Pushback: Forsyth County school board in Georgia sued for censoring parents during public comment

The Forsyth County School Board

Bring a gun to a knife fight: The five elected members of the Forsyth County Board of Education in Georgia have now been sued for the repeated censoring of parents during their open comment period because the parents wished to read pornographic excerpts from books that school board had approved for use in school libraries.

The suit was filed by the Institute for Free Speech (IFS) for two parents, Alison Hair and Cindy Martin, as well as the independent parents organization called Mama Bears of Forsyth County.

Multiple district residents, including Mama Bears members and plaintiffs in the lawsuit Alison Hair and Cindy Martin, have used their time to read aloud from school library books they consider pornographic. Yet while these materials are available to kids in school, the Chair has cut off and banned speakers who read from them at Board meetings when he deems the language inappropriate or profane.

This catch-22 robs parents of the ability to confront board members with the very language they themselves consider inappropriate for children, such as graphic descriptions of sex acts. After plaintiff Alison Hair attempted to read one such passage at a March 15 board meeting, she received a letter signed by every member of the Board of Education prohibiting her from participating in any future meetings until she provides a written guarantee that she will abide by the Chair’s directives. The Board, however, cannot require that citizens sacrifice their First Amendment rights as a precondition for participating in meetings, the lawsuit explains. [emphasis mine]

You can read the complaint here [pdf]. The facts of the case are very clear: the board members, led by board chairman Wesley McCall, have been abusing their power to silence any criticism. They are also doing whatever they can to prevent parents from revealing the queer and obscene content contained in school library books that the board members have approved for children, as well as creating rules that make removing these books practically impossible. From the complaint:
» Read more

A large majority of today’s college students think blacklisting is a good thing

The user manual for the modern generation
The user manual for the modern generation

The modern dark age: Old-fashioned Americans, who believe in free speech and tolerance, often assume that the spate of cruel blacklisting stories that now dominate our society are merely the actions of a few isolated individuals who have happened to gain a position of power and are abusing it.

This assumption could not be more wrong. We are entering a future where blacklisting, censorship, and the abuse of power will become the norm, because apparently the new generation thinks such things are always justified, if they have been offended in any way. From a recent poll of 2,000 students at 130 colleges:

In one eye-opening finding, 74 percent of undergrads endorse the view that a professor who says “something that students find offensive” should be reported to the university. By a majority almost as lopsided, 65 percent believe that a fellow student who says something they consider offensive should be turned in. That informers’ mindset is especially pronounced among students who identify themselves as politically liberal, fully 85 percent of whom would report a professor who offends them. But even among self-identified conservatives, a solid majority, 56 percent, are of the same mindset. [emphasis in original]

» Read more

Pushback: PA school board settles lawsuit and will pay $300K for censoring critics

Reaffirmed at Pennsbury
Reaffirmed at Pennsbury, despite its school board’s hostility

Bring a gun to a knife fight: The Pennsbury school board in Pennsylvania has now been forced to pay $300K and fire its attorney, Peter Amuso, because that attorney silenced three different individuals during the open comments period at a school board meeting, simply because they were criticizing the board’s policies.

More details here. This quote describes how Amuso shouted down one of those speakers, Doug Marshall:

Marshall was interrupted by solicitor Peter Amuso for referring to the equity policy as the “equity and critical race theory policy,” which, Marshall is told, isn’t what it is officially called. … Marshall is later asked to stop speaking for sharing “irrelevant” information and violating Pennsbury School Board Policy 903, which states that members of the public can be asked to stop speaking for “lengthy, personally directed, abusive, obscene or irrelevant” comments.

“You’re now being disruptive and disorderly, you’re done,” Amuso can be heard telling Marshall as he objects to being cut off.

The board’s defeat in court was certain because a federal court has already ruled [pdf] that the board’s actions were unconstitutional.
» Read more

Today’s blacklisted American: Lake Superior State University bans free speech

No first amendment allowed at Lake Superior State University
No free speech allowed at Lake Superior State University

The modern dark age: In June Lake Superior State University earned the Speech Code of the Month award from the Foundation for Individual Rights and Expression (FIRE) for having a vague and oppressive policy towards the placement of posters on campus.

Students wishing to put up posters on campus at Lake Superior State University better choose their words carefully, as the public university’s posting policy threatens “disciplinary sanctioning” over material deemed “offensive, sexist, vulgar, discriminatory or suggestive.” The trouble with this policy is that anyone, for just about any reason, can claim that someone else’s speech is “offensive” or “suggestive.”

