Frau Merkel’s appeal to crush freedom of speech to save freedoms in Germany

Direct link.

Newspeak at its apex. Thank you MissPiggy for the examination and translation of this one.

This is most likely Merkel’s tandem effort with Erdogan and the OIC to impose Islamic blasphemy laws in Germany and by extension, the EU.

As we have come to expect, the method is to use th Frankfurt School’s Political Correctness in order to slide blasphemy laws in under the guise of tolerance. But it is in reality, the Marcusean Repressive Tolerance, which is the gateway to full Soviet like control on what can and cannot be said aloud. And if thoughts that run counter to the official consensus (global warming, men cannot become biological women) are said in private, the power bestowed on the listener to destroy your life makes #Metoo look trivial.

non-blurred video with sign and translation

WARNING: Nudity

The woman in the middle of what appears to be a large crowd of leftists and muslims starts out with a sign that says:

“Blasphemy is a right of (those who live in) the Republic of France”

It isn’t until people took her sign away that she went for a message that was harder to ignore.

“Do not sell secularism cheaply”.

This event appears to be a major march against “islamophobia“, that took place in Paris today. This is likely a prelude to a new anti-free speech law in the guise of hate speech. We are seeing this all over the Western world now.

How Frankfurt School managed to make hate speech, out of disagreement with the state

Direct link:

https://d.tube/v/vladtepesblog/QmXD4wuoLtDRDaGZ3pycYFExZhNCFgXXGiZfQEHLmr1WZM

Below, an explanation of this video by the translator, Ava Lon. Thank you very much for this difficult work, and Gates of Vienna for the edit and format.

This is 7 minutes long part of a longer video, from Krzysztof Karo? -the very Polish writer, who informed us about Spinelli and his role in the creation of the EU. The entire video is about the semantic changes uttered by the -as he calls them- Neo-Marxists, in order to appropriate the language, the debate and finally be able to create the narrative.

They reach this goal by starting by a premise (a false premise) that Truth cannot be known at all, it is only described by our imperfect language which can vary from one person to another, and therefore causes the Truth to be un-knowable or creates many Truths. [if you’re confused already, please keep in mind that 2+2=4, no matter how you say it, in what language, and how poor your grammar might be]

If the Truth depends on language, nothing seems simpler than modify it by modifying the language, on purpose. Who decides how the Truth will be modified, or rather: what will be called the Truth once the necessary changes have been performed?

Jürgen Habermas, belonging to the second generation of Frankfurt School philosophers, after suggesting the nonexistence of objective Truth and the possibility therefore of molding it at will, answers this question by proposing a collective solution in the endeavor of deciding what the Truth is, or rather what it should be.

The process in which the Truth is established is called the Discourse, according to the Communicative Action Theory -known in Poland as the Discourse Theory and this is the name used in the argument of Krzysztof Karo? in this video, ‘discourse’ being the key word- [and Discourse, unlike a normal discussion, doesn’t admit dissent], and the consensus that is reached in that process isn’t reached by presenting better arguments, but rather by pressuring everyone to abandon their views and adhere to the consensus.The difference between this and a compromise is that in a compromise everybody gives up something in order to agree on a common ground. In the Neo-Marxist Consensus Discourse certain positions are entirely given up and the person whole-heartedly takes the Truth established by the discourse and its consensus as HIS OWN [just like in Orwell’s 1984, it wasn’t enough to just ACCEPT the Big Brother, you had to truly LOVE him].

Once everybody agreed what the Truth is (in every particular case), doubting, criticizing, speaking about different possibilities, or even just asking questions about that Neo-Marxist “revealed Truth” is sowing discord, enmity and hate speech.

I thought this was very important in the light of the sentencing of ESW in Austria, where clearly the truth was not a defense, and anyway, the court seems to have had already some sort of consensus about what the truth was.

2013 interview with the head of the Organization of Islamic Cooperation (OIC) on the implementation of UN Res. 16/18

We are restoring this because of its terrible importance. Many people, most in fact, do not know about 16/18 or its importance, and would likely think you unwell or dishonest if you tried to explain it to them.

Here it is from the head of the OIC himself, Ekmeleddin Ihsanoglu, who is more clear than most of our own leaders on the intention of 16/18.

Please note that it has now been thoroughly established that the attack on the US Embassy in Libya was a well planned terrorist attack by Islamic groups and had nothing whatsoever to do with the short and badly made Youtube film on the life of Mohammad mentioned in the video. In fact, that video only had 13 views at the time that the attack happened, which leads many to suspect that the Obama/Clinton admin had created the film as kind of false Cases Belli for this event or one like it. Possibly to advance the implementation of Islamic blasphemy laws within the USA.

