As the blogmaster is typing he is witnessing a scene in the US Capitol akin to what is associated in countries often described as banana republics. It is impossible to find the words to accurately describe events which have caused the ceremonial event of the Electoral College to be suspended as members scatter to preserve life and limb.
The USA is Burning
1,694 responses to “The USA is Burning”
@ Crusoe
You are wrong in principle and in fact. Further, precedence has nothing to do with ideas. Every amendment of the legislation, every change in the case law changes the precedence. Precedence is fluid.
To return to the substantive issue, we cannot have a private company censuring a politician, no matter what s/he says. If the politician breaks the law, we have the rule of law; if the politician says something ridiculous, then the voters make that decision. Not private companies.
What next? So if you say you are not a multi-culturalist, or think the Mottley government is incompetent, you should be barred from Facebook, or BU, or Twitter or some other silly social media site?
Inciting mayhem and subliminal statements which undermines or create havoc and mayhem tilted towards destruction of democracy does not come under the Constitutional protection of free speech
Such are the equivalent of shouting fire in a crowded theatre
Rightwing trash are regularly banned from Twitter
Alt-Right are racists
Rightwing speak lies
leftwing speak truths
People vote for liars
Is that the same position you take when the contributions from our own ‘enlightened’ Pachamama are seen as ‘heretical’ (in your eyes only) with you constantly asking for him, Pacha, to be treated as persona non grata on BU?….(Quote)
I know you will tell any number of fabrications just to get a laugh and I will normally ignore you. But have you ever seen me call for ANYONE to be banned from BU? ANYONE. That is the problem with BU, most people cannot tell the difference between truth and fiction..
Some issues are so serious that we should stick to the truth, even if we are not familiar with it.
Pacha..i have no clue what’s going on here i do know i want no part of it. Been hearing rumors but dismissed them.
https://www.naturalnews.com/2021-01-04-dominion-smartmatic-share-same-offshore-address-barbados.html
Interesting to hear a couple US law makers have tested positive for Covid 19 after the invasion by the nut heads last week.
Private companies censor politicians every day.
Have you been living under a rock.
Currently, there is a private company refusing to meet with a president of a country despite many pleadings. This a form of censorship
Pachamama,
These two men are simply attempting to make us feel that they belong to some exclusive club of deep thinkers.
A “black power” man and a racist, strange blogfellows suffering from the same burning need to feel superior! See how they massage each other’s ego! It’s like mutual masturbation in plain cybersight! Now THAT is what I call OBSCENE!
Freedom of speech rights have ALWAYS had limits. Besides, is it not universally accepted that with every right should come responsibility????
Is it not universally accepted that, “To whom much is given, much is expected”?
Trump’s position of power demands that he show more responsibility than the average man.
When an insignificant Donna says, ” I wish Hal Austin would curl up and die,” NOBODY rushes out to make her dream come true! (tee hee)
But this man Donald Trump has probably a hundred thousand who are willing to MAKE IT HAPPEN!
We all know that gangsters often speak in code. Michael Cohen told us that Trump knows how to speak that code.
Would we fight for the right of an Al Capone to tweet his instructions in plain sight?
Steupse man! Just steupse!
“Their hignorance knows no bounds!”
All hell is breaking loose, am watching this Masters Martial Arts live with some Asians, Africans and Wesley Snipes doing their thing, someone sent me, nice and safe, these dudes and ladies are really skilled..
.. ya see that shit that’s about to explode in US and maybe other places, am staying clear..
There was a report where as soon as Trump tweeted about Pence calling him out for lack of supporting his cause the rioters immediately started to chat negatively about him. This Turd is a …
Anglo American White Supremacy is a global culture. BU is probably the only site where you can say something like whites are racists without having your comments removed and/or being banned. White people may run the net but their spies turn a blind eye to the subtle and unsubtle layers of racism by white folks in political campaigns, which is why USA and America ended up with Racist Trash Governments for Racist White Countries.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=MwswMgChld4
Two things it seems like a lot of people don’t care about free speech unless its theirs,
Dub street did someone die and leave you their crappy old record collection. See if you can find some current stuff.
