Category Archives: Free Speech

The Heat is On

The heading sounds like the title of a song…hey and I like that song too!!

This post is about Lois Lerner and Eric Holder because the latest revelations mean that Eric Holder and his Justice Department are in big doo doo. It has been decided that Lois Lerner should face criminal prosecution. The case has been sent to the Justice Department. However, it has been revealed that the Justice Department was working in cahoots with Lerner in an effort to prosecute conservative groups for what is claimed to be lies. This attempted action smacks of anti-liberty and it flies in the face of the right to free speech. (In my view, the political activity of those groups is entirely based upon the right to the freedom of speech).

Breitbart has an item regarding the meltdown of Eric Holder when he last appeared before Congress. Eric Holder is facing a contempt of Congress charge, and what I do not understand is why the Congress have not proceeded any further with the charge. The article is worth a read. Here is an excerpt from the article:

And Eric Holder has much to hide.

Holder is at the center of one of the most serious scandals of the Obama administration, “Operation Fast and Furious,” where weapons were allowed to “walk” across the border by our government and into the hands of Mexican drug cartel members. One of those weapons wound up at the crime scene of murdered Border Patrol Agent Brian Terry, precipitating public outrage and congressional investigations. Countless Mexican citizens, by Holder’s own admission, will also be shot and killed by weapons supplied by his Justice Department’s gun-running operation.

Holder’s attempts to obstruct justice in the investigation of Fast and Furious were the reason for the attorney general’s contempt citation and for his embarrassing exchange with Rep. Gohmert. (Holder continued his political haranguing at a conference run by the infamous race-hustler Al Sharpton the day after his testimony.)

As Rep. Gohmert pointed out, if Holder had any respect at all for the institution of Congress, or any sincere regret over the contempt citation, he would begin cooperating and release the records that will help us to unravel one of the most shameful chapters of Holder’s tenure. 

But he won’t. Because he can’t. To release those records is to prove his guilt. He knows it. We know it. Congress knows it. And so does the president, who made a desperate effort to protect Holder by claiming Fast and Furious records were protected by executive privilege, which they are not.

Which scandal will bring about impeachment?

The reality is that Barry Soetoro is embroiled in a series of scandals, not just one, that have the potential to bring about impeachment proceedings. In each case it is the lies and the cover-up that is important. The Republican Congressman Chaffetz is probably the most keen to consider impeachment over the stonewalling regarding the Al Qaeda attack at Benghazi. I do think that by the end of his investigations he will be even more keen to see the impeachment process put in place. Yet there are other scandals, each with their own importance and each of them attacks the very freedoms that are gained from the U.S. Constitution.

1. The attack on the First Amendment. The reality of the scandals that indicate attacks on the First Amendment of the U.S. Constitution is only just beginning to hit. There are at least three scandals involved:

– IRS harassment of conservative groups

– the collection of AP records via DoJ

– the attack on Fox News and in particular James Rosen also via DoJ.

I have no doubt that this list will increase in the coming days as more and more things come to light. It is early days where each scandal is concerned.  The IRS one has some legs with so many lies being told that it seems obvious that the instigator of the harassment was in fact POTUS. The smoking gun has to be in the White House logs… and no I do not believe the story about the forum being the reason that the head of the union was at the White House. The log actually indicates that she was there for a meeting with POTUS. (developing)

2. The attack on the Second Amendment of the U.S. Constitution

– Fast and Furious which is still being investigated and there continues to be a situatin where Eric Holder is in contempt of Congress and the White House refuses to hand over documents relating to that matter claiming executive privilege. At this stage I am willing to state that Barry Soetoro was aware of Fast and Furious and that he was the instigator because he wants to be able to ban guns.  I have no doubt that Eric Holder is in collusion with Barry on this subject.

3. Benghazi. I cannot properly classify this one, but I see it as tied up with the attack upon the First Amendment. My reasoning is based upon the attitude of Muslims with regard to the Freedom of Speech…. but that is only one very small portion of this particular subject. Benghazi is a multi-part scandal because there are many issues to take into account including talk of gun running (this is not proved). The real scandal is of course the cover-up and there is where the free speech component surfaces, because of the false claims that a third rate short documentary was somehow to blame for what took place. The person who was responsible for the documentary is in jail, allegedly because of parole violations. Yet, it goes deeper because this is also an attempt to stop anyone criticizing Islam. The speeches of Barry Soetoro to the UN on the subject is ample evidence that this story is about anti-free speech motives.