Every month, FIRE highlights a university policy that hinders students’ free expression, and we’ve made Lake Superior State’s “Posting Policy” FIRE’s Speech Code of the Month for June.

FIRE’s main complaint about the college’s poster policy is that it is “overbroad” and “vague,” and could be abused to ban almost any speech. Students are thus forced to self-censor out of fear that any proposed poster he or she wishes to post could be deemed “offensive” and not only be banned, but cause the school to impose sanctions against the student.

The policy however is far worse. Note the highlighted phrases from that policy:
» Read more

Today’s blacklisted American: Democrat politicians threaten local Aspen newspaper for its news coverage

The goal of Democrats everywhere
The goal of Democrats everywhere

Blacklists are back and the Democrats have got ’em: Because a bunch of local Aspen, Colorado, politicians dislike how the Aspen Times has been covering one story, they wrote a letter to that newspaper demanding it change its coverage and hire their preferred journalists or they would use their power to silence it.

From their letter, written to Robert Nutting, CEO of Ogden Newspapers which owns the Aspen Times:

Our faith in Ogden Newspapers is shattered and we are individually considering separate reactions as a result, including: directing our individual organizations to pull advertisements and notices from the paper; encouraging local businesses to do the same; refusing interviews with reporters at the Aspen Times; or calling for a community boycott of the paper.

To reinstate our trust in the Aspen Times, we would like to see clear action from Ogden Newspapers such as the following: reinstatement of Andrew Travers as the Editor in Chief; re-publication of Marolt’s June 10 column; a joint statement from Travers, Allison Pattillo, the publisher of the Times, and yourself, detailing the editorial freedom and standards of transparency that will be carried forward; and, public clarity about the settlement that was reached by Doronin’s lawsuit.

» Read more

Pushback: Students win major settlement with college for denying them their free speech rights

Chike Uzuegbunam: winner against college censorship
Chike Uzuegbunam: A winner against college censorship

Bring a gun to a knife fight: Because the Supreme Court had ruled 8-1 in March 2021 that Georgia Gwinnett College and its officials could be held liable for damages for illegally denying several religious students their first amendment rights, the university last week finally settled the five-year-long case in favor of those students, paying nominal damages and attorneys’ fees totaling more than $800,000.

The case began when the university in 2016 twice prevented two students, Chike Uzuegbunam and Joseph Bradford, from talking to other students about their religious faith on campus. The first time the university claimed that, according to its speech zone policies, the students could only do so after getting permission from the school and then limiting their speech to a tiny free speech zone on campus. When Uzuegbunam followed this policy, school officials then banned him from speaking entirely because someone had complained. From the Supreme Court’s March 2021 ruling [pdf]:
» Read more

Pushback: Supreme Court rules in favor of HS football coach fired for praying

Joe Kennedy: An American once again free to pray
Joe Kennedy: An American once again free to pray,
when and where he wishes.

Bring a gun to a knife fight: In a 6-3 decision, the Supreme Court today ruled in favor of high school coach Joe Kennedy, who was fired by the Bremerton School District in Washington because he choose to kneel and pray quietly on the football field at the end of each game.

Joe Kennedy was a junior varsity head coach and varsity assistant coach with the Bremerton School District in Washington from 2008 to 2015. He began the practice of reciting a post-game prayer by himself, but eventually students started joining him. According to court documents, this evolved into motivational speeches that included religious themes. After an opposing coach brought it to the principal’s attention, the school district told Kennedy to stop. He did, temporarily, then notified the school that he would resume the practice.

The situation garnered media attention, and when Kennedy announced that he would go back to praying on the field, it raised security concerns. When he did pray after the game, a number of people stormed the field in support.

The school district then offered to let Kennedy pray in other locations before and after games, or for him to pray on the 50-yard line after everyone else had left the premises, but he refused, insisting that he would continue his regular practice. After continuing the prayers at two more games, the school district placed Kennedy on leave.

He eventually lost the job when the school district refused to renew his contract.

You can read the Supreme Court’s ruling here [pdf].

Initially Kennedy was holding locker room prayer sessions and postgame religious talks, actions by a public school teacher that are certainly inappropriate. However, when the district demanded these stop he did so.