In a democracy what should be the checks and balances?
Politics of Trump is Gangsterism. Will FBI be able to keep underlying simmering and brewing violence under wraps for next week and beyond.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Pqv_TqdZSYg
Aha! Multiculturalism! Now we see the problem. Hal Austin shares that phobia with white nationalists. That is why he identifies with certain elements and argues thus.
This is not simply an academic argument about free speech.
But….here’s the difficulty with being against multiculturalism – when the “other” people have already become citizens of the country one cannot simply turn back the clock and seek to suppress their rights! In some parts of the world that leads to ethnic cleansing.
I too feel more comfortable retreating to my own kind. I don’t mind flirting with other people and their cultures but I am married to mine. However, I recognise the difficulty with that in today’s world. Therefore I commit to find ways to deal with it. Life does not promise us ease and comfort.
Isn’t it contradictory for a black Bajan from The Ivy, living in LONDON and married to a white Brit to be so leery of multiculturalism????
Fish or fowl? I swear, he doesn’t know!
The study of human beings is fascinating!
“Dub street did someone die and leave you their crappy old record collection. See if you can find some current stuff.”
Didn’t know white boys like you were into music. I thought you were all about the snarks on the net.
@ Hal Austin January 12, 2021 8:35 AM
(Quote):
But have you ever seen me call for ANYONE to be banned from BU? ANYONE. That is the problem with BU, most people cannot tell the difference between truth and fiction..(Unquote).
+++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
What then do you want the much maligned blogmaster to do with Pacha?
Ostracise the poor jihadist Pacha?
Treat him the same way you want the government(s) to treat the Muslims?
What about putting him, along with your “new Barbadians”, in your concentration camp called the ‘Hal Gulag for dissenters against the gospel according to the Asstin’?
What about doing a Jamal Khashoggi job on him or even one from the template of ‘write-off’ of Qasem or that of Moshen with the backing of the same man whom you think is entitled to run his lying racist warmongering mouth ad nauseam?
But we will leave you to your ‘friendly’ nemesis Artax who is well armed with the keen competence and sharp memory to prove you be a self-deluding contradicting hypocritical genius called the BU Polymath.
Inciting mayhem and subliminal statements which undermines or create havoc and mayhem tilted towards destruction of democracy does not come under the Constitutional protection of free speech
Such are the equivalent of shouting fire in a crowded theatre….(Quote)
@ Mariposa
You are wrong. Wrong in terms of shouting fire in a crowed room, and wrong about constitutional protection of free speech (whose constitution?). What protects democracy is its own inherent principles, one of which is free speech. The parameters of free speech are spelt out in morals and law.
All that is separate to the CEO of a private company, which has a near monopoly dominance of its market, to ban people because it does not like what they are saying. How did the CEO reach that decision?
If we want a free market of ideas, then we must expect people to say things we do not agree with.
Donna do you have any concerns when multiculturalism turns into affirmative action.
David put all the info out there let the reader decide what is the truth. History is written by the winners do really believe everything that is said about a vanquished foe.? People have to make up there own minds but I am tired of trying to make a decision without all the supposed facts. For instance I watched the OJ trial from start to finish and was sure that he did it . A friend of mine formerly married to one of his teammates was positive he was innocent because she said he rarely wore a glove.
“All that is separate to the CEO of a private company, which has a near monopoly dominance of its market, to ban people because it does not like what they are saying. How did the CEO reach that decision?”
Your argument is reheated leftovers from Times News, who are racist in all they say. They have been fighting big tech for publishing views of people they don’t like for long time. Narrative about reparations for slavery and removing statues of racist icons in racist history has been doing rounds on the net but is stifled and ignored. When Times News grudgingly post about black rights and Black Livers Matter their ignorance is abundant and they always counter with white racists views for balance.
