Toronto Public Library Under Fire For Defending Free Speech

A Canadian library has become the latest flash point over free speech as hundreds of protesters tried to prevent others from hearing the views of a feminist writer who has been critical of transsexual laws guaranteeing equal access to bathrooms and other spaces. To its credit, Toronto Public Library held firm in favor of free speech and refused to be bullied into cancelling the event. Nevertheless, police had to escort the audience out the back to avoid threats from protesters who objected to event featuring Meghan Murphy. It is a disheartening scene in a city with a seal professing “Diversity our strength.” Apparently, diversity of ideas is not one of those strengthens according to the Mayor and city council.

Murphy was speaking on her views of “society, the law, and women.
She supports transgender rights but not laws guaranteeing access to bathrooms. She told the BBC “Under current trans activist doctrine we’re not allowed to exclude a man from a woman’s space if he says that he’s female and I find that quite dangerous and troubling.” she told the BBC.

One can clearly disagree with that premise, but this is a debate that we need to have. Murphy has expressed her views in a civil and open fashion. She has not held back her strong views that the transgender activist movement is “regressive and sexist” and endangers women and girls in laws like the one pending on bathroom access.

In response, protesters have demanded that she be silenced and not allowed to share her views with others who wanted to come to the event.

City librarian Vickery Bowles released a perfect statement in mid-October defending the decision to host the event that said that the library would stand by the right to be hearing as a public institution with “an obligation to protect free speech”.

Among those opposing free speech is Toronto Mayor John Tory, who wanted Murphy barred from speaking. Likewise, city councillors Kristyn Wong-Tam and Mike Layton are calling for an investigation of the library policies. For its part, Pride Toronto warned the library “there will be consequences to our relationship for this betrayal”. The “betrayal” was standing with free speech. The effort to silence those with opposing views has become a core belief of many on the left.

I do not buy the convenient argument that silencing others is a form of free speech. I have previously discussed how Antifa and other college protesters are increasingly denouncing free speech and the foundations for liberal democracies. Some protesters reject classic liberalism and the belief in free speech as part of the oppression on campus.  The movement threatens both academic freedom and free speech — a threat that is growing due to the failure of administrators and faculty to remain true to core academic principles.  Dartmouth Professor Mark Bray, the author of a book entitled “Antifa: The Anti-Fascist Handbook” is one of the chief enablers of these protesters. Bray speaks positively of the effort to supplant traditional views of free speech: “At the heart of the anti-fascist outlook is a rejection of the classical liberal phrase that says I disapprove of what you say but I will defend to the death your right to say it.” He defines anti-fascists as “illiberal” who reject the notion that far right views deserve to “coexist” with opposing views.

The mayor, city council, and activists in the Canadian controversy reflect the growing movement in favor of free speech controls growing in both Canada and the United States.

110 thoughts on “Toronto Public Library Under Fire For Defending Free Speech”

          1. mespo – my understanding was that they would have retired in their early to mid thirties and with a big golden parachute.

    1. IB:
      Just more juvenile shenanigans from the gang that couldn’t smear straight. I’m predicting another pie in the face for the Dims when their lies get disclosed and an election defeat that will make Mondale look like Reagan. Oh and I’m hoping to see Clapper, Brennan and Comey in a lovely shade of orange frog-walking into a courtroom near you. ‘Tis a dream but a delightful one.

        1. Gee Oky, that is some fascinating wingnuttery – yeah, I took the time to read mos of it. Look at those lawyers trying to run and hide from the bright light of this daring and dangerous investigative reporting. Nobody innocent hires lawyers so we know something bad is going on.

          Will the next episode show how these sleaze balls tricked Dear Leaser into extorting the Ukrainians for dirt on his political opponent?

          I can’t wait to find out.

      1. Et al;

        I see some in the media have promoted Lt Col Vindman to full Colonel over the last few days, but the bigger questions are, why in the hell was this 1st gen Ukrainian involved with the WH in the 1st place & why in the hell isn’t this suspected Seditious Traitor at least under house arrest until an investigation can be completed???

        One of the bigger questions is what the hell is going on with Trump’s manager of personal & people that are given access.

        Early on Trump was warned by Alex Jones/Infowars & others that his personal manager had no loyalty to Trump, his supporters or the Nation. That was 3 yrs ago & there seems still a huge nest of Anti-American trash that has some how seeped under the back door of the WH.

