The New York Times Beclowns Itself With Fake News About Free Speech

The Federalist ^ | July 1, 2018 | David Marcus

[detective]

There is nothing new about The New York Times running bizarre progressive agitprop. But thankfully these articles are more often relegated to the opinion pages. Not so today, as a headline purporting to be news, on page 1A above the fold, offered the absurd opinion that conservatives have “weaponized free speech.”

In the place of anything remotely resembling facts or serious empirical evidence, the article by Adam Liptak relies mainly on quotes from “experts” who think government needs to compel bad guys to shut up. William F. Buckley comes to mind while reading the mealy-mouthed assault on our greatest and first freedom, specifically his observation that “Liberals claim to want to give a hearing to other views but then are shocked and offended to discover that there are other views.” Indeed.

[detective]

Conservative speech really is under attack.

Conservative, Christian and traditional thought have been demeaned and marginalized by the government, the media and the education establishment. It is only a small step to having free speech criminalized.

[BenLurkin]

Nothing clownish about this. NYT is advocating totalitarian government.

[antidemoncrat]

“For some, hunting is not only a leisure activity, but also a real source of food. For others, hunting is an inhumane and even evil practice. The gun is neutral in this debate”
A gun is also neutral when people shoot people but somehow the libs always find a way to demonize the gun for that.

[M Kehoe]

Didn’t the New York Times exist at one time?

5.56mm

[Repealthe17thAmendment]

From the article: Of course speech is a weapon: the most powerful one that exists. The British understood this when Thomas Paine changed the world with a pamphlet, launching the deadly violence of the American Revolution and ultimately the natural rights protections that the Times so casually tosses aside today.

Just like a gun, speech is a weapon that can be used for good or ill, and there is no basic understanding or a priori definition of which is which. For some, hunting is not only a leisure activity, but also a real source of food. For others, hunting is an inhumane and even evil practice. The gun is neutral in this debate, just as speech is neutral in the debate over who should have the freedom of it.

How long before the left starts requesting "Speech Control", and making people apply for the right to speak?

[dfwright]

How long before the left starts requesting "Speech Control"

They're not going to request it so much as use technology to force it. Twitter and others are actively engaged in making sure only "acceptable" speech is "heard"

[rx]

The shift here owes to the those behind the NWO wanting communist levers at their disposal. These are things over which Americans are ultimately willing to fight and die.

Clearly the NWO/DS/Dem coalition is trying to move the goalposts here. A majority of Americans have seen this or will be able to see it, with Republican control of the Executive Branch. This is why they have felt they had to make Trump “a temporary aberration” (to use Brennan’s recent words), driving both impeachment and death threats.

That U1 approver and that clown that likes to be called the “real president” (both of whom haven’t hesitated to move on lawless usurpation) will have to take their orange-jump-suited places at Gitmo before these trends will turn around.

[KingofZion]

What countries have the least freedom of speech today (and throughout history)?

(1) Communists
(2) Fascists
(3) Totalitarians
(4) Dictators
(5) ISIS

All know that they will lose control if the truth gets out.

Of course liberals don’t like free speech anymore because they can’t win the battle of ideas.

[FenwickBabbitt]

“Weaponized free speech” means conservatives want to have free speech too. That’s all that the closed-minded, intolerant leftists are really complaining about.