Jung Freud #racist #sexist

Jung Freud #racist #sexist unz.com

As for Free Speech vs Muslims, there’s an argument in favor of the Muslims. They have every right to be outraged by the denigration of Islam and Muslims given the current state of Western ‘liberal democracy’. Ideally, totally unfettered speech for all should be guaranteed in a free society. If the West were genuinely committed to free speech for all, we should with free-speechers against Muslim hotheads. Back when the West stood for the right of Salman Rushdie to write a controversial book, it felt good to be on the side of free-speechers against Iran and Muslim firebrands.

But the notion that the current West is a ‘liberal democracy’ committed to free speech is a joke. Europe and Canada trample on free speech at every turn, especially to appease Jews and their two main allies, blacks and homos. Jews, once the biggest defenders of free speech(if only to have their say and gain power), are now the biggest enforcers of Censchwarzship(to hoard the immense power and wealth they’ve accumulated).

Jewish Power effectively neutralized free speech along with white identity and Christianity. So, the real dichotomy is NOT about the Liberal West that values free speech VERSUS atavistic Muslim dogmatists. The reality boils down to Muslims demanding respect for Islam on par with enforced protections for Jewish Supremacist Power, globo-homo vanity, and the Jungle Cult of the Noble Negro(and, off and on, feminist bitchery).

In the current UK where people are fined and/or hauled to prison for making a mocking tweet about Nelson Mandela, exposing the dirty machinations of Jewish Power, questioning aspects of the Shoah(as the iron-clad 6 million figure is more numerology than history), making fun of homos, and positing honest questions about racial/sexual differences, where is the commitment to Free Speech?

7 comments

Nary 48 hours ago, a senior Imam stood next to the Chief Rabbi of Britain in the Church of England’s Westminster Abbey: each gave their blessing to he - the now head of the C-of-E - who previously said that he would be a ‘Defender of Faith’.

First, they came for National Action: I did not speak out because I was not an inferior subhuman Nazi bigot that called for ‘White Jihad’.

…and then they did not come for me: because I’m not an asshole.

“Ideally, totally unfettered speech for all should be guaranteed in a free society.”
Totally unfettered? As in, you can break Twitter’s rules without consequences? But doesn’t that infringe on Twitter’s free speech?

<@KeithInc.> #164756

Their version of free speech is basically them being able to say anything they want and no one being able to disagree with them or tell them no. They only care about their personal right to say anything anywhere, anyone else’s free speech doesn’t really matter. In fact, the idea that others have rights may not occur to them at all.

@Yutolia #164757

Yeah. They define ‘free speech’ as their and only their Right to say whatever they want with exactly zero consequences or right for anyone else to argue against.

The funneh part is that if any of this screech of his would be rooted in reality, he’d be already answering the libel charges. In my worldview he SHOULD be already answering them. You can have free, fucking speech that is not absolute and the absolute variation is a degenerate barbarism, where anybody can just group up a mob and start screaming about killin one minority or another and up to the actual murders it would have been completely legal thing to do. Scams and entrapments would be mostly street-legal and you could send serious death-threats to anybody you’re slightly pissed off at.

You SHOULD be able to have freedom of expression, which very specifically denies you any of the shit you’d love to write and say about other people. You are not asking any questions and you are not exposing anybody, all you want to do is attack groups of people who you think are either inferior to yourself, or do not follow the quasi-cromwellian religious positions you have in your head. If you had any evidence of a criminal behaviour by some specific Jewish fella, you are free to go to the cops and the papers with it but this in not what you want, is it? You got some disturbing conspiracy shit you believe as if these are facts and want to slander a whole minority with that without any legal consequences, of course.

TL;DR: You want to be able to freely spread vile lies and slanderous accusations across any group of people you disagree with. I very much hope you get punished in court for your verbal shitspew but even if you do not, you fucking well SHOULD be and the law should specifically limit what you publicly can say about others without solid proof.

ps. Religions and faiths are not other people, unless you specifically try to make shit up that their adherents do, which is nowhere to be found in any of the actual endorsed practices or holy books.. You know, like you do to Jewish people?

So instead of trying to reestablish free speech, you support Muslim persecution against blasphemers? If so then don’t complain you aren’t seen as a freedom friend.

Sarcasm to expose lies: So you're posting your hate speech from a Jewish jail now and they even allow you to do it from there?