        Palace Intrigue/ Payton Place/

        Trump has removed many of the Obama/Hillary/NeoCon stay behind networks.

        Steve Bannon & Sebastian Gorka both left the WH at the same time. Bannon, after learning more about him, I have no doubt it was a good move for Trump to get rid of him. Gorka I still wasn’t sure of him. Then Trump had a WH conference with new media that continue to be censored by tech publishers that claim to be platforms & who shows up, completely out of touch with the legal issues & causing trouble, Gorka, that SOB isn’t new media! But the talented Ben Garrison, he’s invited but someone Slandered his good name & thus he’s disinvited.

        And the attacks continue & Trump fails to use his authority to demand lawful access to Tech Platforms for his self or his supporters/others.

        Anyway I see Gorka is looking more & more like a divider then a uniter, just to say it nicely

        https://banned.video/watch?id=5dba1b6d025fcb00264e97e6

        https://www.infowars.com/sebastian-gorka-demands-evil-nick-fuentes-be-censored/

        1. Oky1,
          It wouldn’t be improper to refer to a Lt. Col as Colonel. It is common practice to shorten the title when addressing them in an informal setting. A Vice Admiral would be Admiral; Lt. General would be General. A Petty Officer 1st Class would be Petty Officer. This rule, for whatever reason, doesn’t apply with the Chief Petty Officers. A Master or Senior Chief would never accept being addressed as Chief. 🙂

          1. ok but is it proper for a Ukrainian born Lt Col with natural sympathies to his homeland, on the job doing something supposedly constructive in the White House, to presume to blow the whistle on a POTUS whom he supposedly serves because he’s making an INFERENCE of a quid pro quo based on his own interpretation, when interpretation and inference is not in his job description? Im just askin. there is after all, a chain of command, and the commander in chief is TRUMP not Vindman.

            i realize there are generals and factions in the “intelligence community” that don’t like Trump but if the Dems who hate him so much want to empower military adventurism in this country, they can take certain choices, but if they want to uphold civilian command of the military, they will take other ones. one day it will be their man in the White House and the generals and intel community might not like their man, and may be emboldened to insubordination by this whole get-Trump episode in history.

            BEWARE PRAETORIANISM, to put it more succinctly

            1. The Colonel witnessed something illegal, not a policy issue he disagreed with. He has a responsibility and obligation to speak up no matter who was doing it.

            2. Kurtz, Colonel Vindman was assigned to The White House ‘because’ he had expertise. He wasn’t just there by sheer happenstance, as you seem to suggest.

              Had Trump conducted himself like a proper statesman, there ‘never’ would have been any confusion about ‘who’ said ‘what’ to ‘who’.

              1. yeah just like this other stay behind guy eric chiarmarella. keep on giving these cretins excuses, you either approve of a praetorian coup by the MIC against the POTUS or you dont. it’s plain to see if you have eyes.

                Trump got votes from people like me in part because we humble nobodies keenly desire deconfliction with the rump Russian state which is no major threat to America except for its NUKES. Which are. And can come down on nobodies like me because of misadventures in places like Syria. We DON’T CARE about incremental change and color revolutions and making foreign scheissholes safe for democracy. We want OUT of the dangerous schemes like old Hillary was keen on delivering in places like Libya. Call me a chicken guys, I am ok to admit i fear being nuked. (i recently posted a google speech from one of your saints Daniel Ellsberg, explaining why that’s a legit fear, in case you think it isnt. dont take my word for it!)

                The military industrial complex’s Democrat faction lead by Hillary were basing their ongoing adventures on the spectre of a Russian bogeyman. the Ukrainian sympathizers like Vindman were critical in their schemes. but the key thing was to maintain a kulturkampf of adversity towards Russia which fit in with the whole past 60 years or so of building them up as a constant bogeyman, including the latest chapter of branding all hillary’s rivals whether trump or gabbard or nobodies on the internet as “russian assets”

                it’s creeps like this Eric Chiarmarella that want to keep that bogeyman alive
                simple reason, they see opportunities for advancement for themselves, that’s all. national interests, which they were not hired to pursue, are just an excuse and a ploy for their own agendas anyhow.