Now I am one who supported the people of Libya as they fought to free themselves from the yoke of Gadhafi. It did not bother me that some of those fighting were Islamists. What Gadhafi had done through the years was sufficient reason to not support him in any way. I will continue to point out that the Libyan government is elected and it is not run by Islamists (even though Islamists are trying to get control). There are lots of issues remaining in Libya and the situation remains fluid. What I want to point out is that those governing Libya were not responsible for the Al Qaeda attack upon the US consulate. I will also point out that the Libyans would have been more cooperative if it had not been for the amateurish stuff ups that followed the attack including Susan Rice going on TV and contradicting President Mogharief of Libya. She caused him to lose face in Libya and abroad because of the contradiction.  I do not support the Islamists in Libya and I believe that those responsible for the continuing violence in that country, especially in Benghazi need to feel the full force of the Libyan law. However, that is a Libyan internal matter and is not necessarily related to the AQ attack.

The real issue is the cover-up and the refusal to acknowledge that Al Qaeda is not in demise as proclaimed. There has been a refusal to acknowledge terrorism in the USA and that has led to the harming of the survivors of the Ft Hood jihadi attack by Hussein Nidal. It also led to the refusal of the FBI to take warnings about the Tsarnaev brothers seriously, even though it did not stop the FBI doing surveillance on a journalist by the name of James Rosen who was just doing his job.

4. This leads me to the AP scandal again because it is one that is developing legs since it was first revealed. Once again I see this in terms of an attack upon free speech.

At least 3 of these scandals are tied to the Supreme Court decision in the Citizens United case. From that point of view, I can see that there is an overkill, an overreaction in regard to that decision. In that decision, certain things were struck down that affected to a very small extent campaign donations.  What it did not do was to make it easier for corporations to donate to political parties or individuals. Neither did that case make it easy for overseas individuals to donate to political figures. In fact Barry Soetoro has been guilty of accepting those oversease donations (yet another scandal) and hiding the information via bundling. The parts of McCain-Feingold that specifically stayed in place were those parts that forbid foreign donations. The case itself dealt with the chilling of free speech, and this was something brought out in the opinion of Clarence Thomas. It was an issue that 5 of the justices took seriously. For this they were attacked by Barry Soetoro.

Each and every one of these particular scandals could lead to impeachment. We just have to see what develops because in each instance there has been intimidation of individuals that has been in place to stop them talking. It is not just Gregory Hicks who has complained about such intimidation.

A few names keep springing up in regard to these matters. One of them is Lois Lerner, another is Cheryl Mills who is a close associate of Hillary Clinton.  The name of Cheryl Mills keeps cropping up as underlings in the State Department have been “punished” and without just cause.

Developing story – North Korea and reporter Rosen

Breitbart News is reporting about the uproar over the Justice Department targeting 3 Fox News Staffers. Two were targeted because of the Fast and Furious scandal but the other, Rosen was targeted because of his report about North Korea’s possible reaction to further UN sanctions.

This is a developing story and from what I can see the investigation is a true chilling of the freedom of the press and the right to free speech.

The other person in the middle of this developing story is Jin Woo-Kim who is facing serious charges relating to what is being called leaks.

I guess it does not matter that North Korea has reacted in precisely the way that was described by Rosen. Yet again we see a White House Administration that does not want to face facts and constantly responds to crisis in an inappropriate way.


Hot Air is also covering this story about the lengths to which the DoJ has gone in order to chill the freedom of the press.


Despite what some think, White House Pool reporters had some very angry questions for Carney during the daily briefing. Two reporters, Major Garrett from CBS and Jonathon Karl of ABC asked some rather angry questions. Another unnamed reported asked what Carney said was a hypothetical and he refused to answer the question.

This story is developing legs because it goes to the heart of what reporters do when they report the news. James Rosen did nothing wrong yet the White House via the DoJ has treated him as if he was a criminal. At the same time I do not believe that the contractor did anything wrong. The information, by the way, has been proved to be correct. North Korea has reacted in that exact way and the White House wants to continue burying its collective head in the sand, ignoring the realities of the situation.

