 

B/A 

[caz1104]

On ‎8‎/‎3‎/‎2018 at 9:24 AM, Indraman said:

MSNBC Host Wants Facebook Shutdown To Stop 'Fake News'

 

 

Indy

Is'nt this like calling the kettle black?

[Indraman]

Facebook Now Targeting Left Wing Pages As Predicted...

 

 

So, who is the knucklehead that was okay with Alex Jones getting de-platformed? How do you feel now?

 

Indy

[bostonangler]

6 hours ago, Indraman said:

Facebook Now Targeting Left Wing Pages As Predicted...

 

 

So, who is the knucklehead that was okay with Alex Jones getting de-platformed? How do you feel now?

 

Indy

 

I feel great... Let's get rid of all the opinion blogs, sites and youtubers who pose as news but are not. There is a big difference between news outlets and people pretending to be news. 

When someone on the right like Alex Jones or on the left like newshounds, spew conspiracy theories as news product they need to either give a disclaimer that it is opinion or they need to go. JMHO

 

B/A

[Indraman]

Bill Maher Stuns Audience With Unexpected Statement On Alex Jones...

 

 

Indy

[Enigma2a]

On ‎8‎/‎16‎/‎2018 at 12:16 PM, bostonangler said:

 

Even worse our president is trying to shutdown anyone who he disagrees with... Calling the media the enemy. Threatening people's security clearances because he disagrees, yet they have committed no crimes. It's bad enough when citizens react to things they do not like or agree with, but for the president to act in this manner is not very encouraging. The president needs to uphold the 1st amendment, not try and tear it down. Every president in the history of America has had those who oppose and speak out... The idea that our president doesn't understand or care about free speech should worry every single citizen. Next week he may decide what you believe is not to his liking and try to shut you down... This is a bad precedent for any president.

 

B/A 

B/A, Taking security clearances is not a 1st amendment action. The clearances that Trump is considering removing are the people who were fired and or demoted for bad actions they have done. I stated to you before that Brennan is not acting in a NON-Partisan manner (Trump is committing treason.....NOT) as a former CIA Director, per the CIA policy concerning former Directors. Speaking to another Head of state is not treason and Brennan finally walked back his statement. Speaking of the media as the enemy, did not the previous administration bar Fox news, go after journalists, go after conservative non-profits with the IRS, and so on. The only side that is trying to silence the people and remove their 1st amendment rights are the left. If it is not their belief then they will shout you down instead of having a civil disagreement. Trump even stated that he has given Brennan a larger platform to shout from. Trump does not want Brennan to go before an audience and make people believe he has insider knowledge as to collusion or treason, but when asked for the proof of collusion he could not provide it. It gives people a false sense of the truth and divides the people even more.

[Enigma2a]

On ‎8‎/‎17‎/‎2018 at 7:38 AM, bostonangler said:

 

I feel great... Let's get rid of all the opinion blogs, sites and youtubers who pose as news but are not. There is a big difference between news outlets and people pretending to be news. 

When someone on the right like Alex Jones or on the left like newshounds, spew conspiracy theories as news product they need to either give a disclaimer that it is opinion or they need to go. JMHO

 

B/A

What you are calling for is censorship and a removal of their 1st amendment rights. As I stated this is a leftist mentality. I know you have stated you are independent, but from all I have read on your post; you do swing that way. As always, you are entitled to your first amendment right to your opinion.

[bostonangler]

5 hours ago, Enigma2a said:

What you are calling for is censorship and a removal of their 1st amendment rights.

 

Not at all... I'm saying an individual should not present their opinion as news... It is not news to say "I think, believe, etc." For Alex Jones to say Sandy Hook didn't happen is fine as long as he says "in my opinion". Not present it as news. It's okay for some investment person to say we believe bitcoin will go to $20,000, but legally they cannot say "For a fact bitcoin will go to $20,000. It is the same for Adam Montana. Adam never says Dinar is a guaranteed investment. He says he believes it is a solid investment. So censorship is the wrong word to use. I think a better word would be "responsible". But of course for those who believe in conspiracy, they will now think I work for George Soros and I'm part of the Deep State, because I think opinion should be labeled as such.... JMHO (Just my humble opinion)

 

B/A

[bostonangler]

6 hours ago, Enigma2a said:

B/A, Taking security clearances is not a 1st amendment action.

 

He has admitted he is doing this not as a security issue, but as punishment, and in case you didn't know it, doing so is illegal...

 

It’s a federal crime -- §1513 if anyone wants to look it up -- to retaliate against someone for providing truthful information to law enforcement.

Here’s the text of Section 1513(e):

Whoever knowingly, with the intent to retaliate, takes any action harmful to any person, including interference with the lawful employment or livelihood of any person, for providing to a law enforcement officer any truthful information relating to the commission or possible commission of any Federal offense, shall be fined under this title or imprisoned not more than 10 years, or both.