                DETAILING THE PRAETORIAN PAWN IN THE BRENNAN PLOT:

                “A CIA officer specializing in Russia and Ukraine, Ciaramella was detailed over to the National Security Council from the agency in the summer of 2015, working under Susan Rice, President Obama’s national security adviser. He also worked closely with the former vice president.

                Susan Rice: Ciaramella worked under Obama’s national security adviser.
                Federal records show that Biden’s office invited Ciaramella to an October 2016 state luncheon the vice president hosted for Italian Prime Minister Matteo Renzi. Other invited guests included Brennan, as well as then-FBI Director James Comey and then-National Intelligence Director James Clapper.

                Several U.S. officials told RealClearInvestigations that the invitation that was extended to Ciaramella, a relatively low-level GS-13 federal employee, was unusual and signaled he was politically connected inside the Obama White House.

                Former White House officials said Ciaramella worked on Ukrainian policy issues for Biden in 2015 and 2016, when the vice president was President Obama’s “point man” for Ukraine. A Yale graduate, Ciaramella is said to speak Russian and Ukrainian, as well as Arabic. He had been assigned to the NSC by Brennan.

                He was held over into the Trump administration, and headed the Ukraine desk at the NSC, eventually transitioning into the West Wing, until June 2017.

                “He was moved over to the front office” to temporarily fill a vacancy, said a former White House official, where he “saw everything, read everything.”

                The official added that it soon became clear among NSC staff that Ciaramella opposed the new Republican president’s foreign policies. “My recollection of Eric is that he was very smart and very passionate, particularly about Ukraine and Russia. That was his thing – Ukraine,” he said. “He didn’t exactly hide his passion with respect to what he thought was the right thing to do with Ukraine and Russia, and his views were at odds with the president’s policies.”

                REJECT THE ROGUE CIA BOSS BRENNAN’S COUP– REJECT MISADVENTURES BY THE MIC — REJECT RUSSOPHOBIC PARANOIA — PROTECT CIVILIAN RULE OF THE USA

                1. TAKE A PILL.

                  The question is simple and has nothing to do with whatever conspiracy you imagine: Did Trump try to use the powers of the presidency to his own personal advantage, and if so do want this to become SOP for our presidents.?

                  Evidence given by GOP Senator Johnson, State Dept texts between Trump loyalists and their counterpart in the Ukrainian government, the WH transcript, and Trump’s own statement clearly indicate he did. This information is confirmed by several career State Dept and military. Getting cranked up about what any of these people’s political opinions may be is irrelevant tribalism of the lowest order.

                  Answer the 1st question.

                  1. You’ve no interest in evidence. You do have interest in emotional validation, and you’ll take it wherever and however you can get it. Just have your wife tap her ruby slippers while you chant ‘collusion has been proved’.

                    1. Tabby, had Trump ‘not’ been concerned with burning Joe Biden, there would have been no misunderstanding.

                      Now granted Hunter Biden never should have had a position of any kind in the Ukraine. But that could have been exposed without hassling Zelensky. The war Ukraine is fighting, against Russian aggression, is a very serious matter to them. Zelensky had no desire to find himself hostage to American culture wars.

                    2. Biden bragged about extorting the dismissal of a prosecutor. There’s nothing wrong with Trump suggesting they reverse course. He’s telling them Hunter & cronies are not protected.

                    3. As if I GAFF what weak minded cultists like TIA call me. I think we can safely assume that had he any counter points to the evidence I briefly summarized, we’d hear it.

                      As a follower, he doesn’t care if Trump did it, nor do mespo, Olly, Cindy, and the rest of the dumb a.s true believing crew here. Their need is too great.

                  2. no actually anon it does have to do with all that. your singular focus on the wee little part that you think gets you what you won’t, wont extract this molehill from the mountain on which it rests

                    1. Address the accusation and the evidence or shut up Kurtz. This ain’t no post modern disco.

                  3. “irrelevant tribalism of the lowest order”

                    tribalism maybe, but not irrelevant; precisely relevant, actually.

                    and tribalism is now no longer the lowest order. watch and feel the zeitgeist change all around you, as tribalism becomes the first order.

              2. So Vindman’s expertise was in evaluating and reporting to his IC superiors his opinion on President Trump’s statesmanship? So not a spy, got it. LOL!

              3. There isn’t any confusion. Four career government employees transcribed the call and produced a harmonized common transcript. That transcript was released to the public weeks ago.