Subsequently he began praying on the field, alone and silent, after games. This action did attract some students to join him, but since he did not require participation he was violating no one’s rights, nor was he acting as a government agent at that time.
» Read more

Pushback: University of Houston forced to allow free speech to settle lawsuit by conservatives

University of Houston: reluctantly forced to recognize the First Amendment

Bring a gun to a knife fight: When in December 2021, the University of Houston changed its anti-discrimination policy, broadening the definition so widely that almost anything anyone said could be defined as harassment, three conservative students obtained the help of the first amendment organization Speech First and sued. From their lawsuit [pdf]:

The Policy’s “[e]xamples of harassment” make clear that the Policy covers protected speech. Examples of harassment “include but are not limited to: epithets or slurs, negative stereotyping, threatening, intimidating, or hostile acts, denigrating jokes and display or circulation (including through email or virtual platforms) of written or graphic material in the learning, living, or working environment.”

Under the Policy, even “[m]inor verbal and nonverbal slights, snubs, annoyances, insults, or isolated incidents including, but not limited to microaggressions,” can constitute harassment if “such incidents keep happening over time and are targeting a Protected Class.” The Policy warns that “academic freedom and freedom of expression will not excuse behavior that constitutes a violation of the law or this Policy.” [emphasis mine]

In other words, according to the highlighted quote, the university’s anti-discrimination policy attempted to overide the First Amendment to the Constitution.
» Read more

Pushback: HOA demands flag be removed; Neighbors rally and raise their own flags

Banned by Cumberland Crossing HOA
Free speech banned by Cumberland Crossing HOA.

Bring a gun to a knife fight: When the Cumberland Crossing HOA in Ohio demanded that resident Thomas DiSario take down the thin blue line flag he had been flying for five years to honor his son — who had been a policeman killed in the line of duty — he not only refused, all his neighbors rallied in support by raising their own flags throughout the neighborhood.

Some neighbors in a subdivision near Etna are making a statement after a resident was told to take down his “thin blue line flag” by the Homeowner’s Association. The HOA told him to remove it, calling it a political statement.

“I applaud them for it and it’s growing. You see more flags out every few days, you see a few more flags and blue light bulbs,” said Kathy Riddle, neighbor.

More and more neighbors in Cumberland Crossing are mounting thin blue line flags outside their homes. “We wanted to show respect for our neighbor. And we appreciate the service that his family member gave,” said Riddle.

It appears that the HOA demanded the flag’s removal after one complaint, and claimed the reason for doing so was simply because “It is a political statement.” The image below shows the text from the HOA letter, clearly indicating that its reasons for demanding the flag’s removal was an attempt by the HOA to ban political speech.
» Read more

Today’s blacklisted American: Teacher threatened with loss of license for expressing an opinion

Marissa Darlingh: Her free speech not allowed in Wisconsin
Marissa Darlingh at the April 23rd rally: Her free speech forbidden by Wisconsin

They’re coming for you next: A Wisconsin teacher, Marissa Darlingh, has been threatened with loss of her teaching license by the Wisconsin Department of Public Instruction (DPI) for speaking publicly — on her own time and as a private citizen — at a feminist rally on April 23, 2022 against the modern queer movement to introduce perverse sex instruction into elementary schools.

During that rally, Ms. Darlingh publicly expressed that she “oppose[s] gender ideology” in elementary schools and that young children should not be “exposed to the harms of gender identity ideology” or given “unfettered access to hormones—wrong-sex hormones—and surgery.” She argued passionately that she “exist[s] in this world to serve children” and “to protect children,” and does not support social or medical transition of young children. In the passion of the moment, Ms. Darlingh at one point said “[expleteive] transgenderism,” referring to the “gender identity ideology” that she believes harms children.

The Wisconsin Department of Public Instruction (DPI) issued Ms. Darlingh a letter on April 29, informing her that the agency opened an investigation to determine whether to revoke her educator license for “immoral conduct” at the April rally. The letter cites Darlingh’s use of profane language as well as her statements “oppos[ing] gender identity ideology from entering [her] school building” and her statements that she “do[es] not believe children should have access to hormones or surgery” as examples of her “immoral conduct.”

You can view the DPI letter here [pdf]. In threatening to take away Darlingh’s right to teach, it also gave her the option to end the public investigation if she would simply “surrender her license.” To do so DPI kindly included an agreement for her to sign.

In other words, “You sure have a nice looking resume. It sure would be a shame if something happened to ruin it.”

Darlingh not only did not surrender her license, she enlisted legal help from the Wisconsin Institute for Law & Liberty (WILL), which immediately sent a letter to DPI [pdf] telling it to back off or face a lawsuit for violating Darlingh’s first amendment rights. The letter also took the offensive, closing with this demand:
» Read more

Today’s blacklisted American: Churches vandalized by leftists for their beliefs

Today's modern witch hunt
What the left really wants: To burn Christians at the stake.

