Warning: mysqli::__construct(): (HY000/1203): User howardkn already has more than 'max_user_connections' active connections in D:\Inetpub\vhosts\howardknight.net\al.howardknight.net\includes\artfuncs.php on line 21
Failed to connect to MySQL: (1203) User howardkn already has more than 'max_user_connections' active connectionsPath: ...!eternal-september.org!feeder3.eternal-september.org!news.eternal-september.org!.POSTED!not-for-mail From: "Adam H. Kerman" Newsgroups: rec.arts.tv Subject: Re: The 1st Amendment Apparently Doesn't Exist in New York Either Date: Tue, 30 Apr 2024 16:32:23 -0000 (UTC) Organization: A noiseless patient Spider Lines: 150 Message-ID: References: <58CcnV8UJNeyK637nZ2dnZfqnPWdnZ2d@giganews.com> Injection-Date: Tue, 30 Apr 2024 18:32:23 +0200 (CEST) Injection-Info: dont-email.me; posting-host="2e1e963bdddd711087034c6d1e2bdf25"; logging-data="2703984"; mail-complaints-to="abuse@eternal-september.org"; posting-account="U2FsdGVkX1/TjgFVhl7OSErrzuzwwXldEmCr8uzaOL0=" Cancel-Lock: sha1:UoVq2OihUjS2tbt9W00feXSrYjA= X-Newsreader: trn 4.0-test77 (Sep 1, 2010) Bytes: 8513 BTR1701 wrote: >Fresh off a New York judge illegally declaring that 1/10th of the Bill of >Rights has been repealed in her courtroom, the governor of New York has >announced she'll be policing 1st Amendment protected speech if she doesn't >like what you're saying. >New York Announces it Will Take Citizen Surveillance and Censorship to the >Next Level >Like the plot to a dystopian movie, New York will now monitor social media >writings, collect data, and use law enforcement to crack down on any >expression it deems to be hate speech. The article is dated Friday, November 17, 2023. >New York Gov. Kathy Hochul (D) announced on Monday that the state will ramp up >surveillance efforts of social media accounts and that law enforcement will >take proactive measures, including contacting people on suspicion of using >"hate speech". >Hochul cited the rise in anti-Semitic activity in New York and especially New >York City, where the world's largest population of Jews outside of Israel >resides. Hochul also mentioned alleged "Islamophobic" incidents, which she >claimed were increasing and going under-reported. Versus the previous governor who ignored dozens of VIOLENT incidents, in the New York area and upstate. The worst during this period was the Squirrel Hill massacre in 2018 but that was Pittsburgh. >The governor said she would also be increasing police presence, which she >stated has been focused on protecting potential targets including "synagogues >and yeshivas and mosques and any other place that could be susceptible to hate >crimes or violence". >As part of that, Hochul explained, "...we're very focused on the data we're >collecting from surveillance efforts-- what's being said on social media >platforms. And we have launched an effort to be able to counter some of the >negativity and reach out to people when we see hate speech being spoken about >on online platforms. Our media analysis, our social media analysis unit, has >ramped up its monitoring of sites to catch incitement to violence; direct >threats to others, and all this is in response to our desire, our strong >commitment, to ensure that not only do New Yorkers be safe, but they also feel >safe because personal security is about everything for them." >[What the hell is the gobbledygook in that last sentence? "Not only do New >Yorkers be safe"? "They also feel safe because personal security is about >everything for them"? Who's writing this crap? Cardi B?] Heh I'm sure there were lots of arrests of low-hanging fruit loud mouths to not only do New Yorkers be safe but they'll completely miss the incitement and conspiracy to a specific mass violence incident. >Last month, Hochul and New York City Mayor Eric Adams demanded that social >media platforms monitor speech and shut down "incitements to violence", with >Adams insisting, "These guys are experts. If they don't want to do their job >of policing themselves, I really believe it's time for the federal government >to step in." Precrime! >The calls come as Europe ramps up censorship of alleged hate speech, including >pressuring X owner Elon Musk to censor the posts of online users. The United States is the only country in the world with free speech as a civil right. >Many European nations now have laws that have made the expression of religious >beliefs to be viewed as banned speech. This week Finnish Member of Parliament >(MP) Paivi Rasanen and a Lutheran bishop were acquitted after four years of >trials and investigations simply for sharing the biblical view on marriage and >sexuality. Four years! >And in the U.K., an Army veteran will soon be tried for silently >praying for his deceased son outside of an abortion clinic. How did this not cause a diplomatic incident? Stupid question, was his son actually born or is he counting an incident of abortion? >[But notice these European countries never arrest the Muslims who openly call >for the deaths of Jews and Americans.] Those used to be considered threats and not free speech under specific circumstances. >In the U.S., politicians have demanded Internet censorship and have even >engaged in it themselves. For example, the Supreme Court will soon hear >Missouri v. Biden, a case in which the federal government coerced social media >platforms to censor content it disagreed with-- even if the content was true. >Jonathan Turley, a constitutional law professor at George Washington >University and free speech advocate who has written extensively on the issues >of censorship and limitations on speech, has cautioned the U.S. against >adopting European censorship laws that allow governments to stop people from >saying things that governments oppose. Despite what many think, "hate speech", >which is subjective, is protected both by the Constitution and by Supreme >Court precedent. The truth can be hateful. False speech may not be hateful but it can be useless or said to lead others into false conclusions. >He wrote: >"There have been calls to ban hate speech for years. Even former journalist >and Obama State Department official Richard Stengel has insisted that while >"the 1st Amendment protects 'the thought that we hate'... it should not >protect hateful speech that can cause violence by one group against another. >In an age when everyone has a megaphone, that seems like a design flaw." There were pamphlets circulated encouraging open revolution versus the British leading to the war that founded this country. >Actually, it was not a design flaw but the very essence of the Framers' plan >for a free society. Of course it's a design flaw. All hail George III! >The 1st Amendment does not distinguish between types of speech, clearly >stating: 'Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, >or prohibiting the free exercise thereof; or abridging the freedom of speech, >or of the press; or the right of the people peaceably to assemble, and to >petition the government for a redress of grievances.'" >He cited Brandenburg v. Ohio, a 1969 case involving "violent speech", wherein >the Supreme Court struck down an Ohio law prohibiting public speech that was >deemed as promoting illegal conduct, specifically ruling for the right of the >Ku Klux Klan to speak out, even though it is a hateful organization." The speech took place on private property. It actually could have been a very narrow decision but it was a broadly expansive decision to protect black civil rights leaders who might say something incendiary BUT NOT incitement to unlawful activity from getting arrested for the violent or destructive act of someone who had heard the speech. >That ruling led to National Socialist Party of America v. Village of Skokie in >1977, where the Court unanimously ruled that the city government could not >constitutionally deny a permit for the American Nazi Party to hold a march in >the city streets, even in a city populated heavily by Holocaust survivors. >Turley also noted that in the 2011 case of RAV v. City of St. Paul, the Court >struck down a ban on any symbol that 'arouses anger, alarm or resentment in >others on the basis of race, color, creed, religion or gender, and in Snyder >v. Phelps, also in 2011, the Court said that "the hateful protests of Westboro >Baptist Church were protected". >https://www.standingforfreedom.com/2023/11/new-york-announces-it-will-take-citizen-surveillance-and-censorship-to-the-next-level/?twclid=2-6oshw3g6bxsmwqt160vrgne5i