Where Never is Heard a Discouraging Word...Especially from Wiki

Suddenly it's everywhere--scrubbing bubbles of activity, hurtling through cyberspace, busily and frantically on the lookout for anything that might possibly smack of a Discouraging Word. The Google Twins & Sparkle Plenty led the charge last year during the *sudden* emergence of a usurper with NO traceable history between the ages of 10 and 47. Main scream media colluded and collided with Those Who Would Dare To Seek and Report Truth, and, since then, nary a word can be found containing any but the most mellifluous of fairy tales regarding the current Resident of the White House. And, the model continues, with the exception of a few brave and true folks that work to seek and share the truth, most notably, Logistics Monster, who appeared with us live on last night's "Constitutional Radio" with drkate and me. As always, a great kudos and many thanks to her for all the brilliant work she does to help us supplant Those Who Would Attempt to Suppress All Truth, which leads us to today's topic.

With the help of countless, witless official pronouncements from, among others, a judge, a congressperson and other sundry souls, we are told that Twitter has decided the eligibility issue [Judge Robertson, brainfree zone extraordinaire], Snopes dot com, a left leaning husband and wife team working from a basement office has decided the eligibility issue according to Arizona's Sen. Jon Kyle-R; and, last but sadly not least, Senator Mel Martinez assures us that the voters have decided the eligibility issue, contrary to any mandates of our silly old, outdated Constitution. Is it any wonder that the movement to fire the entire Congress enjoys huge gains daily??

Between the fact that few, if any Americans [including, worst of all, apparently, most of Congress, judging by the mountain of inane, insane, erroneous replies to concerned constituents] these days have even the remotest idea as to what the Constitution says OR what it means, and the fact that there is clearly an all out attempt to eradicate any relevant facts about the Usurper or anyone else deemed to have messy, inexplicable gaps or otherwise nefarious acts in their history, it is a miracle that anyone has any information at all. And THAT is precisely the objective of Those Who Would Presume to Rule. If an informed electorate is requisite for a Democratic Republic to function effectively, what better way to thwart it than remove all information? The latest of these Thousand little Coups, as I call them, finds us at the site of Wikipedia, the latest of the "information arbiters" to fall under the auspices of the Obama Cleansing Machine. [Factcheck, Snopes and others have long since been exposed as Obama apologists].

As is required on that online encyclopedia, entries are to be substantiated by third-party media articles. One piece about the question of Obama's eligibility cited the Chicago Tribune and WorldNetDaily.com. The entry was posted on Feb. 24, at 6:16 p.m. EST. Just three minutes later, it was removed by a Wikipedia administrator, claiming the posting violated the websites rules against "fringe" material. When the user tried to repost the entry a second time, another administrator removed it within minutes, banning the them from posting for three days.

Angela Beesley Starling, a Wikipedia spokesperson, explained to WND that all the website's encyclopedia content is monitored by users. She said the administrators who deleted the entries are volunteers.

"Administrators," Starling said, "are simply people who are trusted by the other community members to have access to some extra tools that allow them to delete pages and perform other tasks that help the encyclopedia. Wikipedia, the seventh most trafficked website on the Internet, maintains content monitored by users.

According to Worldnet Daily, a Google search for the words "Barack Obama" brings up the president's Wikipedia page in the top four choices, following two links to Obama's official websites. The entire Wikipedia entry on Obama seems to be heavily promotional toward the U.S. president. It contains nearly no criticism or controversy, including appropriate mention of important issues where relevant. The Wikipedia entry about former President George W. Bush, by contrast, is highly critical, mentioning his history of alcohol abuse, and questions of possible insider trading involving Harken.

And so it goes...but the Internet moves on, oblivious to these blatant, foolish attempts to violate our First Amendment Rights. *They* may have thought that Goebels's, Alinsky's and other models of fact suppression would work as they once did. They were wrong, however, for now we have the Internet--a wild, wild West of a thing, sprawling far beyond anyone's capacity to shut it down, suppress facts or control its usage. We can read, write and hear as many Discouraging Words as we please, thank you very much, and through those words, begin to decipher the facts about what is being perpetrated upon the American people and by whom...all the better to rectify! The tumbrils roll...

bwssnino

Godspeed, Geert Wilders, Ms. Placed Dem & Logistics Monster

A hearty thanks to our Logistics Monster and Ms. Placed Democrat--You, who always *Say It All*! Those who briefly celebrated Alabama Senator Shelby for timidly raising a question about the illegal alien in the White House, and whose hopes were short lived when he back tracked in front of CNN must also remember that this *brave patriot* [NOT] also did not make his voice heard at the time of the Senate vote to certify this Usurper. Tea Parties abound, from sea to shining sea--as OpEdNews covers the latest on 10th Amendment doings and States' Rights issues. As noted yesterday, there are now 28 states engaged in exploring and/or passing resolutions asserting their rights under the U.S. Constitution. One might venture to say that, had our educational system been more thoughtfully administered, we might not be in this present sad state of affairs, with Americans scratching their heads and trying to remember just what it was the Constitution meant ...intended ...stated ...and why they didn't pay better attention the day it was covered in school. Sadly, that noble document upon which our nation has proceeded, both needs and deserves entire semesters devoted to its study.