Genocide is coming to America: Four churches in Olympia, Washington, were vandalized during the May 21st weekend by Puget Sound Anarchists, a pro-abortion group that makes believe it is anti-authoritarian but is willing to commit violence against anyone who dares to express an opinion it does not like.

From an anonymous post on May 22nd on their own website:

A Mormon church, Calvary church, Harbor Church, and St. Michael’s Catholic church all received facelifts in the early hours of Sunday morning. We dumped red paint over the entryways and left messages of “If abortions aren’t safe then neither are you,” “Abort the church,” and “God loves abortion.”

…While a little graffiti may be a small gesture in the war against patriarchal religious control, we wish to highlight that it’s easy and fun to attack. Our enemies are vulnerable and easy to find. [emphasis mine]

In another post from July 2021, this group proudly takes credit for destroying and damaging a garage full of police cars, adding

Be bold! Sabotage is fun!

» Read more

Pushback: Two Alaska Airlines flight attendants fired for asking questions file lawsuit

Alaska Airlines: Opposed to free speech and religious freedom
Alaska Airlines: Opposed to free speech and religious freedom
Picture credit: Quintin Soloviev

Bring a gun to a knife fight: Today’s blacklist story is a follow-up on a September 2021 story about two flight attendants — Marli Brown and Lacey Smith — who were fired by Alaska Airlines because they had the nerve to question the airline’s public support of a gay rights bill, and asked those questions on a forum the airline had itself arranged for employees to comment.

At the time the attendants, represented by the First Liberty Institute, had filed a complaint with the Equal Employment Opportunity Commission (EEOC), which recently issued “right-to-sue” letters to both attendants.

First Liberty has now filed its lawsuit, which you can read here [pdf]. The suit is against both Alaska Airlines and the Association of Flight Attendants Association of the AFL-CIO that failed to defend both Brown and Smith. From the complaint:

On February 25, 2021, Alaska Airlines posted an article about its support for the Equality Act to an internal employee message board and solicited employee comments. The Equality Act is proposed legislation that would add “sexual orientation and gender identity” as protected classes to a variety of federal statutes and would curtail the applicability of the Religious Freedom Restoration Act.

In response, Marli and Lacey felt compelled by their Christian faith to post one comment each, asking about the impact of the Equality Act on civil rights for religion and women in the workplace.

Alaska Airlines responded to Marli and Lacey’s posts by immediately removing Marli and Lacey from their flight schedules, terminating their employment, and disparaging their religious expression and beliefs as “discriminatory,” “hateful,” and “offensive.”
» Read more

Today’s blacklisted American: Professor’s suspension for having an opinion now more than 100 days long, with no end in sight

Georgetown University: No free speech allowed

They’re coming for you next: The suspension by Georgetown University of Ilya Shapiro from his position as executive director for the Georgetown Center for the Constitution because he posted a tweet critical of Biden’s most recent Supreme Court nomination is now more than 100 days long, with no clear end date.

Shapiro’s tweet, now deleted, had noted the Biden administration’s decision to make race and gender more important than a judge’s legal qualifications in picking Ketanji Brown Jackson for the Supreme Court was a bad mistake. For that crime, Georgetown University put him on administrative leave while it conducted “an investigation.”

It is now more than three months later, and the university not only has not completed this faux investigation, which really has nothing to investigate as all the facts are plainly visible for all to see, it apparently has no intention of telling anyone when the investigation will end:
» Read more

Today’s blacklisted American: Biden’s Labor Board attempts to silence conservative news outlet for making bad Twitter joke

Ben Domenech and The Federalist, blacklisted
Ben Domenech and The Federalist, censored by the federal government’s
National Labor Relations Board

Blacklists are back and the Democrats have got ’em: The National Labor Relations Board (NLRB) is attempting to silence the conservative news site The Federalist for “unfair labor practice” because its publisher Ben Domenech sent out a bad Twitter joke in 2019 about unions, and two lawyers who had nothing to do with the company complained to the NLRB.

The National Labor Relations Board (NLRB) has ordered Ben Domenech—publisher of the conservative website The Federalist…—to take down a June 2019 tweet in which he joked about sending employees who wanted to unionize to work in “the salt mines.” Domenech has refused, and the case is now making its way through the courts.

Domenech’s tweet came in response to news that employees of Vox Media Inc. walked off the job in support of unionization. No one at The Federalist had publicly expressed any interest in unionizing, and two of the website’s six employees filed affidavits attesting that they viewed the tweet as a joke. As far as I know, Domenech doesn’t own any salt mines.

