"Freedom of speech" in US

[obyknven]

US hide truth about killings of journalists in Murica. If you read reports of CIA-pet "Reporters without borders"  you can't find info about killings of journalists in US.

http://en.rsf.org/press-freedom-barometer-journalists-killed.html

 

Do you think this is because Murica is land of freedom and democracy? Nope, it's because this theme is taboo. For example you don't find info about killing of David Christopher Bird in these reports.

 

http://www.wsj.com/articles/body-of-missing-reporter-found-in-new-jersey-1426789646David Christopher Bird,

 

But it's not single case

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Chauncey_Bailey

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bill_Biggart

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/James_Edwin_Richards

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Manuel_de_Dios_Unanue

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Fritz_D'Or

 

[Hurlshort]

I thought we were sticking to one oby thread at a time?

[obyknven]

fix link

 

http://www.wsj.com/articles/body-of-missing-reporter-found-in-new-jersey-1426789646 

[obyknven]

I thought we were sticking to one oby thread at a time?

Do you offer reduce of my freedom of speech in freedom of speech thread?  

[obyknven]

RT is enemies of Murica because they asked wrong questions.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=29DdyVq4xR4

 

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=tIzx14AsK2s

[Guard Dog]

This is a great subject to talk about because with the IRS ruthlessly hunting down every PAC that even SOUNDS like it's against Obama, outspoken critics of the President being routinely audited, Freedom of Information requests being denied left and right by the administration, subpoenaed information and e-mail being destroyed, then lying about how it happened. There is no debate that there is an active effort to suppress freedom of speech and information in the US right now. It started under Nixon, abated under Ford, Carter, Regan, and Bush I. It picked up again under Clinton, went into overdrive under Bush II and into turbo under Obama.

 

But I'm sorry Oby, your premise for starting this thread and the links you posted (the ones that actually worked) are crap

[Hurlshort]

Why dont we have a stronger repeal the patriot act movement in this country? All I hear is a bunch of crazy "Obama is a muslim communist who is against white people" instead of actual solutions.

[Guard Dog]

Why dont we have a stronger repeal the patriot act movement in this country? All I hear is a bunch of crazy "Obama is a muslim communist who is against white people" instead of actual solutions.

That would be a good start. But only a start. The leviathan on the Potomac needs to have it's fangs pulled in a more meaningful way than just repealing the patriot act. I'd like to see HCA (Obamacare) gone, and real tax reform coupled with the dissolution of the IRS (or a least a serious reduction in it's size and capabilities). Once that is done let get some justices on 1st Street who actually respect the 10th amendment and maybe we can roll back some of this trash. I'd also love to see Term Limits on Congress too. 

[HoonDing]

Freedom of speech, not freedom of consequences.

 

EDIT: lulz, I luv Russia Today

Edited March 21, 2015 by HoonDing

[Valsuelm]

I wonder if there's some loser American on some Russian gaming forum somewhere that trolls Russians and tries to insult their nation on a semi-regular basis.

[Volourn]

"I wonder if there's some loser American on some Russian gaming forum somewhere that trolls Russians and tries to insult their nation on a semi-regular basis."

 

Eh. That kind of Amerikan probably vanishes within hours of his first post....

[obyknven]

I wonder if there's some loser American on some Russian gaming forum somewhere that trolls Russians and tries to insult their nation on a semi-regular basis.

Lol. Western boys must avoid Russian forums, it's really terrible places.

[Gorgon]

Ask yourself this. In dayZ, wich this is supposed to be, which is the more impressive outcome ?

[HoonDing]

Red-blooded Amerikans wouldn't speak Russian anyway unless they're commie traitors who wouldn't insult the Motherland anyways.

[BruceVC]

There is very little wrong with the notion of  "freedom of speech " in the USA and IMO to suggest this  is is  really just " Obama-bashing " and  a scurrilous accusation 

 

You have vociferous and influential newspapers and international news channels that are independent from government control and these  provide just one medium where criticism and praise of the government can and most certainly does happen

 

You have a degree of  political partisan control on the stories and direction at some of these places  but end of the day there is still absolute " freedom of speech " in the USA   
 

[213374U]

All I hear is a bunch of crazy "Obama is a muslim communist who is against white people" instead of actual solutions.

 

Might I suggest that then, perhaps, you are listening to the wrong people and news outlets?

 

From an outsider's perspective, it looks like Americans are afraid of even listening to "underdog" candidates, and that's even before some "clever" pundit tags them as communists, radical leftists, or whatever. They couldn't possibly win, so what's the point, right? This is a sort of sad self-fulfilling prophecy.

 

Do you expect the people who implemented and consolidated the attacks on your freedom to reverse the process of their own volition?

[Longknife]

Maybe someday we will learn to be more like Russia, the pinnacle of true freedom within the modern world.

[Guard Dog]

 

All I hear is a bunch of crazy "Obama is a muslim communist who is against white people" instead of actual solutions.

 

Do you expect the people who implemented and consolidated the attacks on your freedom to reverse the process of their own volition?

 

 

Now that is hitting the nail squarely on the head. That is why if there is ever to be any reform it MUST come from the State governments because the Federal government is hopelessly out of control for this very reason. The ones who benefit from the intrusion on freedom will never be the ones to stop it from happening. That is why so few justices like Scalia & Thomas, actual 10 amendment champions ever get nominated.

 

The other alternatives are we continue down the road we're on until the very notion that we are a free republic is a joke. Or, at some future point we fight.