                1. Yes, TIA, the WH transcript is part of the evidence and dovetails with evidence on other events – the accusation is not solely about the phone call as the effort unfolded after at least 2 months of effort.

                  Read a newspaper.

          2. Olly, thanks for the update on the Military pecking order.

            Around here I think I’m just called Chief SOB behind my back. LOL;)

    1. You’re an attorney?

      So the weapon with prints, the changed life insurance policy, and surveillance camera showing the suspect climbing out the window are all in evidence and you’re working on discrediting the tipster?

      Brilliant!

      Stick with that crap you read mespo. It’s very amusing.

    2. ha ha Obama-Biden-Rice-Brennan stay behind operative.

      https://www.realclearinvestigations.com/articles/2019/10/30/whistleblower_exposed_close_to_biden_brennan_dnc_oppo_researcher_120996.html

      so now the first smear campaign is tied to the second, as expected

      will the people allow CIA underlings to dictate policy to the POTUS?

      That’s what the Democratic leadership of the House wants. Amazing!

      Crush the rogue former CIA director Brennan’s COUP!

        1. I’m lovin’ the supposed attorney going after the tipster and ignoring the evidence his tip laid bare.

          Like going after Susan Arkins jailhouse confession to spring the Manson gang.

      1. I hope there’s criminal penalties for exposing WBs, or at least repercussions for the board. You may someday see the value of the designation if someone in authority who is not your cult leader is abusing their position illegally. Yeah, I know. Your obedience is too great, your devotion too blind to consider that.

        1. Chuckles. Leaking is bad when someone other than Adam Schiff is doiing.

          The peddler of hearsay wouldn’t have been defined as a whistle-blower three months ago. Just remember, the ‘Deep State’ is a RWNJ fantasy. Or whatever.

  1. The American Founders established individual rights, freedoms and immunities which were “natural” and “God-given.”

    Nature and God are universal as are the rights, freedoms and immunities established by the American Founders.

    Canadians, as do all citizens of the world and the universe, enjoy not only the freedom of speech but every other right, freedom and immunity of Americans.

    Some dictators, despots and monarchs may not have received the memo just yet.

  2. TURLEY RETURNS TO ‘FREE SPEECH’..

    WHILE IGNORING ELEPHANT IN THE ROOM

    Last week, after Ambassador Taylor’s devastating testimony to the House Impeachment Inquiry, Professor Turley’s column was not really about Taylor. Instead the professor wrote a column noting that Democrats may find themselves embracing Former National Security Advisor John Bolton as a friendly witness in their impeachment drive. Bolton, during the Bush years, was considered excessively hawkish by Democrats and mainstream media. Therefore Turley was noting an obvious irony that people in the Beltway must find amusing.

    In that column, however, Turley handled Ambassador Taylor’s testimony as more or less a footnote. The professor was reluctant to say just how damaging Taylor’s testimony was. Though to his credit Turley included a link to a transcript of Taylor’s opening statement. But Turley was reluctant to share his scholarly expertise regarding the impact Taylor had had; an omission some of us found peculiar. Just the night before Donald Trump had called on Republicans to fight impeachment with all their strength.

    So here it is about 1:00 pm (EDT) the day after Lt. Col. Alexander Vindman’s testimony before the Impeachment Inquiry. Vindman, a decorated veteran, had actually listened in on Trump’s July 25th phone call with Ukrainian president Zelensky. By all accounts, Vindman’s testimony supports the testimony of Ambassador Taylor. This apparently made quite an impression on Trump defenders. Right-wing media immediately launched a campaign to smear Vindman as a ‘deep state operative’ whose allegiances are only to Ukraine, the country of his birth.

    Therefore one has to seriously wonder why Professor Turley has yet to comment on Vindman’s testimony. It is the elephant in the room which should be an obvious subject of an analysis for a scholar like Jonathan Turley. Trump defenders should be cautioned here. The professor’s lack of comment is ‘not’ a good sign! It means the professor is very, very reluctant to annoy Trump defenders among his friends and associates.

    By the way, I was once on the set of movie about a 1930’s circus act. The set was a replica of an old circus tent staked to the ground. Standing in the middle of that tent was an actual elephant who played a crucial role in the movie. Interestingly I noticed that the hundreds of extras present had a tendency to keep facing the elephant. Which goes to show that elephants are hard to ignore.

