Why Freedom of Speech Matters (And Why ‘Hate Speech’ Is Protected, Too)

“Truth is great, and will prevail if left to herself . . . [Truth] is the proper and sufficient antagonist to error, and has nothing to fear from the conflict, unless by human interposition disarmed of her natural weapons free argument and debate, errors ceasing to be dangerous when it is permitted freely to contradict them.”
— Thomas Jefferson

From The Other McCain: The Background:

When news of Tommy Robinson’s arrest in England made headlines, Americans were shocked. A judge had sentenced Robinson to 13 months in prison for attempting to publicize the trial of men accused of operation a criminal sex ring that trafficked underage girls in Leeds.

The case involved one of several so-called “grooming” gangs that have been exposed in England in recent years, the most notorious of which was The Rotherham Horror. Basically, lower-class white English girls are seduced (“groomed”) by young Muslim men, mostly the sons of Pakitani immigrants, and then gang-raped and/or pimped out as prostitutes. The racial aspect of this phenomenon obviously has the potential to inflame public opinion, especially since investigations have shown officials failed to act promptly in many cases because of political correctness.

Why was Robinson arrested?

The Contempt of Court Act 1981 lays down strict limitations on what can be reported in the press regarding active criminal proceedings. This is to prevent outside influences from affecting jurors, ensuring that the defendant has a fair trial based only on the evidence put before the court.
Robinson was already serving a suspended sentence for contempt of court concerning a 2017 case in Canterbury when he was arrested by police while live-streaming on Facebook outside a grooming trial in Leeds on Friday morning.
In the broadcast, played to the court, Robinson “got into a shouting match with several men who appeared to be defendants in the case”, Buzzfeed reports. He also read out the names and charges against the men, some of them inaccurate.
“No-one could possibly conclude that it would be anything other than highly prejudicial to the defendants in the trial,” said Judge Geoffrey Marson QC, presiding. . . .
A temporary order had been imposed by the court banning media coverage of Robinson’s trial and conviction while the Leeds grooming trial was ongoing over fears it could further publicise Robinson’s prejudicial broadcast.
“If the jurors in my present trial get to know of this video I will no doubt be faced with an application to discharge the jury,” Marson told Robinson on Friday, the Hull Daily Mail reports.
“If I have to do that it will mean a re-trial, costing hundreds and hundreds and thousands of pounds.”

Apparently, either (a) English courts do not have the authority to sequester the jury in high-profile trials, or (b) the courts are deliberately attempting to suppress public knowledge of the Leeds case. As an American unfamiliar with British law, I can’t say which is true, but I do know that there is a smoldering resentment among many Britons about the role of the “respectable” media in cases like these.

It’s a different way of providing a fair trial, and I think a much inferior way because it deprives the people of the knowledge of what is going on. It’s an extension beyond reasonable means of why even in America we have restrictions on cameras in courtrooms. But in any case…

 Class prejudice was clearly a factor in this. Most British journalists are from the college-educated upper classes, while the girls being raped and pimped out by these Muslim gangs were mostly from a class that Americans would call “white trash.”

It’s not as if the “grooming” gangs were a big secret, after all.

Truer words have never been spoken, I think.

 Radical feminist Julie Bindel wrote in the £ Sunday Times in 2007:

Blackburn, in common with many northern towns, is experiencing a huge upsurge in pimping, and it is an unpalatable truth for the authorities — and indeed the police — that many of the newest wave of pimps come from within the Asian community. . . .
The Mall in Blackburn is popular as a meeting place for the town’s young men and women. Set on two floors, with over 100 high-street stores, it is brightly lit and usually busy. It teems with young women with pushchairs, elderly people window-shopping, and teenagers meeting up with their friends. The crackle of security guards’ radios mingles with the cheesy piped music. […]

One security guard, asked if the men are pimps, said he neither knew nor cared. “It’s the girls,” he says, “they love the Pakis. We can’t get a look in.” Nearby, a young man takes two of the girls into a shop, where he buys them make-up and perfume. Later on, the groups of men move on to the Vue cinema complex near Blackburn station. The younger men are on bicycles, the older ones in expensive-looking cars, sound systems blaring out bhangra and gangster rap. Girls begin to approach them, and are soon driven away in cars by the older men. It is possible that they are taken to “slag houses”, where they will be sold for sex.

Right out in the open, at the freaking mall. Well, you won’t see nuthin’ if you keep your eye wide shut.