Trevor Phillips is a sell out who sold is soul and is arguing against black movements just like you.
dub not me …I play it for my cat,….it likes nothing better that rolling in the catnip listening some tunes and laying down and sleeping all day. But I have noticed lately she has been putting on weight since covid lock down and the slow play of your tunes are not helping. Speed it up a bit or you will have a diabetic cat on your conscience.
Here is some white boy music for your kind of damaged mind
Oh dear, Lawson! When a particular race has had the labour of their ancestors stolen for hundreds of years and have been oppressed for a hundred more; when all laws and practises denied that race the ability to progress, when all the hard won progress of that race is repeatedly demolished in an orgy of violence and hatred; when after bleeding and dying for a country that country kicks those of that race back into the dustbin after the war is over, some affirmative action is in order for the descendants who have so suffered to give them a leg up!
But as for those from another country and their descendants, that is debatable. For private universities, for instance, I think the argument is that a diverse student population enriches the learning experience and introduces fresh perspectives and ideas.
okay… so I will put you down as not sure
Sure about affirmative action for black American descendants of slaves.
Not sure about the rest.
Well now I am really confused! How is the blogmaster to deal with users of “obscenities” or as I like to call it – colourful language” if not by some form of censorship?
What are his options? He can ban us or he can delete the post or simply put all the “colourful commenters in moderation and then refuse to post it. Or he can repeatedly call for English rather than French in the rumshop.
And when we insist that “Sixty million Frenchmen (and women) cannot be wrong” what next???????
One word for that denial from The Contrarian, “POPPYCOCK!”
Are there limits to freedom of speech?
The First Amendment allows us to speak our mind and stand up for what we believe in. However, the limits on free speech are rooted in the principle that we’re not allowed to harm others to get what we want. That’s why we’re not allowed to use to speech for force, fraud, or defamation
Does freedom of speech mean you can say anything?
Many people seem to believe there is a law titled “Freedom of Speech” that allows you to say anything. … It’s there with the other big ones, such as freedom of religion, the press and the right to free assembly. In fact, the First Amendment does not actually promise you the right to say whatever you want.Jan 23, 2018
Given two areas of examples where freedom of speech is not absolute
@ Mariposa
To answer your question: yes. There are limits to free speech. But we already have controls of that from incitement to libel to threatening behaviour, etc. That is the route down which we should go.
The second point you raise is about the First Amendment. That is American. We are not all Americans. It may seem as if American law and values have captured the world, but not yet.
The issue remains: who gave a private company CEO the power to ban people for their views? This may be so on BU, banning someone for supporting the DLP, but in the wider scheme of things that is insignificant. We have seen people banned or having their views deleted on BU because the chairman simply dislikes the authors. But there are any number of alternatives. If I am banned from one pub I can go to the other.
Let us look at politics; I am a Christian, should I ban Jews, and Muslims, and Buddhists, or even Jehovah Witnesses, Seventh Day Adventists, etc?
However, with social media and a near global dominance, a ban is the equivalence of being ostracised. How did the CEOs reach their decisions? What was the democratic input?
You are such a liar and hypocrite.
what’s with these cardiovascular surgeons that they love to perform unnecessary surgeries so they can be seen as millionaires, no different from politicians, would rob the dead to look wealthy…these rob the healthy….from Barbados to here to there…the one in Barbados wanted to sue because he thinks he has a right to open someone’s heart who don’t need the procedure..and everywhere else these criminals believe they can perform unnecessary surgery on people to haul in multimillions and don’t go to prison.