    1. Is this the same Taylor whose cross-examination we haven’t yet seen? The same Taylor that offered more hearsay in his opening statement? The same Taylor who was doing work for a Democratic Party outfit financed by the sorosphere (w/ Hunter Biden on its board)?

      1. No, Tabby, that’s not the same Taylor. You’re confusing him with the William Taylor of rightwing media accounts.

        1. By the way, Tabby, I can’t find any confirmation that Taylor had any connection to Soros or Hunter Biden. I’m sure you’d relish the opportunity to show us ‘what’ you’re referring to.

            1. Tabby, had it been ‘all over the news’, it would have shown up in my Google Search. It did ‘not’, however. And it’s funny you didn’t post it here just to show how ‘easy it was to find’.

              1. Hor:

                Here I’ll do your research for you. It took .76 seconds on Google:

                “Acting U.S. Ambassador to Ukraine Bill Taylor, who provided key testimony to the Democrats’ controversial impeachment inquiry yesterday, has evidenced a close relationship with the Atlantic Council think tank, even writing Ukraine policy pieces with the organization’s director and analysis articles published by the Council.

                The Atlantic Council is funded by and works in partnership with Burisma, the natural gas company at the center of allegations regarding Joe Biden and his son, Hunter Biden.

                In addition to a direct relationship with the Atlantic Council, Taylor for the last nine years also served as a senior adviser to the U.S.-Ukraine Business Council (USUBC), which has co-hosted events with the Atlantic Council and has participated in events co-hosted jointly by the Atlantic Council and Burisma.”

                https://www.breitbart.com/politics/2019/10/23/who-william-taylor-impeachment-star-witness-longtime-relationship-burisma-backed-think-tank/

                1. Mespo: The Atlantic Council is a nonpartisan, international think tank that was founded in 1961.

                  Your Breitbart article is aggressively misleading by suggesting The Atlantic Council was set up by Burisma. Burisma didn’t even exist when the council was formed and is not a major player the council’s organization.

                  One might also point out that Bill Taylor was Ambassador to Ukraine during the Bush years. So this idea that Taylor is ‘deep state’ operative sympathetic to Democrats has no basis in fact.

                  https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Atlantic_Council

                    1. Mespo, it’s worth noting that George Soros is also of a funder of the Cato Institute, a think tank frequently cited by conservatives when it suits their purposes.

                      That Wikipedia link for the Atlantic Council lists their 3 top funders. Soros is ‘not’ among them. That Wikipedia link also lists the council’s membership. They are as follows:

                      Leadership

                      Jon Huntsman, Former Chairman
                      Fred Kempe, President
                      John F.W. Rogers, Chairman
                      David McCormick, Chairman, International Advisory Board
                      Frederick Kempe, President and CEO
                      Damon Wilson, Executive Vice President
                      John Studzinski, Vice Chair
                      Fran Burwell, Vice President and Director, Transatlantic Relations Program
                      Barry Pavel, Vice President and Director, Brent Scowcroft Center on International Security
                      Jason Healey, Director, Cyber Statecraft Initiative[48]
                      Shuja Nawaz, Director, South Asia Center
                      Peter Schechter, Director, Adrienne Arsht Latin America Center
                      J. Peter Pham, Director, Africa Center
                      John E. Herbst, Director, Dinu Patriciu Eurasia Center
                      David Koranyi, Director, Eurasian Energy Futures Initiative, Dinu Patriciu Eurasia Center
                      Graham Brookie, Director and Managing Editor, Digital Forensic Research Lab (DFRLab)
                      Kathy Baughman McLeod, Director, Adrienne Arsht–Rockefeller Foundation Resilience Center

                      In the Wikipedia link you can click on most of these names to see who they are. Most are corporate officers for well known companies and institutions. None of the highlighted names cites any direct connection to Soros.

                      It amazes me the lengths Trumpers will go to in trying to link Trump critics to the deep state, globalists, coastal elites or ANTIFA. The idea seems to be that ‘any’ critic of Donald Trump has to be part of some conspiracy somewhere.