The complainants, leftist lawyers Matt Bruenig (a former NLRB attorney) and Joel Fleming, have never worked for or been personally harmed by the Federalist and were clearly acting to silence their political opponents by taking advantage of NLRB’s overly broad regulations, which allow total strangers to file complaints against businesses they don’t like. The NLRB then moves to harass those businesses.
» Read more

Today’s blacklisted American: Conservatives and the religious blackballed at Disney

Disney: Hostile to free speech

Persecution is now cool! Even as the corporate management at the Disney company is publicly aligning itself with the gay political agenda, a group of conservative and religious Disney employees have published a letter outlining how this so-called “inclusive” company has made its workplace very hostile to them, forcing many to leave and requiring the letter writers to stay anonymous to protect their jobs.

One of the employees, who works in the Imagineering department designing attractions in Disney theme parks, told The Daily Wire that he’s had three close colleagues leave his division in just the last nine months because of the increasingly hostile work environment. “No matter what department or what segment, we’ve been watching the [diversity, equity, and inclusion] takeover of Disney accelerate to breakneck speeds, and God help you if you get caught standing in front of the train.” [emphasis mine]

The full letter is available here on Google docs. Assuming Google will censor it at some point, the link above has also republished it in full at the bottom of the article. This quote from the letter is especially revealing about the intolerant work atmosphere created by the “woke” Disney employees:
» Read more

Today’s blacklisted American: HS student sues after being punished for saying there are only two genders

No free speech allowed at Exeter High School in New Hampshire.
No free speech allowed at Exeter High School in New Hampshire.
Photo: Austin Blake Grant

They’re coming for you next: A freshman student from Exeter High School in New Hampshire is suing his school district and assistant principal for suspending him from one football game because he had stated his Catholic belief that there are only two genders in a text message exchange with another student.

The boy’s name is at this point being withheld, with the lawsuit being handled by his attorney, Ian Huyett of Cornerstone Action, a Christian advocacy group focused on New Hampshire issues.

The lawsuit alleges the student received a one-game suspension in September in violation of his constitutional right to free speech and the New Hampshire Bill of Rights because he expressed what the suit called his Catholic belief there are “only two genders,” male and female.
» Read more

Today’s blacklisted American: PJMedia banned by Twitter for calling a man a “man”

Cancelled Bill of Rights
Doesn’t exist at the Twitter.

The new dark age of silencing: The quite legitimate and major conservative news outlet PJMedia was locked out of its Twitter account this week because it had the audacity to state that just because the Biden administration’s assistant secretary for Health for the U.S. Department of Health and Human Services likes to wear make-up and dresses, that does not make him a woman, even if he claims he is and the government and Twitter insist we accept that claim, no questions asked.

PJM’s Matt Margolis took issue with that claim in an article titled: “Rachel Levine Is Not the ‘First Female Four-Star Admiral’… Because He’s a Male.” He wrote:

Even if you believe that gender is a social construct and subject to how one feels and not dependent on biology, sex chromosomes determine whether an individual is male or female. Rachel Levine is 100 percent male, right down to his DNA. He is not a female. He may have grown his hair out and changed his name to a woman’s name, but that doesn’t make him a female.

Let me second Margolis’s position. If Levine likes to cross-dress, all power to him. However, he is still a guy, and that is what I will call him, to his face if I ever had the unlikely opportunity to do so. This would likely get me arrested and blacklisted also, as that is now what our present culture demands for anyone who dissents from the leftist agenda, even if that leftist agenda is utterly false and contrary to reality.
» Read more

Today’s blacklisted American: YouTube blacklists U.S. senator for saying things YouTube dislikes

Censored by YouTube
Senator Rand Paul: censored by YouTube

The new dark age of silencing: YouTube has once again removed videos of Senator Rand Paul (R-Kentucky) while also suspending him for a week, because he stated facts about COVID-19 and masks that YouTube dislikes.

YouTube last week removed a video of an interview the Kentucky Republican senator did on Newsmax. Paul discussed his suspicions about the origins of the coronavirus, his feud with Anthony Fauci over what funding for research in China’s Wuhan lab came from the United States, and argued that most face coverings do not help stop the spread of the virus.

Paul, an eye doctor, then recorded, and on Aug. 3 uploaded, a second video chastising YouTube for taking down the video and promoted one of its competitors, Rumble. He defended his comments on masks. “Saying cloth masks work, when they don’t, actually risks lives, as someone may choose to care for a loved one with COVID while only wearing a cloth mask. This is not only bad advice but also potentially deadly misinformation,” Paul said in the video.