https://youtu.be/ULOcUT_Ll00
Hal Your question bearing on who gave Twitter or Fb a right to ban Trump
From what i gather those two platforms have rules or guidelines which regulates community standards and individuals having to accept those rules or guidelines before having access to the platform
Once individual agrees to the rules and guidelines and in the interim breaks them
The platform makes decisions based upon the agreement as to whether the individual can further engaged on the platform
Trump would not be the first to be banned
I believe that Minister Louis Farrakhan was also banned and no one spoke up for his freedom of speech
https://platform.twitter.com/widgets.js
The Turd speaks.
https://platform.twitter.com/widgets.js
https://platform.twitter.com/widgets.js
https://platform.twitter.com/widgets.js
Something is happening!
https://platform.twitter.com/widgets.js
https://platform.twitter.com/widgets.js
David,
On the upside – at least I have managed to teach him the meaning of the word “ignore”. It was easy really. I’d mention the other lesson I have taught him but then he might regress just to prove me wrong.
Who knows what else I may yet teach him?
🙄
“What next? So if you say you are not a multi-culturalist, or think the Mottley government is incompetent, you should be barred from Facebook, or BU, or Twitter or some other silly social media site?”
You live in one of the biggest multicultural cities on planet Earth where every country in the world has up to 4 generations of foreigners settled here with children who were born and bred in London and gone to multicultural schools and have multicultural friends. If you don’t like multiculturalism move out of London like other racists have done.
@ Mariposa
Of course Facebook and Twitter could ban who they like in normal circumstances, but given their powerful positions they cannot. I will give a similar example.
In the UK it is not unusual for banks to ban people for all kinds of reasons. But a ban is not simply telling the would-be account holder to go elsewhere, it effectively shuts them out of all kinds of legitimate activities, such as receiving their wages by bank transfer, paying by standing orders or direct debit, etc. Apart from that it raises all kinds of suspicions.
The regulator got round that by forcing banks to offer the public a basic current account. So banks can only ban people now if they have evidence of illegitimate activity. If you have a powerful or near-monopoly position, then your responsibilities are different to a cake shop in the high street.
Same thing with Twitter. You may not like what people say on Twitter, but they have a right to express their views within the boundaries of the law.
If Twitter bans Trump and QAnon and other rightwing groups, they will also ban Black Lives Matter, Antifa and other black-led groups.
Similarly, there is a great debate about if criticising Israel is antisemitic; or to criticise Jihadists is the same as being anti-Muslim.
Remember, Trump got 74m votes.
@Mr Blogmaster, u must play by your old rule: play de ball NOT de man!
@Austin, does stretch over the crease of hypocrisy here and yes does play this free speech ball in an ugly fashion …. but as inconceivable as it is that he harps against bloggers here andnuse of uncouth language yet champions a free pass for uncouth, foul and seditious language by a world leader … he is not wrong on that moor!
And no Crusoe, you are wrong as Austin noted … the SCOTUS gave a ‘narrow’ judgement on that cake case … in fact it was so narrow that it drove to the heart of the cake maker being discriminated AGAINS for HIS RELIGIOUS beliefs.
It DID NOT legislate on the border issue of ALL companies ability to deny services and thus currently gave no precedent for that.
So how that will play in the future is unclear… again as you should have followed .. this admin (as most other Republican ones) fought against affirmative action in a Harvard case (re Asian students as I recall) and petitioned the courts to modify some aspects of that same Civil Rights Act.
This is always a very contention conservative-liberal issue.
But back to your point Mr Blogmaster, the question is not whether POTUS was bombast and dangerous with his comments … but rather if he contravened any law (as the bogger said) … if he did then he needs to be sanctioned accordingly.
DJT obviously incited a mob as your remarks and other evidence suggests but did the man have a just right to say what he said or did he BREAK the law doing so… if he did NOT then no private or public entity can curtail his speech simply because we dont like it.
That is what we condemn in Russia when the Pussy Riot band members were arrested for merely singing a song that criticized Putin.
We simply cant sooth the gander when we like and SHOOT the goose when we dont like him!