So he is abusing his power for self preservation. I find it hard to understand how so many people who tell you they are patriots who love America, are not outraged by anyone in government who thinks they are above the law. This is so political. If Obama or Clinton were pulling security clearance because they didn't like what someone said about them people on the right would be outraged, but for Trump to do it, those same people make up excuses for him and accept the abuse of power. And that is the problem with America today. Partisanship is destroying all of us.

B/A

[Enigma2a]

46 minutes ago, bostonangler said:

 

He has admitted he is doing this not as a security issue, but as punishment, and in case you didn't know it, doing so is illegal...

 

It’s a federal crime -- §1513 if anyone wants to look it up -- to retaliate against someone for providing truthful information to law enforcement.

Here’s the text of Section 1513(e):

Whoever knowingly, with the intent to retaliate, takes any action harmful to any person, including interference with the lawful employment or livelihood of any person, for providing to a law enforcement officer any truthful information relating to the commission or possible commission of any Federal offense, shall be fined under this title or imprisoned not more than 10 years, or both.

So he is abusing his power for self preservation. I find it hard to understand how so many people who tell you they are patriots who love America, are not outraged by anyone in government who thinks they are above the law. This is so political. If Obama or Clinton were pulling security clearance because they didn't like what someone said about them people on the right would be outraged, but for Trump to do it, those same people make up excuses for him and accept the abuse of power. And that is the problem with America today. Partisanship is destroying all of us.

B/A

B/A, have you looked at the list of people he is looking at to remove their clearances. They have either been fired or demoted and under ethics review and then fired. In my humble opinion, as one who has had a clearance before, if you are fired, you do not deserve the privilege of keeping your clearance. If Trump listed people who have not been fired or under ethics review and wanted to take their clearance, then I too would be outraged. Some on the list actually lied under oath and were fired because of it, should they keep their clearance? Comey admitted to leaking and was found to have mishandled his job, or should Rosenstein not written a letter to Trump explaining why Comey should be let go? So should he keep his clearance? Clapper even stated Brennan’s rhetoric was political. Unfortunately, most people look at everything thru rose colored political glasses instead of rationally looking at things in a neutral manner. This is not about Trump abusing his authority, but about making sure that if you are removed for other than honorable reasons; you do not deserve your clearance. Remember it is a privilege and not a right. If I was fired from my government job, I would expect to lose my clearance as well.

[Indraman]

1 hour ago, bostonangler said:

 

Not at all... I'm saying an individual should not present their opinion as news... It is not news to say "I think, believe, etc." For Alex Jones to say Sandy Hook didn't happen is fine as long as he says "in my opinion". Not present it as news. It's okay for some investment person to say we believe bitcoin will go to $20,000, but legally they cannot say "For a fact bitcoin will go to $20,000. It is the same for Adam Montana. Adam never says Dinar is a guaranteed investment. He says he believes it is a solid investment. So censorship is the wrong word to use. I think a better word would be "responsible". But of course for those who believe in conspiracy, they will now think I work for George Soros and I'm part of the Deep State, because I think opinion should be labeled as such.... JMHO (Just my humble opinion)

 

B/A

 

Who determines what is "News" and what is not? If a person says that the sky is falling, which agency or authority will confirm the sky is falling?

 

Indy

[bostonangler]

Just now, Enigma2a said:

B/A, have you looked at the list of people he is looking at to remove their clearances. They have either been fired or demoted and under ethics review and then fired. In my humble opinion, as one who has had a clearance before, if you are fired, you do not deserve the privilege of keeping your clearance. If Trump listed people who have not been fired or under ethics review and wanted to take their clearance, then I too would be outraged. Some on the list actually lied under oath and were fired because of it, should they keep their clearance? Comey admitted to leaking and was found to have mishandled his job, or should Rosenstein not written a letter to Trump explaining why Comey should be let go? So should he keep his clearance? Clapper even stated Brennan’s rhetoric was political. Unfortunately, most people look at everything thru rose colored political glasses instead of rationally looking at things in a neutral manner. This is not about Trump abusing his authority, but about making sure that if you are removed for other than honorable reasons; you do not deserve your clearance. Remember it is a privilege and not a right. If I was fired from my government job, I would expect to lose my clearance as well.

 

Honestly, why do people make excuses for our president? He admitted he is punishing people who make him look bad... Remind you of anyone? Geeez

 

B/A

[bostonangler]

Just now, Indraman said:

 

Who determines what is "News" and what is not? If a person says that the sky is falling, which agency or authority will confirm the sky is falling?

 

Indy

 

Not who... It's what... And what is fact... Not opinion... That's the problem.

 

B/A 

[Enigma2a]

1 hour ago, bostonangler said:

 

Not at all... I'm saying an individual should not present their opinion as news... It is not news to say "I think, believe, etc." For Alex Jones to say Sandy Hook didn't happen is fine as long as he says "in my opinion". Not present it as news. It's okay for some investment person to say we believe bitcoin will go to $20,000, but legally they cannot say "For a fact bitcoin will go to $20,000. It is the same for Adam Montana. Adam never says Dinar is a guaranteed investment. He says he believes it is a solid investment. So censorship is the wrong word to use. I think a better word would be "responsible". But of course for those who believe in conspiracy, they will now think I work for George Soros and I'm part of the Deep State, because I think opinion should be labeled as such.... JMHO (Just my humble opinion)

 

B/A

B/A, whenever I look at an online “News site”, I always default to the opinion that it is their opinion and not actual news. It is a shame there are no true unbiased journalist anymore. I miss just getting the news as news without someone’s spin attached to it.

