|
| |

Free Speech?
So you really think you have
a right to free speech? Think again.
You don't have a
"right" to free speech. The only realy right you have as an American
citizen, and the only one the courts routinely uphold, is the right to endless litigation.
Affirmative action coupled with sexual and racial discrimination and harassment
litigation is the most Orwellian form of mind control in the world. Not even the
most private thoughts of Russians are as microscopically scrutinized as your private
thoughts are. And your courts have taken the extraordinary position that they know
more about what you "think" than you do. There are more words in the US
which will cause a lawsuit than there are in the entire rest of the world, which is partly
why a third of the world's prison population and three quarters of
the world's lawyers are here.
You are delusional if you
think you have the right to question the Talmud. A simple
10 question survey about the Talmud, which asked questions like "The Talmud played a key role in the destruction of
America's families", is
characterized by the self styled experts and alleged fathers rights activists as
"hatred" and "anti-semitism". A man who simply referenced an
article which used the word nigger was vilified for months. There are more than 100 words like this which will cause freedom loving Americans
to pirouette for a whole year, ready to deny you your "right" to free speech the
instant ANY citizen in the whole wide world, American citizen or not, "feels"
that they are offended by the word you use. Backing them up is an entire Army of
politically correct thought police which is ready to deny you your rights if the courts
don't, and there is NOBODY who will stop them from doing so.
You might just as well take
that erroneous copy of the First Amendment you have in your hand and throw it in the same
trash can as the one where the Second Amendment is. The only "real rights"
you have are the illegal Sixteenth and Nineteenth Amendments.
> In a message dated 3/25/00 8:41:45 PM Eastern Standard Time,
> dean@primenet.com writes:
>
> << Ms. King, the reality is that these Christian patriot groups have large
> contigencies of women involved---it isn't a fathers rights thing at all but
> rather a conservative political process. Those who don't trust men or
women
> should seek therapy to get the help they need for gender bias.
Dean
> p.s.
> Mark Hall and John Knight are no longer welcome on Witchhunt for posting that
> type of hatred. I imagine Mark Hall is John Knight's other email address.
> >>
>
> But their primary target is women. They are anti-women from beginning
> to end, demanding repeal of the 19th Amendment (women's right to vote),
> presumptive father custody, and in general they spew distorted and
> vicious "facts" through their internet site. Most of the signatories
are
> men. I will take a look at the signatory list and see what FR luminaries
> have signed on in the past...Fathers Manifesto may be a "fringe" group,
> but like the fms'ers, they have been able to attract people nevertheless.
Sent: Sunday, March 26, 2000 5:49 AM
Subject: [witchhunt] Re: Antisemitic propaganda (was: Interesting Poll)
It should be noted that many of the people who signed on their list did so before they
changed the so called Fathers Manifesto's focus........it is also questionable if some of
the people even signed it........
Sent: Sunday, March 26, 2000 3:19 AM
Subject: [witchhunt] Re: Antisemitic propaganda (was: Interesting Poll)
> In a message dated 3/25/00 5:40:39 PM Eastern Standard Time,
> Kingeil656@aol.com writes:
>
> << Interesting how many Fathers' Rightsters have signed on to the
Fathers
> Manifesto -- wonder what that says about them....and their agenda....and you
> wonder why women are suspicious of these guys?!? >>
>
> Well, Eileen, I understand what you are saying. I am in
sad agreement
> with you, I had found the anti-Semitic thread VERY disturbing and had said
> so. There is currently a thread on that newsgroup using the "N" word. I
also
> find that disturbing.
>
> Part of the father's movement has signed on with the
Militia types. Very
> pro violence, and violent rhetoric. I have to do more than just distance
> myself from that kind of thinking. I must CONDEMN it and clearly disassociate
> myself FROM it.
>
> I was subscribed to their list, I have unsubscribed
several times only
> to have John add me back. I have again unsubscribed today. Considerable
> reflection when into doing that. You are known by the company you keep. And
> anti-Semitism and racism are NOT things *I* wish to be known by. John can
> take whatever offense at my comments as he likes. But times do come where
> people have to take a moral stand. THIS is one of those times! The rhetoric
> is wrong. I want NO part of it.
Sent: Saturday, March 25, 2000 7:49 PM
Subject: [witchhunt] Interesting Poll
> Seig Heil, Seig Heil, Seig Heil, Seig Heil, Seig Heil,
> Seig Heil, Seig Heil, Seig Heil, Seig Heil, Seig Heil,
> Seig Heil, Seig Heil, Seig Heil, Seig Heil, Seig Heil,
> Seig Heil, Seig Heil, Seig Heil, Seig Heil, Seig Heil,
> Seig Heil, Seig Heil, Seig Heil, Seig Heil, Seig Heil,
> Seig Heil, Seig Heil, Seig Heil, ad nauseum...
>
> Moaabsux (jim)
Sent: Saturday, March 25, 2000 8:10 PM
Subject: [witchhunt] Antisemitic propaganda (was: Interesting Poll)
> Dean:
>
> I wish you'd reconsider your banishment of these folks
> who present their very open and frank agenda to us. I
> have always respected the Church of Scientology for
> their open and frank disclosure of who and what they
> are. I also happen to dislike immensely their agenda.
> Nazi's of any sex can go straight to hell as far as I
> am concerned. But this is America and I fought and
> people died for their rights too. But they break the
> law, I'm on'em like flies on shit!
>
> But the agendas of those who regularly feign high
> respectability and misuse our deepest trust as one's
> psychologist, physician, pastor, social worker, police
> officer too (etc) who are to help the public not use
> them, those I would banish to a very low, low
> place-were it not that they do the job so well
> themselves...