Because our First Amendment rights are so sacred, and our guarantee of these rights becoming more tenuous each day, I reprint the following excerpt from Geert Wilders's speech, given at New York's Four Seasons, on February 23, 2009. Requiring no further explanation, it appears in its entirety at his website. http://www.geertwilders.nl/index.php?option=com_content&task=view&id=1535&Itemid=1 Save for comment below by "Not a Sheep," I leave it to the reader to decide two things:

1. How important to you are our First Amendment Rights; and

2. Are you aware of how dangerously close we are to losing them with

the advent of main stream media's political correctness and word

police operatives.

This is the essence of my short introduction today: where the left and Islam come together, freedom will suffer.
My friends, make no mistake, my prosecution is a full-fledged attack by the left on freedom of speech in order to please Muslims. It was started by a member of the Dutch Labour party, and the entire legal proceeding is done by well-to-do liberals, the radical chic of Dutch society, the snobbish left. Too much money, too much time, too little love of liberty. If you read what the court of Amsterdam has written about me, you read the same texts that cultural relativists produce.
How low can we go in the Netherlands? About my prosecution, The Wall Street Journal noted: “this is no small victory for Islamic regimes seeking to export their censorship laws to wherever Muslims reside”. The Journal concluded that by The Netherlands accepting the free speech standards of, “Saudi-Arabia”, I stand correct in my observation that - I quote - “Muslim immigration is eroding traditional Dutch liberties”.
Now, if the Wall Street Journal has the moral clarity to see that my prosecution is the logical outcome of our disastrous, self-hating, multiculturalists immigration policies, then why can’t the European liberal establishment see the same thing? Why aren’t they getting at least a little bit scared by the latest news out of, for example, the UK. News that tells that the Muslim population in Britain is growing ten times as fast as the rest of society. Why don’t they care?

The answer is: they don’t care because they are blinded by their cultural relativism. Their disdain of the West is so much greater than the appreciation of our many liberties. And therefore, they are willing to sacrifice everything. The left once stood for women rights, gay rights, equality, democracy. Now, they favour immigration policies that will end all this. Many even lost their decency. Elite politicians have no problem to participate in or finance demonstrations where settlers shout “Death to the Jews”. Seventy years after Auschwitz they know of no shame.
Two weeks ago, I tried to get into Britain, a fellow EU country. I was invited to give a speech in Parliament. However, upon arrival at London airport, I was refused entry into the UK, and sent back on the first plane to Holland. I would have loved to have reminded the audience of a great man who once spoke in the House of Commons. In 1982 President Reagan gave a speech there very few people liked. Reagan called upon the West to reject communism and defend freedom. He introduced a phrase: ‘evil empire’. Reagan’s speech stands out as a clarion call to preserve our liberties. I quote: If history teaches anything, it teaches self-delusion in the face of unpleasant facts is folly. What Reagan meant is that you cannot run away from history, you cannot escape the dangers of ideologies that are out to destroy you. Denial is no option.

So, what should we do? Is this a good moment for freedom-loving people to give in or to change course? To all-of-a-sudden start singing praise of Islam, or proclaiming there is such a thing as a moderate Islam? Will we now accept the continuation of Muslim mass immigration to the West? Will we appease sharia and jihad? Should we sacrifice gay rights and women rights? Or democracy? Should we sell out Israel, our dearest ally, and a frontline state of Islam?
Well, my humble opinion is: No way, Jose!
I suggest to defend freedom in general and freedom of speech in particular. I propose the withdrawal of all hate speech legislation in Europe. I propose a European First Amendment. In Europe we should defend freedom of speech like you Americans do. In Europe freedom of speech should be extended, instead of restricted. Of course, calling for violence or unjustly yelling “fire” in a crowded theatre have to be punished, but the right to criticize ideologies or religions are necessary conditions for a vital democracy. As George Orwell once said: “If liberty means anything at all, it means the right to tell people what they do not want to hear”.

Let us defend freedom of speech and let us gain strength and work hard to become even stronger. Millions think just like you and me. Millions think liberty is precious. That democracy is better than sharia. And after all, why should we be afraid? Our many freedoms and our prosperity are the result of centuries of endeavour. Centuries of hard work and sacrifice. We do not stand alone, and we stand on the shoulders of giants.

