One Way To Censor Those Whom You Disagree--Ban Them!

SNEAK PREVIEW: France President May Ban Non-PC Language Users from Internet for Life

Published

 2 hours ago 

on

 Feb 23, 2019

By

 Jose Nino

• Share
• Tweet

Globalist President Emmanuel Macron is flirtingwith more anti-free speech measures.

At an annual dinner, Macron put forward the idea of permanently banning those convicted of so-called “hate speech” crimes from all social media.

Broadcaster BFMTV reports that a bill fighting hate speech online will be filed around May.

This proposal to put the clamps on Internet speech coincides with the ear-piercing levels of criticism Macron is facing throughout the anti-government Yellow Vest protest. The French government has brought down the hammer on the Yellow Vest protestors, arresting approximately 8,400 protestors in a span of a few months.

Trending: Foul-Mouthed Muslim Congresswoman Leads PC Witch Hunt Against Detroit Pub Crawl

According to Macron, “The European fight must continue, but it is too slow.” Macron then went out of his way to compare banning individuals convicted of hate speech from social media to football hooligans being banned from attending football matches.

Now, there are questions regarding how the government will enforce this social media ban.

Secretary of State for Digital Affairs Mounir Mahjoubi said “the IP address is what Twitter has on each user who publishes a message on its platform. It must, as soon as possible, send it to the justice system to quickly identify the author and then ‘we can continue’.”

Mahjoubi added:

“It is no longer acceptable today that platforms that have the means to help justice and the police to identify the person who has committed an offence online take several weeks, even months, before giving the information.”

The logic authoritarian globalists use is at times baffling. Let’s consider this:

ADVERTISING

Hooligans are individuals that actively cause mayhem and destroy private property. On the other hand, those convicted of hate speech happen to say something that merely offends another individual or group. The only thing hurt in the latter case is someone’s feelings.

France is embarking on a dangerous path with its latest move to further persecute hate speech. Hate speech is a vague term that authoritarian politicians use to muzzle controversial opinion and quell dissent.

France has witnessed the rise of “No Go Zones” and other unsavory social trends thanks to the EU’s mass migration policies. As a result, numerous dissidents on the Right have stepped up to the plate to expose these schemes throughout the EU. Instead of being applauded for their public service, they’ve generally been met with social media exclusion and in worst case scenarios, fines and jail time.

Macron’s latest proposal is par the course for globalist politicians in the EU. These politicians have made it a point to push for more laws and regulations to combat hate speech and so-called fake news online.

Day by day, free speech becomes an afterthought in Europe.

If Political Correct Speech Is The Only Speech Allowed, Then We Will Have Lost All Of Our Freedoms. Snowflakes Are Just The Beginning!

Tim Allen Trashes 'Precious Snowflakes'

• Source: Breitbart 
• by: Jerome Hudson

SPECIAL:MEN DONT NEED VIAGRA IF YOU DO THIS ONCE DAILY - 'KILLS' ED

How to instantly and permanently “reverse” your ED so that you can achieve erections on command.

Learn More

Baxter family patriarch Mike Baxter (Tim Allen) took aim at political correctness and microaggressions in the latest episode of ABC sitcom Last Man Standing, entitled “Precious Snowflake.”

The episode sees Mandy Baxter (Molly Ephraim) ask her father to deliver a speech at her business school’s graduation. The speech, however, must be approved by a school committee tasked with rooting out any offensive language, words commonly referred to by the PC police as “microaggressions.”

“Microaggressions?” Mike asks Mandy. “You mean, like, ‘midget warriors’?”

“No,” Mandy replies. “They’re objectionable words or phrases. For instance, ‘Midget warriors.'”

“I know what microaggressions are,” Mike says. “It’s the latest liberal attack at free speech. And a lot of fun if you do ’em right.”

Republican Changes To IRS Oversight Of Political Speech Make A Lot Of Sense.

GOP IRS Report: Political Speech Provides Social Welfare

July 30, 2014 by Sam Rolley 

 5 17

 

 0 25

Representative Darrell Issa’s House Oversight and Government Reform Committee discussed its report on the Internal Revenue Service targeting scandal, “Making Sure Targeting Never Happens: Getting Politics Out of the IRS and Other Solutions” on Wednesday.

According to the report, the Oversight Committee “has reviewed approximately 800,000 pages of documents produced by the IRS, the Treasury Department, the Justice Department, the Federal Election Commission, the IRS Oversight Board, the Treasury Inspector General for Tax Administration, and other custodians.” Based on the findings from the research, Oversight members have come up with a 15-point plan to reform the IRS.

The most important reforms, as summarized by Issa in a press release accompanying the report’s Tuesday release, include:

*Replacing the IRS Commissioner with a multi-member, bipartisan commission

*Removing the IRS as a regulator of political speech for social-welfare groups

*Allowing taxpayers, and not the IRS, to control access to their confidential taxpayer information

*Creating a private right of action for victims of willful and injurious leaks by IRS officials of confidential taxpayer information

*Establishing transparent and objective criteria for scrutiny of applicants

*Establishing clear and transparent rules for information-collecting purposes

*Prohibiting political and policy communications between the IRS and Executive Office of the President

*Removing the IRS from implementation of the Affordable Care Act

Currently, nonprofit status is supposed to be reserved for entities which allocate less than half of resources to “political activities.” The left has already heavily criticized the Issa plan, charging that lawmakers should instead focus primarily on defining what the IRS should consider “political speech,” thereby strengthening agency guidelines for denying nonprofit status.