YouTube responded by taking down that video as well, saying that it violated YouTube’s community guidelines. On Tuesday, Paul’s office said that the company imposed a seven-day ban from posting more videos.

» Read more

Today’s blacklisted American: Town tries to silence Trump supporter; he sues

Banned for being conservative
No first amendment rights in Long Beach, New York!

The modern dark age: Because the town of Long Beach, New York has forced a Trump supporter to hide his car, festooned with pro-Trump and conservative messages, he is suing that town for $25 million for denying him is first amendment rights.

“I believe the city is trying to silence me because I’m pro-Trump,” [Michael Wasserman] told The Post. The 62-year-old entrepreneur has become known in the area for plastering his home — along with his Porsche and Jeep — with a rotating variety of political flags and stickers.

Now he has filed a $25 million federal suit — against the City of Long Beach, the chief of police, the city manager and specific police officers — after officials forced him to remove the flags on his cars.

The town claims they are a violation of an ordinance stating that “[No] sign shall be erected, affixed or maintained within the perimeter of any … public street or public property.” Wasserman parks his car on a public street outside his home.

“They’re bending and massaging the ordinance to fit the crime,” Wasserman told The Post. “This is a blatant attempt to silence me.”

The picture above shows Wasserman leaning on his car, with his home behind him, also covered with flags and political banners.

The city claims they are simply enforcing a law that forbids signage without permission on public streets. Yet, how are the signs on Wasserman’s car any different then every bumper sticker you see? They are not, and this is where Wasserman’s claim that it is pure political oppression seems confirmed.

Wasserman’s case is further reinforced by the treatment he gets generally in this blue-state New York town:
» Read more

Today’s blacklisted American: Twitter bans all election audit accounts in Arizona, Georgia, Pennsylvania, Nevada, and Wisconsin

Liberty and freedom banned
Twitter’s goal: Only Democrats can have freedom of speech.
Photo credit: William Zhang

The new dark age of silencing: In a single purge Twitter yesterday banned all the accounts of all election audits going on in Arizona, Georgia, Pennsylvania, Nevada, and Wisconsin.

Earlier today Twitter permanently suspended all nine of the official ‘Audit War Room’ accounts from it’s platform. The accounts were a main source for breaking updates and were banned as part of big tech’s continued attempt to shield the public from the stunning revelations being found regarding the fraudulent 2020 election.

Unsurprisingly, Twitter provided no reason for the suspensions. [emphasis mine]

Note the highlighted sentence. Twitter is no longer even pretending that it is banning these accounts because of some vague “community standard” that each violated. No, Twitter banned them simply because it is possible that the election audits going on in these states might actually uncover evidence of election fraud, and to allow honest and real news reporting can no longer be allowed, if that reporting might threaten the dominant leftist agenda and the Democratic Party politicians who are imposing it.
» Read more

Today’s blacklisted American: Democrats introduce Senate bill demanding companies censor social media

Democrats: No soapbox free speech allowed
Democrats: No soapbox allowed! Photo: GeorgeLouis

Blacklists are back and the Democrats got ’em! Two Democrats, Senator Amy Klobuchar (D-Minnesota) and Ben Ray Lujan (D-New Mexico), yesterday proposed a new law that would force social media companies like Google, Facebook, and Twitter to immediately remove any posts on their platforms that includes medical information those Democrats disagree with.

If the companies do not do so, they will be held liable for those posts.

As has become typical of Democrats, they label any information they disagree with as “misinformation.” To make sure their definition is sustained, their bill would have the federal government determine what is correct and not correct. That definition would then be used to justify silencing any other opinions.

Such a law would essentially repeal the First Amendment of the Constitution. Free speech will be banned. Only government-approved speech in connection with health will be allowed. If such a law was upheld by the courts (a very distinct possibility in today’s legal culture), it could quickly be expanded to cover all speech on any subject.

There is some irony in this Democratic Party proposal. » Read more

Today’s blacklisted American: Booksellers want to burn a book they do not like

The Bill of Rights cancelled by American Booksellers
No first amendment allowed at the
American Booksellers Association.

The horrible ironies of this story are beyond the pale. The American Booksellers Association (ABA), a non-profit trade organization founded in 1900 to represent independent bookstores while also defending freedom of speech, has now violently condemned the publication of a book that raised questions about the modern perverse sexual movement and its unbridled support of sex changes for young children.

