Lux Interior wrote:
Well I agree that the world needs more action and less chat to effect change, posting about murdering and lynching can cross a line in this day and age. It only takes one weasel to snitch to an authority to fuck things up for all on here. I'm not saying that's definitive but a possibility.
There's two new members on here who have already claimed to have done just that. Real or not, they present at the very least, an attempt to suppress free speech.
You do bring up an interesting point. One that I discussed before with Novum. Which is how this or any other forum can get into trouble for what I say. I am the one saying it. Not the forum. Also, lets say some governemental agency came after this forum over something I said. The constitution says that it will make no laws that suppress freedom of speech. If congress can't make a law to do so, how in the hell could they create a governmental agency to do so. The point is, they couldn't.
Some of the things I have said could be viewed by the rulers in the U.S. as being illegal. Namely, by the judiciary branch of government. But who carries the most authority in this country. The judiciary branch of government or the constitution. What if the government shut this place down and this forum took the government to court. All the way to the supreme court if necessary. I wonder which they would think would have the most authority. But then, it seems to me that a conflict of interest would arise. Because instead of somebody impartial, it would be the judiciary branch making the decision.
By the way, if you look into any of the sections around here in which I have posted or replied to threads, you will see my avatar as being the last person to reply to them. If you have nothing better to do, leave a reply in them. Anything at all. Because they are some lonely, lonely threads.
You're well aware of people being prosecuted for so called hate crimes I know. Often these people have used a very public platform and had the potential to reach a much larger audience than here. I guess it's all down to how many could be influenced, for want of a better word or the subject matter. Holocaust denial isn't yet a crime in the UK but Alison Chabloz was punished for making a satirical song about it so I guess who gets offended also can have an impact. Legal matters require a new dictionary to deal with the jargon and complex laws so then you have to find a defence lawyer who's savvy enough to get to grips with that jargon and use it for your best defence. Some subjects are just too hot potatoes to take on, even if the lawyer was able to run legal rings around the prosecution many will just not touch it for fear of financial ramifications, ie being smeared and targeted buy the unter rulers.