(note: I long for the days of the Nixon Administration because President Nixon was very good when it came to Foreign Affairs. It was Nixon who gained the trust of Mao Tse Tung, which is a very big achievement because that contact led to the opening up of China. He got pilloried over Vietnam yet Nixon actually had to make decisions that went against his own religious convictions, and he was not afraid to make those decisions. He was far more decisive than most people recognize. What is more, I have since learned that Nixon was going to be impeached for ATTEMPTING to use the IRS against his enemies. His attempts were unsuccessful, and that makes it hard for me to comprehend why Nixon is condemned when Barry Soetoro is getting away with what is now the most chilling White House Administration in the history of the United States of America.)


Sharyl Attkisson has also mentioned that her computers were compromised. It appears that someone or an entity did an illegal search of her computers. She has not named names… but stand by for further explosive information over this matter.


Hot Air has a post regarding the thoughts of three reporters, including Brit Hume and Kirsten Powers. The comments by Kirsten Powers ( Fox News reporter with liberal leanings) are a must read. I continue to be amazed over the statements being made by Powers and it is not the first time that I have been full of admiration for what she has to say. I note that Powers was the one who had some critical comments to make over the way in which the LSM failed to report on the Gosnell murders and crimes.

The chilling of free speech

The right to free speech is something that I believe can be abused. Yes, I really do believe that there are times when the press go too far. The News of the World hacking scandal is of the manner in which journalism oversteps the boundaries of decency and a right to privacy. The hounding of Lady Diana, the Princess of Wales, which was something that led to her untimely death, was another example of media going too far. However, going too far can be in the opposite direction as well.

When the Supreme Court handed down its decision in the Citizens United vs. FEC case, there was an outcry by some over the campaign donations aspect of the case. The issue was actually quite murky because the corporation, Citizens United had been formed for a political purpose. The Supreme Court struck down one part of the McCain-Feingold act relating to the donations of corporations inside of the USA. However, it did not strike down that part of the act that referred to overseas donations. However, you would not have known that was the case in light of the brouha and carry on that came from the White House and DNC operatives. They were furious over this particular decision. The Justices also reversed a couple of decisions that gave corporations that included something like the Wisconsin Right to Life, the right to free speech during a political campaign (at least that is how I understand a portion of the judgment because the Wisconsin Right to Life case was specifically mentioned in the judgment).

What you might not have known or understood, that at the heart of the majority opinion, and especially the opinion of Clarence Thomas was their views about the chilling of free speech. They in fact saw the McCain-Feingold Act (or at least that one section) as an attempt to chill free speech. So, it would seem that the carry on was in fact obsfuscation once again, so that the real heart of the decision was hidden from the public. The outcome of the case was to determine when a video that was very harsh on Hillary Clinton could be released and seen by the public so close to voting. It is not like it actually affected the current pResident in the White House, yet he was the one who screamed at the Supreme Court Justices. In other words, he was trying bully boy tactics in an attempt to chill free speech.

The latest example of this attempt to chill free speech happened last week when Mark Halperin, a left-wing political analyst stated on the Morning Joe show on NBC, that he thought a speech given by Østupid, showed that Østupid was being a dickhead (Richard Cranium is the polite form of the same expression). The comment was supposed to be bleeped, but there was a stuff up, and Halperin immediately apologized on air. Later that day NBC suspended Halperin indefinitely. It turns out that the dickhead in the White House, whatisname, that Jay person, got on the blower and demanded action. What for? The scandal here is not the use of the term “dick” which is actually very mild, but the fact that NBC caved to pressure from the White House, thus chilling free speech.

Some media outlets are actually incensed over the matter. Should Halperin have been suspended over the issue? Personally, I do not believe that he should have been suspended for making a comment about what he thought about a lousy speech from Østupid. The action, based upon something so minor is indeed cause for concern. It is an action that implies that no one can offer an opinion that does anything other than draw adulation for Duh Won. This is how dictators behave.