First, some details about that book and its author:

Irreversible Damage [by Abigail Shrier] is not some partisan screed. In the book, Shrier delves into the startling trend of adolescent teenage girls identifying as transgender, which a scientific study described as a “social contagion.” Shrier endorses transgender identity and even hormones and surgery for some people, but she warns against “treatments” that will leave many girls permanently scarred, noting that an increasing number of those who previously identified as transgender have de-transitioned.

Note how careful Shrier is to label herself in favor of sex changes for children even as she raises fair questions about some of these procedures and the possible harm they may do.

No matter. No one at all is to be permitted to question the left’s modern sexual agenda. When the ABA included a mention of this book in its July membership newsletter, the control freaks came out in force, demanding retribution and the burning of Shrier’s book.

And the ABA immediately complied, kowtowing like groveling slaves in its statement of apology.
» Read more

Today’s blacklisted Americans: Opponents of critical race theory in Virginia subjected to harassment campaign

Rick, stating the truth in Casablanca
Are Americans finally waking up?

They’re coming for you next: The parents in Virginia who are putting together a campaign to keep the teaching of the Marxist and racist program called “critical race theory” out of their local schools have been subjected to a harassment campaign that included hate mail, threats, and even slanderous letters sent directly to their employers.

One example cited in the article:

An anti-critical race theory (CRT) activist, Jessica Mendez, says that in June her employer was sent a flyer that called her an “active racist.” “You should be ashamed to employ a known and active racist!” the flyer, obtained by Daily Caller, read. The flyer added, “Yes, what is wrong with her? She’s a racist!!”

It further showed photos of Mendez at various anti-CRT rallies protesting the curriculum of Loudoun County Public Schools. Loudoun County has been at the center of a revolt against the implementation of CRT in school curricula that has spread across the country.

» Read more

Today’s blacklisted American: YouTube shuts down conservative channel during its annual conference

banned by YouTube
No free speech for conservatives on YouTube!

Blacklists are back and YouTube’s got ’em! The American Conservative Union (ACU) was banned by YouTube this week, a ban that coincided precisely with the ACU’s annual convention, the Conservative Political Action Conference (CPAC), thus preventing it from airing content from the event.

The ACU, which hosts the Conservative Political Action Conference (CPAC), received “a strike” on their account from YouTube on July 9, preventing them from uploading new content for a week. This includes ACU’s CPAC 2021 Part 2 in Dallas, Texas, and Trump’s CPAC speech scheduled for Sunday, the organization said in a statement.

» Read more

Today’s blacklisted American: YouTube shuts down channel that routinely broadcasts Trump rallies

The Bill of Rights cancelled at YouTube
No first amendment allowed at YouTube.

Persecution is now cool! One day prior to the July 3, 2021 Trump rally in Florida, YouTube unilaterally suspended Right Side Broadcasting, the channel most well known for live streaming such events.

The suspension was for seven days. YouTube also deleted the channel’s videos from several other Trump events. From Right Side Broadcasting blog announcement:

YouTube has suspended RSBN from live streaming and posting content to their YouTube channel on the eve of President Donald Trump’s Save America rally in Sarasota, Florida.

YouTube has also deleted all of RSBN’s coverage of Trump’s June 26 rally in Wellington, Ohio, along with his June 5 speech to the North Carolina GOP convention.

The videos deleted had several million views.

As is usual for these efforts at censorship, YouTube merely claimed that “The videos contain remarks from President Trump that violate the aforementioned policies and countervailing views on those remarks are not provided.” Of course, YouTube has never demanded any Democrat to provide “countervailing views” during their political rallies, and I am sure the Google-owned video broadcasting service never will.
» Read more

Today’s blacklisted American: What the last six months has revealed

Today's modern witch hunt
Reporting daily the modern witch hunt against freedom and
independent thought.

It is just about six months since I decided to do a daily column entitled “Today’s Blacklisted American.” In that time I have documented more than 120 examples where one group of Americans thought it okay and proper to destroy the livelihood and freedom of other Americans, all because the latter said something the former did not like.

The link will take you to the full list of columns since mid-January. After six months I think it is time to assess what these columns have revealed. And that revelation is quite ugly.
» Read more

Today’s blacklisted American: Baseball bans man for expressing his opinion at baseball games with banner

The Bill of Rights cancelled by Major League Baseball
Doesn’t exist at the professional baseball games.

This seems especially appropriate during the July 4th weekend: Major League Baseball (MLB) — joining Disney, Sea World, and Sesame Street — has officially banned Dion Cini from all baseball stadiums, simply because he routinely came to games and displayed a “Trump Won Save America” banner.