[Enigma2a]

4 minutes ago, bostonangler said:

 

Honestly, why do people make excuses for our president? He admitted he is punishing people who make him look bad... Remind you of anyone? Geeez

 

B/A

Anyone who is in office regardless of political affiliation would be my answer. And no, I do not make excuses for him. 

[bostonangler]

2 minutes ago, Enigma2a said:

B/A, whenever I look at an online “News site”, I always default to the opinion that it is their opinion and not actual news. It is a shame there are no true unbiased journalist anymore. I miss just getting the news as news without someone’s spin attached to it.

 

I totally agree.. I used to work for TV news. Over the years it went from journalism to gossip, and "spot news" with means accidents and fires... There is no investigative reporting.

 

B/A

[bostonangler]

Just now, Enigma2a said:

Anyone who is in office regardless of political affiliation would be my answer. And no, I do not make excuses for him. 

 

Anyone in office should be held to the highest standards... Sadly none of them on either side of the aisle have scruples.

 

B/A

[Synopsis]

 

 

 

[PeaceSign]

On ‎8‎/‎17‎/‎2018 at 6:38 AM, bostonangler said:

 

I feel great... Let's get rid of all the opinion blogs, sites and youtubers who pose as news but are not. There is a big difference between news outlets and people pretending to be news. 

When someone on the right like Alex Jones or on the left like newshounds, spew conspiracy theories as news product they need to either give a disclaimer that it is opinion or they need to go. JMHO

 

B/A

 

Dude if you get rid of alex jones then get rid of CNN. CAUGHT MANY TIMES STAGING LIES!!

 

You can not stop free speech Like literally impossible.

[bostonangler]

9 minutes ago, PeaceSign said:

 

Dude if you get rid of alex jones then get rid of CNN. CAUGHT MANY TIMES STAGING LIES!!

 

You can not stop free speech Like literally impossible.

 

I would never want to stop free speech. But you can't yell fire in a movie theatre and you shouldn't ever want to. Same with calling yourself news when you are not. Everyone should have the right to speak their mind as long as they do it responsibly. I know that will never happen, but people should try...

 

B/A

[PeaceSign]

11 minutes ago, bostonangler said:

 

I would never want to stop free speech. But you can't yell fire in a movie theatre and you shouldn't ever want to. Same with calling yourself news when you are not. Everyone should have the right to speak their mind as long as they do it responsibly. I know that will never happen, but people should try...

 

B/A

 

You should be able to say anything your want even "FIRE FIRE FIRE!" If it is illegal the justice system will make an example of that person. What does "news" mean to you? cuz Sandy Hook has a lot of anomalies and to me that is news. Same with the Boston bombings, and aurora, and the *** nightclub have a ton of valid arguments that in fact it was a false flag. We don't need thought police...I am allowed to question all narratives even if it makes a fake mom cry! or a real one!

 

 

[nstoolman1]

Who gets to define "responsibly"?

Everyone has the right to free speech as long as they are willing to except the consequences 

that go with it. 

[bostonangler]

2 minutes ago, PeaceSign said:

 

You should be able to say anything your want even "FIRE FIRE FIRE!" If it is illegal the justice system will make an example of that person. What does "news" mean to you? cuz Sandy Hook has a lot of anomalies and to me that is news. Same with the Boston bombings, and aurora, and the *** nightclub have a ton of valid arguments that in fact it was a false flag. We don't need thought police...I am allowed to question all narratives even if it makes a fake mom cry! or a real one!

 

 

 

I'm sorry to hear you say Sandy Hook or the Boston Bombings were staged... I noticed you didn't mention 911... As for false flags and the Deep State, the best example I see of those right now is the guy who was picked to lead America down the tubes by insiders... He sure wasn't picked by the American voter.

 

B/A

[PeaceSign]

I was on a train once and this guy gets on, and he's yelling at nothing! I knew he was crazy, cuz he sits down and just randomly yells at someone who is not there, everyone noticed but no one cared! THE WHOLE TIME!! Now was it annoying to some...sure, I found it amusing, but can you imagine if we all started trying to label what you can and cannot say...that is MADNESS!    Everyone could be "locked up" for saying things that others don't like. Think about that you could out me, and then I could turn around and out you. IMPOSSIBLE, we would all end up caged for being offended.

[PeaceSign]

5 minutes ago, bostonangler said:

 

I'm sorry to hear you say Sandy Hook or the Boston Bombings were staged... I noticed you didn't mention 911... As for false flags and the Deep State, the best example I see of those right now is the guy who was picked to lead America down the tubes by insiders... He sure wasn't picked by the American voter.

 

B/A

 

9/11 too! and san bernadino! all great arguments coming from those believe the false flag...parkland too!