                  1. oh, there’s a lot of value to be gleaned from Breitbart, if you know how. guys like you just have a knee jerk reaction against people you don’t like. See, the information from Brietbart about him being an Atlantic council crony actually explains quite a bit. in short, he’s part of the internationalist, globalist, interventionist clique, who hates Trump

                    about the Atlantic council:

                    “The leading donors in 2018 were Facebook and the British government.”

                    source: reuters

                    here’s a paper if you want to learn more. but feel free to ignore the information if you don’t like me. i could care less if you understand things at the end of the day, just throwing it out there for my own good karma

                    https://www.nato.int/acad/fellow/96-98/small.pdf

                    1. Kurtz, Facebook was largely blamed for getting Trump elected. So their funding of The Atlantic Council shouldn’t alarm any Trumper.

                      In a Congressional hearing last week, Mark Zuckerberg said that Facebook couldn’t possibly check political ads for factual content. That should have pleased Trumpers greatly.

                      But today, Facebook announced that they would no longer accept political ads. That’s funny because, Congresswoman Cortez asked Zuckerberg if Facebook would let her run ads claiming that various Republicans supported her green deal. Zuckerberg literally had no answer to that question. Which proves that factual content matters in political ads.

              2. Horatio, give up all hope that you or anybody can break the trump cult fever on this site. Only their view is accepted. They have their own version of alternative definitions of reality and facts.

                  1. Yeah, Fishwings. And as I pointed out to Mespo, that article he linked is aggressively misleading. The Atlantic Council goes back almost 60 years. Yet Brietbart suggests that it was set up by Burisma! It’s like no lie is too shameless in support of Donald Trump.

                    1. So can you share with us your logarithm on how you choose fake profile names?

                      You have more identities on here than the “performing arts guests” on RuPaul’s Drag Show Racing and they look better than you too

                1. They have their own version of alternative definitions of reality and facts.

                  You say that like it’s a bad thing. Once the IG and Durham reports drop, then we’ll truly see which of our realities is not from this universe.

                  Tick…tick…tick…

                  1. Pathetic.

                    Olly, tells us about McCabe’s indictment. Isn’t that the first stone in the cosmic payoff you’re counting on?

                2. you’re bound up in a “cult” of your own and you’re too arrogant to see it.

                  really, rather than pretending that objectivity is somehow solely your own province, you might consider to what extent everyone is operating on received convictions and unchosen and unreasoned inputs.

                  study the work of the postmodernists a little. go ask mayor pete his daddy was an expert on them.

                  see this is why I like communists better than liberals. at least the Commies have the guts to admit their own preferences and perspectives. you guys are kidding yourselves that only you can see the pure unfiltered light of truth with no bias. i got news for ya. nobody does.

                  1. Hilarious Kurtz. Mespo feeds up some ridiculous BS from his wingnut sources and you claim Postmodernism as a defense. And you’re all Catholics to boot? The Bible is just another “text” written by some other “dead white men”?

                    Who knew??

                    1. I’m a lapsed Catholic, kind of done with churches for now. That’s not at issue.

                      Postmodernism draws on existentialist philosophy which can serve as much as an inspiration for “conservatives” as it did for communists, radicals, or liberals. Postmodernism’s roots are in Heidegger and Nietzsche’s thinking, both of whom were in their time, considered right wingers

                      I am not making that up. here’s an elaboration on the philosophical connection not that you care https://www.press.uchicago.edu/ucp/books/book/chicago/N/bo3683709.html

                      postmodernism is not a defense. it is a way of thinking that is prevalent out there today. my simple point to those who can grasp it, is that there is nothing in deconstructionism for example, which prevents its methods from being used to “deconstruct” the petty fixations of contemporary liberals and their whole list of agenda items and new set of phony moralistic norms, which are intended to replace the older ones.

                      as for the source, brietbart is itself exactly that in operation. you may not know anything about breitbart except that it’s on your baddie list. but if you did, you might understand how andrew breitbart and bannon were attacking the Republican establishment before he died, and how that continues on today, then you can understand precisely why and how they are willing to point the figure at globalist organizations like the Atlantic council that had plenty of Republican establishment support in the past. which is a big help in understanding why some people hate trump. it has nothing to do with much besides continuing the policy of Russia as bogeyman. They don’t want to give that up. That’s what Atlanticism is all about. Geopolitics.

                      Trump is my guy. I don’t care about the old Republican establishment. in fact i have come to dislike it quite a bit. Now I am just a nobody but trust me there are a lot more like me out there. Now I am old but not as old as you. I don’t expect you to understand.