Subsequent to this, we have seen Canadian Parliamentary motion M103 be adopted and financed, and many other nations around the world, including Austria and the EU adopt saleable laws which clearly are meant to conform to UN 16/18, although typically renamed into something that the locals can accept.

Direct link:

https://d.tube/v/vladtepesblog/QmekS9GnrR3N5jC8Pzj2jSRWJLEuEozUPa8mDWQWSxVN67

From EW:

A stunning display of hypocrisy at a “freedom of speech” conference

It is established that Twitter has agreed to conform to Pakistani blasphemy laws.

It is stunning that at a free speech event, RT is banned but the CBC and BBC are not although the reasons for banning RT (presumably) apply more to the CBC and BBC.

The Rebel managed to attend but they clearly attempted to stop Ezra from asking the only question that mattered. This was a stage managed event and no dissent was to be permitted, and the Pakistani censors must not be challenged.

This is a truly outstanding moment by The Rebel’s Ezra Levant, equalled perhaps only by his appearance as a defendant at the disgraceful Canadian ‘Human Rights Commissions’.

Freedom of speech is dying all over the world and the UK appears to be the vanguard of the new totalitarian push against freedom of speech.

H/T Oz-Rita

 

Asia Bibi in Canada

It is possible that this is the first genuine refugee Canada has taken in. And it is an amazingly good thing that Canada did. One wonders if there are conditions to her being here such as limits to her freedom of speech to discuss Islam and its impact on minorities in Islamic countries. It is difficult not to believe that the Saudi girls are not under conditions like that as their language has been extremely measured since arriving here.

The CBC article failed to mention that the UK turned down her application because of concerns over how local muslims would behave. Once again showing who makes the law in the UK.

It is a powerfully good thing that Canada brought in Asia. However I personally have met migrants to Canada from Syria who were Christian but had to lie and say they were Muslim to get into Canada as a refugee. So while this extremely high profile case is an excellent event, someone needs to look in to the actual policy in Canada in terms of accepting genuine refugees of Islamic horror and discrimination against minority religions and see what is wrong in the system.

 

ESW Files an Appeal With the European Court of Human Rights in Islam

An important update on the state of European Union Blasphemy laws From Gates of Vienna:

On January 22 lawyers for Elisabeth Sabaditsch-Wolff filed an appeal of her “hate speech” conviction with the Grand Chamber of the European Court of Human Rights.

Before I go any further, I must remind readers that Elisabeth incurred enormous legal expenses to put together and file this appeal with the ECtHR. To contribute to Elisabeth’s legal defense fund:

Elisabeth’s seminar on Islam was infiltrated by a leftist journalist in October of 2009. A year later she was indicted in an Austrian court for her “hate speech” about Mohammed. She was eventually convicted, and appealed at various levels, until finally her conviction was upheld by the European Court of Human Rights in October of last year.

In other words, the entire process has consumed a full decade of Elisabeth’s life.

So far…

Please read the rest at Gates of Vienna.Net

Pakistanis riot, demanding much that makes Lilliput look perfectly reasonable

It has been some decades since I read Gulliver’s Travels. The main part, and the part no one seems to remember anything else other than, is where two nations go to war over which end of the egg should be cracked before consuming it.

Well Pakistan has it beat.

For weeks now, major riots have been taking place resulting in numerous deaths and massive and regular breaches of all civilized rules, such as not hiding fighters in ambulances etc. All because a legislator proposed something and didn’t mention Islam’s founder and pirate in chief, Mohammad.

The legislator apologized and blamed it on a clerical error when he saw the scale and viciousness of the rioters but that wasn’t enough for them. They now demand his resignation and more.

(Maybe if Pakistan had some better TV shows?)

For more of this planned directed chaos intended to intimidate the few Pakistani legislators who may have a trace of liberal consciousness, please look at the comments in the Reader’s Links posts over the past few days and even last week.

Thank you M. and all who sent in related materials. This is no small thing. It is happening increasingly and with increasing lethality in the West. The Charlie Hebdo massacre was absolutely a manifestation of this consciousness.

Also the normalizing of the very concept of blasphemy as a criminal matter, and deserving of death is extremely serious. It was a scant few years ago when all of us would have thought the notion primitive, medieval and not possible in the modern world.