But in the months since the IRS scandal hit headlines more than a year ago the agency has already attempted and failed to narrow down the definition. Center for Competitive Politics President explained why during Oversight testimony Wednesday.

He said in a prepared statement: “The Internal Revenue Service is primarily a tax collection agency. It knows little about nonprofit advocacy and even less about First Amendment protections for free speech. This incompetence was on clear display when the IRS proposed regulations last November attempting to define political activity, which generated over 150,000 public comments. Organizations and citizens across the political spectrum were nearly unanimous in criticizing the proposal for seeking to regulate too much activity.

“In fairness to the career staff at the IRS, this is extremely difficult work. The tax laws are complicated, but the relationship of campaign finance laws and the First Amendment is even more complex and raises very difficult constitutional issues,” he continued. “This difficulty is one reason why the IRS should not be involved in this type of political regulation.”

Instead of making the political speech definition narrower, supporters of more comprehensive IRS reform support broader protections for nonprofits’ 1^st Amendment activities. The reason for this view, as Issa’s report puts it, is that “activities that promote free political speech and free political assembly benefit the general welfare” because they are American rights.

Should Ron Paul's Campaign For Liberty 501(c)(4) Be Required To Give Up Its Donor List? We Don't Believe So!

Ron Paul’s nonprofit refuses to disclose list of donors to the IRS

Published time: April 16, 2014 15:43

Get short URL

Ron Paul (Reuters/Robert Galbraith)

Share on tumblr

Tags

Court, Law, USA

The United States Federal Reserve is usually the government office finding itself most often in the crosshairs of former Texas congressman Ron Paul, but now the longtime lawmaker is setting his sights on another agency: the Internal Revenue Service.

Paul’s relentless efforts to abolish the Fed have without a doubt been a hallmark of the 78-year-old libertarian’s career in Congress, but recent attempts from the IRS to compel a nonprofit organization run by the former presidential hopeful for details about its contributors has pushed him to pursue yet another fight with the federal government.

Last week, Paul signed his name to an email sent to supporters acknowledging that the IRS has billed his nonprofit, Campaign for Liberty, for failing to hand over the names of donors when the group filed its taxes for the year 2012.

But Megan Stiles, the group’s director of communications, now tells the Washington Examiner that the organization will fight the government’s demands.

"There is no legitimate reason for the IRS to know who donates to Campaign for Liberty," Stiles told the Washington Examiner on Tuesday. "We believe the First Amendment is on our side as evidenced by cases such as NAACP v. Alabama and International Union UAW v. National Right to Work. Many 501(c)(4) organizations protect the privacy of their donors in the very same way as Campaign for Liberty. For some reason the IRS has now chosen to single out Campaign for Liberty for special attention. We plan to fight this all the way."

Stiles’ confirmation of an impending fight between Campaign for Liberty and the IRS comes just days after Paul told his supporters via email that the government’s latest actions “is likely just the first in a long line of unconstitutional and likely illegal ‘excuses’ this rogue government agency will use to try to shut us up and shut us down by fining us to death.”

“Forcing organizations like Campaign for Liberty to publicize donor information would have an incredibly chilling effect on political speech,” Paul wrote.

“Many liberty-loving Americans would silence themselves for fear of becoming targets of political ‘retribution,’” he continued. “And after the Obama IRS was caught red-handed targeting pro-limited government groups for harassment and intimidation, these fears could not be more well-founded.”

“The statists’ goal is to cripple Campaign for Liberty and perhaps even force us to shut our doors,” he added.

On the official Campaign for Liberty site, the group published a bill from the US Department of Treasury sent late last month for $12,900 levied on account of the organization’s failure to file its 2012 taxes completely. Specifically, the group’s paperwork was absent a Schedule B form — required by the IRS from American tax-exempt nonprofit organizations that receive $5,000 or more in donations each year — that would list the names of contributors and how much they handed to an organization.

IRS Fines Ron Paul's Campaign for Liberty

"Paying this outrageous extortionist fine — just to exercise our rights as American citizens to petition our government — may even be cheaper in the short run," Paul added in his email. "But it’ll just embolden an alphabet soup of other federal agencies to come after us."

Robert Wenzel, a reporter for the Economic Policy Journal, wrote this week that the letter “raises many more questions than it answers and is one more indication that it is going to be one hot and sticky summer” for the business end of Paul’s politics.

“Given the many things that C4L can fight against, a battle that can jeopardize the organization's very existence, as the letter suggests, seems like an odd battle to fight, especially when it has already disclosed to donors that it is collecting data as a result of federal law,” Wenzel wrote. "Or is there something about the contribution list that C4L doesn't want to disclose for other reasons?”

Another possibility, according to Wenzel, is that the agency’s new-fangled interest in Paul’s organization is connected in some way to reports that surfaced earlier this year into an alleged grand jury probe that’s been launched to investigate possible corruption involving Ron Paul 2012 deputy campaign manager Dimitri Kesari.

"The IRS technically requires donor information from 501(c)(4) organizations and is forbidden by law from releasing it to the public, yet despite this they have 'mistakenly' released the information repeatedly over the years," Stiles added to Examiner reporter Joel Gehrke on Tuesday. "Often these leaks have been made to political opponents of the conservative groups whose information was leaked. Leaking the donor information is intended to harass and to intimidate those donors from donating to political causes. Campaign for Liberty has refused to provide donor information to the IRS to protect the privacy of our members. Now the IRS has demanded the information and fined Campaign for Liberty for protecting its members’ privacy."