We are all responsible for our own action, so does it make sense for grown men and women to breach the capital, try to kill Mike Pence and then simply say ‘the boss-man made me do it’ … if we are all somewhat ‘weak of mind’ and ready to commit that act and the man goads us on, then free speech falters (case of Michele Carter whose boyfriend of 18-years called her threatening to commit suicide and the dear lass actually strongly suggested that he get back into his parked truck and finish the act. He did.)
Maybe POTUS has weakened many minds and they are ready to jump back into that truck … problem is social media CEOs aren’t the ones to diagnose that.
That’s just the way the law cookie crumbles or fills our head with fumes, if u prefer!
I gone.
@ David BU
Whom have you banned for supporting the DLP or deleted the views of those people you dislike?
Remember Trump got 74million votes
So was Hliter well accepted in Germany
The crux of this issues stems from Trump wording of the language is
and the power and powerful use of words that can incite anarchy as demonstrated by trump foot soldiers
@Dee Word
Let Trump who is not shy about retreating to the Courts to do so by challenging the bans. The blogmaster would have done same. Imagine a president of the USA forcing social media to flag many of his comments with fact-check disclaimers. He incited violence that resulted in the deaths and injuries to human beings for crusades.
Ban the turd!
@Artax
It is why the blogmaster used the words liar and hypocrite.
According to the F.B.I. (Fuck Being Indicted) there are expected to be armed protests in 50 states across America due to Trump’s shit stirring conspiracy theories that he was set up in his election defeat by the deep state who thought he was a dangerous cunt and needed to be evicted from his seat.
America should have their gun rights revoked as they are nut jobs with guns. There will be many dead, many arrests because the outgoing President was Un-presidential.
Free Speech is called HIP HOP, which they tried to ban, but came back harder.
but as inconceivable as it is that he harps against bloggers here andnuse of uncouth language yet champions a free pass for uncouth, foul and seditious language by a world leader ….(Quote)
Who is the uncouth, foul-mouthed world leader whose seditious language I am championing a free pass for? Plse give an example of where I once used the word seditious.
@Mariposa
So was Hliter well accepted in Germany…(Quote)
What does this mean? The conversation was about free speech and the abuse of their power by Facebook and Twitter.
@ de pedantic Dribbler January 12, 2021 1:07 PM
You’ve offered reasonable comments, which I’m in agreement with.
I don’t believe the CEO of ‘Twitter’ would’ve made a unilateral decision to permanently suspend Trump’s account without legal consultation.
Twitter permanently suspended his @realDonaldTrump account on Saturday, January 9, 2021, citing the “risk of further incitement of violence.”
https://blog.twitter.com/en_us/topics/company/2020/suspension.html
Some sources indicate the categories of speech that fall outside the US Constitution’s First Amendment protection, are child pornography, defamation, obscenity, incitement to violence and true threats of violence. However, there are tests that have to be met in order for those categories of speech to be deemed illegal.
As it relates to incitement of violence, in the case Brandenburg v. Ohio, 395 U.S. 444, 447-48 (1969), the Supreme Court held that the First Amendment protects advocating the use of force or lawbreaking “except where such advocacy is directed to inciting or producing imminent lawless action and is likely to incite or produce such action.”
However, does Twitter, Facebook, etc, fall under the category of social media platforms, or are they publishers that could make editorial decisions?
The morning after is the bit*h…🤣🤣
https://youtu.be/7HlvdPFEc6g
Hal u did say that Ttump received 74 million votes
I took that to mean he was well accepted since that number was indicative to his popularity amongst his foot soldiers
Hence my response as an indicator to Hilter being popular amongst the German population which turned out to be a grave which they had dug for themselves
Btw this is not the first time Trump has used inciteful language based on what he think of himself and to lay a ground work of revenge amongst his foot soldiers
His language has always been placed on flowery attacks against people he despise
I clearly remember Trump saying That he can kill someone and the people would still vote for him
Words to that effect speaks of a man who endorses violence and appreciates or believes he should be rewarded