                    2. there is a connection from Bultman to Nietzsche to Heidegger to Sartre to Foucault to Trump but I am not sure I am willing to explain that to you for free.

                      Here’s an essay you can pull and read https://philarchive.org/rec/MILADH-2

                      Dugin, banned from the US, is a Russian thinker, who’s claimed to influence Putin.

                      Putin’s just responding to things that have happened to the world due to US policy however; we as Americans have to respond to those changes in the world in our own ways, too. It just so happens that there can be homologous structures which develop in different places due to similar conditions.

                      He’s no prophet however, just a clever fellow who sees an emergent zeitgeist and has heralded it before others grasped the earth moving beneath their feet

  3. Tory is a figure in the Ontario Conservative Party. The problem is that Canadian culture is fundamentally pusillanimous. It allows aggressive and loosly-wired people to dictate terms, because positions of authority are occupied by people like John Tory.

  4. My library system, the Maricopa County Library System suppresses free speech depending on the location. They have totally banned American Vandal Seasons 1 and 2.
    They had originally ordered season 1 and then realized that the phallus that was painted on the faculty car was on the DVD disc. Oh, horror, oh clutched pearls. I only got to see it because I made a huge stink about it. Then they withdrew it from the catalog.

  5. Protest is also a free speech right as is boycotting. What is not free speech is threats.

    The WaPo has a self admitted government propagandist, Richard Stengel, writing an op-ed about the need to restrict free speech in the US. Max Blumenthal was arrested by DC police for covering the Venezuelan embassy protectors and the people protesting the protectors. These protesters committed violence and property damage as police stood by and watched. Max showed what was happening and for this “crime” he was arrested. Julian Assange is in a maximum security prison as a political prisoner. His crime was showing US war crimes, including the murder of reporters and a civilian family who tired to come to the aid of the reporters. His case will end free speech and freedom of the press in our nation and around the world unless people speak out now.

    I am glad there are still people who will support free speech and free press rights. They are few and far between at this time.

    1. “Blumenthal was hauled into a police van and ultimately taken to DC central jail, where h”e was held for two days in various cells and cages. He was shackled by his hands and ankles for over five hours in one such cage along with other inmates. His request for a phone call was denied by DC police and corrections officers, effectively denying him access to the outside world.”

      https://thegrayzone.com/2019/10/28/this-charge-is-one-hundred-percent-false-grayzone-editor-max-blumenthal-arrested-months-after-reporting-on-venezuelan-opposition-violence/

    2. “Protest is also a free speech right” only if it doesn’t abridge the free speech rights of others. Creating conditions that make it difficult or impossible for a speaker to be heard by their audience is not an exercise of free speech; it’s a denial of free speech. Yes, threats are over the line, but you don’t have to go that far to be over the line.

  6. Loving the crest with the nonsensical “Diversity Our Strength” motto. So ironic that even the most enthusiastic embracers of “diversity” are strangled in its clutches.

  7. Sign on the Mens Room: Dongs Only. Sign on the Womens Room: No Dongs Allowed.
    Sing a song to the gay promotion protestors:
    (music to the tune of Short People by Randy Newman)
    Bent people got no reason….
    Bent people got no reason…
    Bent people got no reason to live!

    They got little bitty eyes… and
    Little bitty feet… little bitty voices that go peep peep peep!

    Don’t want no bent people…
    Don’ want no bent people round here!

  8. I don’t agree with this individual in every aspect of her stated views but she has a right to voice her opinion. I oppose the idea that if you or your group doesn’t agree with someone that you have the right some even say the obligation to shut them up. Remember when advocates for civil rights were shut up. People who act to silence their critics should consider how they would feel if the show was on the other foot.

    1. People who act to silence their critics should consider how they would feel if the show was on the other foot.

      Good post JH. People should consider…but they likely won’t, as that would require a degree of enlightenment they don’t possess. Instead, they will follow the path Bastiat describes:

      It is as if it were necessary, before a reign of justice appears, for everyone to suffer a cruel retribution — some for their evilness, and some for their lack of understanding. The Law
      http://bastiat.org/en/the_law.html

  9. The left is increasing the us/them divide; fortunately they are so indiscriminate in their attacks that they will ensure a significant majority in the “us” column.

    Watch Trump go to reelection victory as the lefties overplay their hand.

Leave a Reply