Cini’s Twitter profile describes him as “Guerilla Marketeer, Political Consultant, Founder of OperationFlagDrop & ‘Professional Provocateur.’”

He has skated with his flag on Wollman Ice Rink, where he was physically assaulted, even though the Trump organization operated Wollman Rink. Cini also unfurled what is rumored to be the world’s largest Trump flag on the front of Trump Tower in Manhattan in March of this year. Cini even dropped a “Trump Pride” flag one day after the end of Pride Month.

Cini has now been banned by MLB stadiums and Disney parks, Sea World, and Sesame Street. As per his Twitter account, he has no plans of stopping the flag drops.

» Read more

Today’s blacklisted American: Rappers have song banned by Spotify & SoundCloud for criticizing BLM, government lockdowns, and the modern perverse sexual movement

The Bill of Rights cancelled at SoundCloud and Spotify
No free speech allowed at SoundCloud or Spotify.

Persecution is now cool! Rappers Bryson Grey and Patriot J have had a song with the opening line “They might ban me for this song” banned by Spotify & SoundCloud.

The song strongly criticized BLM, the government lockdowns, and the modern perverse sexual movement. Bryson noted in announcing the Spotify ban that though these same outlets claimed the song was banned for hateful speech, they do not ban much more violent rapper songs that glorify murder, crime, and drug use.

Patriot J responded by pointing out that other black rappers can glorify death, crime and all kinds of immoral and disgusting lifestyles, “but if you mess around and rap about traditional values and expose truths they will BAN YOU!”

“Remember y’all, you can rap about anything you want except going against the LGBT. You can rap about your vagina to children all day, you can rap about popping pills, you can rap about doing crime… but not the forbidden topic,” tweeted Bryson Gray.

This second link also included this tidbit about the intolerant employees at Spotify:
» Read more

Today’s blacklisted American: Journalist Andy Ngo blackballed again, this time by SoundCloud

Journalist Andy Ngo, blacklisted
Journalist Andy Ngo: blacklisted and banned by Soundcloud

Persecution is now cool! Journalist Andy Ngo has been blackballed again, this time by the podcast and music website SoundCloud.

[Ngo’s] podcast, ‘Things You Should Ngo’ was banned “on grounds of being dedicated to violating” Soundcloud’s rules. Unsurprisingly, as Ngo’s publication The Post Millennial reports, there’s a problem with the explanation.

The latest episode of the podcast was uploaded more than one year ago and there was no option in the notification email for Ngo to appeal or even seek further information. Over the weekend, SoundCloud’s Trust & Safety Team informed Ngo via email of the permanent ban for “violating” the site’s Terms of Use and Community Guidelines, which state that users must not use the platform to create content “that is abusive, libellous, defamatory, pornographic or obscene, that promotes or incites violence, terrorism, illegal acts, or hatred on the grounds of race, ethnicity, cultural identity, religious belief, disability, gender, identity or sexual orientation, or is otherwise objectionable in SoundCloud’s reasonable discretion.”

Of course, Ngo’s podcast did none of those things. His podcast simply interviewed politicians and public figures, a perfectly legitimate thing for a reporter to do in a free society. That such reporting according to SoundCloud must now be censored because some of those interviewed expressed conservative values just shows us the close-minded and oppressive attitude of that company’s management.

I say “again” in the headline because this censorship by SoundCloud follows a long string of blackballing of Ngo by many different outlets and totalitarian organizations.
» Read more

Today’s blacklisted American: Mayor in Colorado bans pledge of allegiance and anyone who dares recite it during public comments

The Bill of Rights cancelled in Colorado
Doesn’t exist in Silverton, Colorado.

The mayor of Silverton, Colorado, Shane Fuhrman, unilaterally decided during a public trustee meeting that the pledge of allegiance was now banned, saying he did so because of some “direct and indirect threats, inappropriate comments in and out of public meetings and general divisiveness and issues created in our community.”

One trustee immediately challenged Fuhrman’s ruling, noting that the trustees had voted in favor of reciting the pledge at an earlier meeting, and that the mayor had no right to rescind that vote unilaterally. Fuhrman shrugged and demanded a citation of some law saying he couldn’t do it.

When someone insisted on using their comment period to recite the pledge anyway (with the rest of the audience and some officials joining in), Fuhrman, who wa elected by a margin of only 10 votes, threatened to have them removed for daring to exercise their first amendment rights by doing so.

A video of these events is embedded below.
» Read more

1 2 3 4 8