This brings me to a comparison in Middle Eastern countries such as Syria and Libya, as well as a couple of other countries from the former Soviet bloc. Much of what we are hearing about the deaths and suppression in Syria cannot be verified because Asshat has banned the press. Even press people from Lebanon have ended up in trouble after they crossed the border. In other words Asshat has engaged in tactics that are meant to suppress the truth about the whole issue, and in that way he hopes to control the narrative about those who are protesting his regime. The Libyan regime under Daffy Duck has indulged in a similar tactic, only they have allowed the press to enter Tripoli, but they are not allowed to roam freely, and they are only allowed out of the Rixos Hotel with a minder (though a couple of times they managed to ditch the minder in order to deliver an interview with 4 of the revolutionaries inside of Tripoli). The stage management has meant that the press are taken to various sites where things have been quite clearly set up. This has included the placement of bodies removed from the hospitals under the pretence that the people died as a result of the bombings from NATO. It was all a set-up. The journalists, on the other hand have tried to do the right thing, and they report what they are supposed to report, but buried inside their reports you will find disclaimers, as well as other information that casts a fresh light on what they have seen. An example would be the bombing that took place near a children’s playground. The press did see the bunker that was built underneath the children’s playground and they reported exactly what they saw.

On the same subject, the correspondents who have been travelling with the revolutionaries have been treated a whole lot better than in Tripoli, and they have been able to accompany the rebels on their excursions, thus reporting what is happening, and without fear of being killed, unless of course they end up being caught by Daffy goons. Several sets of correspondents have either been killed by Daffy goons, or they have been captured. A few of those who were captured, and have now been released came from the New York Slimes. Several correspondents lost their lives in Misrata when the Daffy goons turned their missiles upon them. This is the kind of thing that happens when free speech is being chilled.

This is also why the interference of the White House in NBC is an absolute scandal. It is not the remark that is offensive. It is the chilling of free speech that led to Halperin being suspended that is really offensive.

Freedom of Speech comes with responsibility

This is a controversial topic, and many of you will not like my point of view. However, I have tried to give this subject a lot of thought.  It relates to what I consider the irresponsible actions of Terry Jones, the “pastor” from Florida. I am not talking about either the Lindsay Graham or the General Petreus solution here, I am talking about the responsibility that comes with our right to free speech.

Terry Jones knew that his actions would create a situation when Middle Eastern countries learned of his actions. Terry Jones knew the consequences of his actions – that there would be a riot because the more radical imams would stir up the hatred against the USA as well as against Christians.

In the past innocent words have been twisted and distorted by those radicals, and it had also led to riots and deaths. A good example were the words uttered by Pope Benedict not long after he was elected to become Pope during the Regensburg address. Now I happened to agree with the comments that were uttered at the time. I feel sure that Josef Ratzinger did not intend to cause a riot.

However, when you compare that situation with the deliberate actions of Terry Jones, one has to question the lack of responsibility shown by Jones.  I happen to think that his actions were totally irresponsible. Whether one can say that he is responsible for the deaths at the UN compound is another story. Also, I am not going as far as calling his actions bigotry, even though it might be appropriate.

Our freedom of speech, such as what I am exercising here, comes with the responsibility of not inflaming people to the point of causing riots. It also comes with the responsibility of not spreading fear amongst people. It really is very much a two way street.

Now, it happens that I disagree very much with the tactics used by Muslims when they start these riots. I happen to disagree with the manner in which they try to twist the freedom of speech so that it is used against us. The riots and the deaths caused by the riots are a form of intimidation. Muslims are very goood at that form of intimidation. Their imams are very good at whipping up the anger that leads to the riots, church burning, and the deaths of westerners in Muslim countries.  It is nothing new in those countries.

In the past I have mentioned the Africans known as the Circumcellions. I mention them here because I think that it will throw some light on the excitability of these people. If you want to find a link, try looking up the Donatist controversy, because the story of the Circumcellions is tied up with the Christian heresy known as Donatism.  Basically, the Circumcellions were probably a bit thick when it came to the idea of martyrdom. They seemed to think that they had to find a way of dying as martyrs, but without committing suicide. These people existed well before Mohammed, but they are African tribesmen. My mention of them is based upon how I see that it was in the nature of these people to be extreme in one way or the other. The Circumcellions, who lived around the time of St. Augustine, can certainly be described as extreme.  This is my point we are dealing with people who have a tendency to do extreme things out of a wrong belief that they are somehow doing God’s will.

It is for this reason that I personally disagree with the manner in which Terry Jones has exercised his basic right to free speech. It would be far better if he took responsibility for his actions, rather than putting on a front of further belligerance. 

Surely we can disagree with the Muslims, even disregard the Koran as being holy, but without doing something that was bound to cause a riot? 

I do not defend the Westboro Baptist church when they protest at funerals, and likewise I will not defend the actions of Terry Jones. Was he really doing God’s work by taking that action?