Mind, it happens here as well, it happens everywhere, it always has, but not in wholesale lots, like it does in Britain, and yes I used the present tense, it still continues.

The mostly Pakis that do this are contemptible, of course. But what can one say about a society that intentionally overlooks these girls being sold off to the highest bidder? Britain was the main driver in the end of slavery in the west in the nineteenth century, now because it is afraid to confront a few brown-skinned people, it has allowed its own daughters to be enslaved. Hell of a price to pay for political correctness, even if it is one that the ‘slags’ and their families are paying for you.

To be sure, it’s not all Britons, many are just as angry about Tommy Robinson (and what may well prove to be a death sentence) as anybody in the world. But note that he too is lower class, and the upper classes are busily denouncing him worldwide. I admire him, and yes, I admire his willingness to disobey an unjust law. Reminds me of Rev Dr. Martin Luther King’s letter from a Birmingham Jail, where he said this:

You express a great deal of anxiety over our willingness to break laws. This is certainly a legitimate concern. Since we so diligently urge people to obey the Supreme Court’s decision of 1954 outlawing segregation in the public schools, at first glance it may seem rather paradoxical for us consciously to break laws. One may want to ask: “How can you advocate breaking some laws and obeying others?” The answer lies in the fact that there are two types of laws: just and unjust. I would be the first to advocate obeying just laws. One has not only a legal but a moral responsibility to obey just laws. Conversely, one has a moral responsibility to disobey unjust laws. I would agree with St. Augustine that “an unjust law is no law at all”

Now, what is the difference between the two? How does one determine whether a law is just or unjust? A just law is a man-made code that squares with the moral law or the law of God. An unjust law is a code that is out of harmony with the moral law. To put it in the terms of St. Thomas Aquinas: An unjust law is a human law that is not rooted in eternal law and natural law. Any law that uplifts human personality is just. Any law that degrades human personality is unjust.

It’s time, and past time, for the great British majority to wrest control of their country back from this uncaring and uncontrollable elite, before it sells them all, like those poor lower class girls to the highest bidder. The left likes to say, “By any means necessary”, I’d suggest taking them at their word.

Advertisements

About NEO
Lineman, Electrician, Industrial Control technician, Staking Engineer, Inspector, Quality Assurance Manager, Chief Operations Officer

24 Responses to Why Freedom of Speech Matters (And Why ‘Hate Speech’ Is Protected, Too)

  1. the unit says:

    Slick Willie type girls? You know, hundred dollar bills and trailer parks, aka description by James Carville. 🙂

    Liked by 1 person

    • NEO says:

      Pretty much, I think. Kind of hard to tell exactly how terms relate. But definitely not high achievers, and probably not the cheerleader captain either. From what I read, what those girls really need is a dad at home, preferably with a nice clean shotgun. but just a good dad would help immensely. 🙂

      Liked by 1 person

      • the unit says:

        As I said, aka Carville definition. Early fake news. Probably the most wholesome girl I knew in the late ’50’s was a Hardy Court girl (Gulfport, MS). Probably worst living conditions than most trailer parks back then. Old, even pre-WWII barracks moved onto commercial lot (one beside the other on several acres) for rent cheap…before govt. housing projects.
        Wholesome she was, and I know…dated her once…then twice to be sure…that was enough back then to know. And met up with her again in our 60’s…still was. 🙂

        Liked by 1 person

        • NEO says:

          Yep, I thought so, known a bunch of what could be called ‘trailer trash’ over the years. Damned good folks, liked ’em then and do now. I’d bet the Brits are much the same. Yeah, those buildings, when I was at Purdue, we still had some, as classrooms, ours were the World War One equivalent of Quonsets, only not as nice. At least our had steam heat. 🙂

          Liked by 1 person

        • the unit says:

          Oh yeah, Gulfport Field proper had lots of Quonset Huts. After WWII business’s were allowed to locate there and use them.
          These shacks must’ve been previous Officer’s housing, as they were board and batten. Maybe Hardy Court could’ve been off base housing back then originally and not moved there. I not quite that “ripe” to remember exactly. 🙂

          Liked by 1 person

        • NEO says:

          Could well be, I don’t remember a lot about the ones at Purdue, they were rather ordinary frame buildings, given that this was around 1970, could well have been refinished too, I’d guess. Let the cold in though, for sure! 🙂

          Liked by 1 person

        • the unit says:

          We didn’t know ordinary constructed frame buildings as Quonset Huts. Only the curved ones from ground on one side to ground on the other side (sides, roof, and all).
          My my, cultural revolution definitions over time hard to decipher sometimes. 🙂

          Liked by 1 person

        • NEO says:

          Nir did nor do we, plenty still around. 🙂 The ones I was referring to served rather the same purpose during WW I, and were a simple frame building, rumor had it they were used for both barracks and stables. Probably originally whatever passed for tar paper in 1917. I think they were referred to as FWA Buildings, so maybe built to the same plan during the New Deal. Yep, can be difficult to figure it out sometimes! 🙂

          Liked by 1 person

        • the unit says:

          And as I meant to say some comments before, wholesome girl back then I didn’t keep dating ’cause she was too much 🙂 …lived with her mom, no dad. Knew her older bros by two and four years…they also fine fellows. Don’t know details of where dad was or wasn’t…war or what?

          Liked by 1 person

        • NEO says:

          Yep, wasn’t considered overly polite where I grew up to be asking questions about things like that. Sometimes you found out, sometimes not. People didn’t wear it on their sleeves like they do now. I was rather like Groucho Marx in dating. Any girl that would date me, I didn’t want to date. Silly fool I was, in hindsight! 🙂

          Liked by 1 person

        • the unit says:

          And how time flies! The two bros been deceased now long time ago. And the last time I ran into the wholesome her was couple of years after Katrina. 🙂

          Liked by 1 person

        • NEO says:

          I was thinking that too. In afew years it’ll be my high school class’s fiftieth anniversary, most of them, I haven’t seen since graduation, haven’t seen any for at least 35 years. Maybe I should go? 🙂

          Liked by 1 person

        • the unit says:

          Just me, but I think for the 50 you should. I did. There are drawbacks though. Depression?
          We have website that basically is now just keeping score on who’s left, originally marriages and births of grands, happy stuff.
          My docs nurse asks every visit about depression. Seems they worried about that. I just say my trigger finger still pulls. So no. 🙂

          Liked by 1 person

        • NEO says:

          Yeah, there’s that, but I’m pretty good usually at fighting that off. You’re right though, in many ways, it’s a scorekeeping operation now. heck, I’m still here, why would I be depressed? 🙂

          Liked by 1 person

        • the unit says:

          Best cultural exclamation for that…Exactly! #MeToo. 🙂

          Liked by 1 person

        • NEO says:

          Yep! 🙂

          Liked by 1 person

  2. the unit says:

    So anyway about the topic, I think it’s on Market Watch the we’re all one tweet away from being fired. Said Twitter public discourse now. So free speech not allowed in public. ??? I thought the argument was that Twitter was a private business and could censor whatever it wanted as it’s free right. Then commenters said they don’t tweet so not worried. Then others responded that commenting on MW is public and being monitored as well.
    So what the heck?
    Would I be reprimanded if I explained here how I Obama-rigged my cutting deck to get it working on my riding lawnmower after the PTO cable broke this week? 🙂

    Liked by 1 person

    • NEO says:

      There’s too much of that, and no fooling. I suspect a lot of it is because the whole commenting thing, and especially Twitter, has become so coarse. There are things said, everyday, that the average sailor would be embarrassed to say. Don’t know as free speech really applies here, speech has always had consequences, good and bad, heck that’s why we do it, if no one cares, why bother?

      Nope, but then I was an Obama rigger before it was cool! 🙂

      Liked by 1 person

      • the unit says:

        Rigging must be especially difficult for someone half free at last and half guilty and ashamed. 🙂

        Liked by 1 person

        • NEO says:

          I bet it is! 🙂

          Liked by 1 person

        • the unit says:

          There’s wannabe rigging and know how rigging. Another year of still here! 🙂

          Liked by 1 person

        • NEO says:

          🙂

          Liked by 1 person

        • the unit says:

          Don’t know what the message in the video with the short short of the towers and Theodore John Kaczynski was supposed to be. Was reading over there. About St. Ambrose on Christ and Death. Maybe just that liars figure and figures don’t. Same with truth.
          The serpent was really a clown…perhaps Bosco was the name of that one back in the day. 🙂

          Liked by 1 person

        • NEO says:

          Indeed so! 🙂

          Like

Leave a Reply

Please log in using one of these methods to post your comment:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out /  Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out /  Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )

Connecting to %s

This site uses Akismet to reduce spam. Learn how your comment data is processed.