>
> Moaabsux (jim)
Sent: Saturday, March 25, 2000 8:04 PM
Subject: [sharedparenting] Re: Poll
Sorry, that was my fault. I should have gone to the URL before I approved the post.
Opps. I do NOT support the "Father's Manafesto".
Roger Smith of sharedparenting.net
Sent: Saturday, March 25, 2000 9:56 PM
Subject: [witchhunt] Re: Antisemitic propaganda (was: Interesting Poll)
> Jim, as the local representative of the Jewish press and part of the
> conspiracy it is my duty to keep the peace here.
>
> If Mr. Knight and his alleged members of his group agree to behave we'll let
> them back in. If not, I won't.
>
> I won't allow racial slurs, pornography, or anti-semitic things on the
> list. It offends people on our list,including Christians.
>
> Dean
> In a message dated 3/25/00 4:38:32 PM Eastern Standard Time, SRobbins@UH.edu
> writes:
>
> << At 12:52 PM 03/25/2000 -0800, Mark Hall wrote:
>
> >I just took the following poll.
> >
> >http://apps3.vantagenet.com/zsv/survey.asp?id=1210141755&GO=Go%21
>
> The antisemitic propaganda that this Father's Rights group espouses is
> truly disturbing. This is not about father's rights..it's about white
> Christian male supremacy... thinly veiled as father's rights...and not
> dissimilar from the ideology of the Ku Klux Klan.
>
> As a strong proponent for father's custody, joint custody, and visitation
> rights, I find this frightening, to say the least.
> >>
>
> Interesting how many Fathers' Rightsters have signed on to the
> Fathers Manifesto -- wonder what that says about them....and
> their agenda....and you wonder why women are suspicious
> of these guys?!?
Sent: Sunday, March 26, 2000 1:33 AM
Subject: [witchhunt] Re: Antisemitic propaganda (was: Interesting Poll)
> I've been troubled for years by John Knight's mafest which demands father
> custody, no exception.
>
> As far as militant, does my awarding purple hearts to veterans of the war on
> fathers qualify? Or what about those old civil war cannons I haul to the
> capital. We been shotting three rounds in distriss of fathers. I do admit that
> the cannons are deliberately aimed at the Colorado Supreme Court building. Does
> this qualify as militant? It was a lot of fun. Even the cops didn't want to
> leave.
>
> kcw
If every American citizen had the power to censor every
other American citizen, then this is what our Censorship list
would look like
- Blasphemy.
- Anti-Christian speech.
- Any speech and writing that denigrates "deadbeat
dads".
- VAWA.
- The term "child support".
- All of Sandra Day O'Connor's Supreme Court decisions.
- Accusing people of "hate" solely as a debating tactic.
- Studying and preaching the Talmud
- The Kol Nidre Oath.
- EEOC notices in public places.
- All of N.O.W.'s publications.
- The term Goyim.
- The woman who does the Ford commercials.
- The term Shiksa.
- Affirmative action ads which say "women and minorities
only".
- Accusing people of being nazis.
- The term Gentile.
- False allegations or comments from feminists about men.
- Gun control commercials.
- Anti-Kosovo propaganda.
- Tax notices from the IRS.
- Any speech and writing which condones adultery.
- People who think everybody "hates" them.
- The term Gajin.
- Politicians who claim that burning the flag is "speech".
- The term Roundeye.
- The term Paleface
- The term Whites.
- Ruth Bader Ginsburg's face.
- The term White Men.
- The term Whitey
- The term Honkey.
- The term Blanco.
- The term Yanqui.
- The term Norte americano.
- All of Clinton's speeches.
- Oprah Winfrey.
- Ads which praise single-mother-households.
- Politicians who say "greatest economy in ten years".
- Speech which encourages the creation of single-mother households.
- Anti-family rhetoric from feminists.
- Complaints about the vast right wing Christian conspiracy.
- Janet Reno's LIES to Congress.
- Pictures which show Hillary Clinton's thighs.
- Anti-smoking commercials.
- Homosexual "rights" advertising.
- Ruth Bader Ginsburg's Supreme Court decisions.
- Feminist speech in general.
- Hemmorhoid commecials.
- Instruction and publications describing how to charge people with sexual
discrimination.
- Speech praising the Jews who demanded gun control just prior to the Holocaust.
- Car pool lane signs.
- Revisionist history of Thomas Jefferson.
- The DUI campaign from MADD.
- Dennis Rodman's haircut.
- People who think everybody "hates" everybody else.
- Any speech and writing which promotes gender equality.
- Instruction and publications describing how to charge
people with sexual harassment.
- Tampax commercials.
- Speech and writing promoting racial equality.
- Obscene speech.
- Instruction
and publications describing how to charge white men with racial discrimination.
- Profanity.
- Speed limit signs.
- The Simpsons.
- The term Gook.
- The term Cajun.
- The term Canuck
- The term Jew.
- The term Mexican.
- The term Texican.
- The term Wino.
- Pornography
- The term Beaner.
- The term Taco.
- The term Pollack.
- The term Chink.
- The term Injun.
- The term Nigger.
- The term Coon.
- The term Spic.
- The term Wop.
- The term Bastard.
- The term Hymie.
- The term Kike.
- Anti-semitic speech.
- The term Feminazi.
- . "in the best interest of the children"
- Lawyer
- Mental health counselor
- Child protection services
- "trust me"
- "IN GOD WE TRUST"
- DAD
- Truth
- Jesus Christ
- God
- ME
| |
|