 

I always wondered if Obama realized how close he came to a limited armed insurrection over the Cliven Bundy affair? I'm not saying it was a good cause to fight over, it really wasn't. I'm not saying Bundy deserved the support, he really didn't. But folks are getting so angry about the heavy handed treatment from Sodom-on-the-Potomac many are looking for a fight.

[Namutree]

Maybe if Rand Paul wins in 2016 things will begin to reverse.

[Hurlshort]

 

All I hear is a bunch of crazy "Obama is a muslim communist who is against white people" instead of actual solutions.

 

Might I suggest that then, perhaps, you are listening to the wrong people and news outlets?

 

From an outsider's perspective, it looks like Americans are afraid of even listening to "underdog" candidates, and that's even before some "clever" pundit tags them as communists, radical leftists, or whatever. They couldn't possibly win, so what's the point, right? This is a sort of sad self-fulfilling prophecy.

 

Do you expect the people who implemented and consolidated the attacks on your freedom to reverse the process of their own volition?

 

 

I was actually a big fan of the Green Party when they had Ralph Nader at the helm.  I haven't looked into them much lately.  But I appreciate the sentiment of limiting corporate power in the country.  

 

 

I do want to see a third party arise in this country.  I think it should be a hardcore moderate party built on compromise are rational solutions.  I live in a dream world, obviously.  

[Hurlshort]

Maybe if Rand Paul wins in 2016 things will begin to reverse.

 

Rand Paul does not seem to be his father.  Although it could be he is just pandering to get votes.  Which is also something his father wouldn't do.

[Guard Dog]

Maybe if Rand Paul wins in 2016 things will begin to reverse.

Even if he does the President can't make or change laws. I know the filthy son of a b---h we have now has been doing that very thing, illegally, by misusing executive orders and, for reason that stupefy me, has been allowed to get away with it. But if I vote for Paul and he begins using executive authority to do things no President should be able to do then I am against him. Even if it's something I agree with.

 

Congress makes laws. Congress changes laws. ONLY Congress. The preservation of the separation of powers is far more important that any political outcome. The left in this country will say the ends justify the means if they get what they want. But that is so short sighted because the executive power that has been seized at the expense of Congress and the people will someday be in the hands of someone they don't like.

[Guard Dog]

 

 

All I hear is a bunch of crazy "Obama is a muslim communist who is against white people" instead of actual solutions.

 

Might I suggest that then, perhaps, you are listening to the wrong people and news outlets?

 

From an outsider's perspective, it looks like Americans are afraid of even listening to "underdog" candidates, and that's even before some "clever" pundit tags them as communists, radical leftists, or whatever. They couldn't possibly win, so what's the point, right? This is a sort of sad self-fulfilling prophecy.

 

Do you expect the people who implemented and consolidated the attacks on your freedom to reverse the process of their own volition?

 

 

I was actually a big fan of the Green Party when they had Ralph Nader at the helm.  I haven't looked into them much lately.  But I appreciate the sentiment of limiting corporate power in the country.  

 

 

I do want to see a third party arise in this country.  I think it should be a hardcore moderate party built on compromise are rational solutions.  I live in a dream world, obviously.  

 

Corporate power? Are you serious? What power do you think corporations have? Can they throw you in jail? Can that seize your life savings? Can they take your guns, your home,  your children from you? The most powerful corporation in the world could not take one penny from your checking account without your permission, Hurlshot. The smallest government right there in your home county can take it all.

 

Corporations do have money no doubt.  And they are not afraid to use that money to get the government to swing the big stick for them. If we take the stick away from the government then everyone is safe. If we give the government a bigger stick and hope they use it against the corporations we forget that sooner or later the use the stick on us.

 

You don't invite in the lion to help you with the bear. If you do you just end up in the lions belly instead.

[Hurlshort]

I certainly didn't say I want a bigger government that can limit corporate power, GD.  It looks to me that both businesses and government are currently getting fat off one another.  Why can't we find some candidates that want to limit corporate lobbyists AND work towards fiscal responsibility AND support civil rights?  I believe that is the entire premise of Ralph Nader's latest book.  

 

https://nader.org/books/unstoppable

 

That list he gives has a number of libertarian principles.  There are a number that a disagree with, but the alternative is just moving forward with a broken two-party system where the candidates are all the same.

 

Also he blasts Hillary Clinton, so you should like that about him.     

[Namutree]

 

Maybe if Rand Paul wins in 2016 things will begin to reverse.

 

Rand Paul does not seem to be his father.  Although it could be he is just pandering to get votes.  Which is also something his father wouldn't do.

 

He isn't his father AND he's pandering to get votes.

 

He'd moderate to be sure, but he'd be moderating in the right direction.

 

 

Even if he does the President can't make or change laws. I know the filthy son of a b---h we have now has been doing that very thing, illegally, by misusing executive orders and, for reason that stupefy me, has been allowed to get away with it. But if I vote for Paul and he begins using executive authority to do things no President should be able to do then I am against him. Even if it's something I agree with.

 

 

 

Congress makes laws. Congress changes laws. ONLY Congress. The preservation of the separation of powers is far more important that any political outcome. The left in this country will say the ends justify the means if they get what they want. But that is so short sighted because the executive power that has been seized at the expense of Congress and the people will someday be in the hands of someone they don't like.

 

What laws can be passed is hugely impacted by the president since he has the power of veto. Want to get some BS bill signed into law? Pass something the president likes. Not to mention there are bills that need to be renewed which gives the president influence over congress.

 

The President has incredible power to turn things around even without abusing executive orders.