Late December 1944 the American army was suddenly faced with a last-ditch effort by the Germans. In the Ardennes, in the Battle of the Bulge, Hitler and his national-socialists fought for their last chance. And they were very successful. Americans faced defeat, and death.
In the darkest of winter, in the freezing cold, in a lonely forest with snow and ice as even fiercer enemies than the Nazi war machine itself, the American army was told to surrender. That might be their only chance to survive. But General McAuliffe thought otherwise. He gave the Germans a short message. This message contained just four letters. Four letters only, but never in the history of freedom was a desire for liberty and perseverance in the face of evil expressed more eloquently than in that message. It spelled N – U – T – S. “Nuts”.
My friends, the national-socialists got the message. Because it left no room for interpretation! I suggest we walk in the tradition of giants like General McAuliffe and the American soldiers who fought and died for the freedom of my country and for a secular and democratic Europe, and we tell the enemies of freedom just that. NUTS! Because that’s all there is to it. No explanations. No beating around the bush. No caveats.
Our enemies should know: we will never apologize for being free men, we will never bow for the combined forces of Mecca and the left. And we will never surrender. We stand on the shoulders of giants. There is no stronger power than the force of free men fighting for the great cause of liberty. Because freedom is the birthright of all man.

May you be well and stay safe, Geert. You are a brave patriot. Godspeed and save you from persecution, prosecution and other ills.

I urge all who hold First Amendment rights sacred to visit his site, spread the word of his plight, see "Fitna" http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=zZI0DFhcarY&feature=PlayList&p=35DD115CD32A3290&playnext=1&index=39 and donate to his cause.

More from, "Not a Sheep Maybe a Goat" http://notasheepmaybeagoat.blogspot.com/2009/02/more-on-banning-of-geert-wilders-update.html

NOTE: Live Leak speaks:

Update: LiveLeak speaks:

LiveLeak.com has a strict stance on remaining unbiased and allowing freedom of speech as so far as the law and our rules allow. There was no legal reason to refuse Geert Wilders the right to post his film (Fitna) on LiveLeak.com and it is not our place to censor people based on an emotive response. We in no way endorse Geert Wilders, his views, nor the views expressed within Fitna. To many of us involved in LiveLeak.com some of the messages therein are personally offensive. That being said, our being offended is no reason to deny Mr Wilders the right to have his film seen. Pre-emptive censorship or a discriminatory policy towards freedom of speech are both things we oppose here on LiveLeak.com. A person has a simple, clear choice about whether to view this film. No one is being forced to view it and nor is it being broadcasted on every channel on their television set. If you click on media simply to be annoyed, it is pointless to blame others for your choice.

We do not intend on defending the content of Fitna, only our choice to allow it. Anyone has the full right of reply on LiveLeak.com. Any person or organizations are free to post their opinion and, dependent on said response falling within both the law and our rules, we will afford such responses equal exposure. There are undoubtedly better ways to spark a discussion but this film is now out there and we believe we should all grasp this opportunity to create an open dialogue and discussion on this subject.

bwssnino

Speak Now or Forever Hold Your Piece...

As this year's election cycle progressed, we heard increasing rumbles of speech, media and voter supression, truth squads, loss of First Amendment rights and other potential horrors. Election day has come and gone, leaving us nervously glancing around, wondering how and to what extent, if any, our rights to free speech will be affected under a new administration. Thus far, even before massive voter fraud helped The Annointed One seize office, any hint of question or criticism has been strongly discouraged, and, in some cases, severely punished. Witness the endless threats and strong arm tactics, cyber terrorism hacking and street corner thugs working the crowds like so many bouncers in a barfight. On election night, a young man was arrested for wearing a McCain Palin tee shirt on the street near an Obama rally; had it not been for the bravery and integrity of its governor, Missouri would have enacted Truth Squads to arrest anyone who criticized the Democratic Candidate during the campaign.

As truth and facts have been scrubbed like so many web pages in Google land [in exchange for a promise to its owner for a seat in the new administration], so have they been kept out of media. Investigations into voter fraud have been tepid to non-existent, as have those into questionable [illegal] campaign funding, and no one is really sure what is going to be left [no pun intended] of our First or even Second Amendment rights when this administration gets through with them. Thus, trepidation rules in many camps.

But the wise words of Martin Niemöller remind us that, no matter what happens, we must stand firm against the proscription of free expression. We must stand together, stand firm and stand out against any attempts at the suppression of our right to free speech, for, as Thomas Jefferson noted, we must hang together or we will surely hang separately. There is strength in numbers, and our numbers are growing daily. Much to the surprise of many [this author not among them], membership and interest in government, political and media reform continue to skyrocket; emails continue to pour in to us all en masse while new groups and coalitions continue to grow, expand and form. It appears that most Americans are not at all comfortable with the way things seem to be going, and the Designee has not yet either been able to prove his natural born American citizenship or been sworn in. Already, Buyers' Remorse appears to rule, even before any new Executive Orders are signed.

First spoken in the late 1940s after the Second World War, these simple words must never be forgotten:

First they came for the communists, and I did not speak out--
because I was not a communist;
Then they came for the socialists, and I did not speak out--
because I was not a socialist;
Then they came for the trade unionists, and I did not speak out--
because I was not a trade unionist;
Then they came for the Jews, and I did not speak out--
because I was not a Jew;
Then they came for me--
and there was no one left to speak out.

Chilling words, chilling truth. Pastor Niemoller was imprisoned from 1937 to 1945 in concentration camps, and was transferred from Sachsenhausen to Dachau in 1941. He survived to spend the rest of his life speaking out. We must all continue to do the same.