Miriam, freedom of barking, as I'd like to call it doesn't have a
value if it is not expected to make a difference. Also, it is
restricted in the west to speak up against the Holocaust's historical
authenticity. So, if freedom of expression is not allowed in all
fields, including academic ones, then it is demonstratively
fallacious. Could you show me one thesis at a prestigious western
university that reexamines or oppugns the Holocaust's historical
authenticity. You won't find one. Why? Because Jews succeeded in
making this particular subject a taboo. They may have done so through
instilling terror or threatening someone's interest, they're good at
both anyway.
On 9/22/18, Miriam Vieni <miriamvieni@xxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
Mustafa
You are confusing issues. Freedom of expression means that people have a
right to say what they think. It also means that people who disagree with
them, have a right to respond. You are complaining because you do not agree
with some opinions of some Americans and because you do not agree with
responses of other Americans to things that you believe. If you are in
favor of free speech, it is only fair to criticize those people who do not
permit others to express themselves openly.
Miriam
-----Original Message-----
From: blind-democracy-bounce@xxxxxxxxxxxxx
<blind-democracy-bounce@xxxxxxxxxxxxx> On Behalf Of Mostafa
Sent: Saturday, September 22, 2018 1:02 AM
To: terri.rupar@xxxxxxxxxxxx; allison.michaels@xxxxxxxxxxxx; Emilly
<amyleblanc01@xxxxxxxxx>; david@xxxxxxxxxx; paul@xxxxxxxxxx;
mdecausmeaker@xxxxxxxxx; sam@xxxxxxxxxx; sharon@xxxxxxxxxx;
kellie@xxxxxxxxxx; lcbelk@xxxxxxxxx; sarahowens@xxxxxxxxxx;
elizabeth@xxxxxxxxxx; samantharosehuskey@xxxxxxxxx;
william.h.hatcher@xxxxxxxxx; jpholdsworth5@xxxxxxxxx; mahloww@xxxxxxxxx;
chuckmarzahn@xxxxxxxxx; tmohlenhoff@xxxxxxxxxxx; yngveke@xxxxxxxxx;
revleonard@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx; asstpastor@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx;
music@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx; youth@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx;
children@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx; nursery@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx;
admin@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx; jason@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx;
pastor@xxxxxxxxxx; tracy@xxxxxxxxxx; blind-democracy@xxxxxxxxxxxxx;
rharmon@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx; hburgess2@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx;
dan.boone@xxxxxxxxxxxxx; charlie.isbell@xxxxxxxxx; chaas0217@xxxxxxxxx;
spidamonki1982@xxxxxxxxxxx; iamspiro8@xxxxxxxxx; ckrugman@xxxxxxxxxxxxx;
pmikeal@xxxxxxxxxxx; bchiles@xxxxxxxxx; adicey@xxxxxxxxxxxxx;
rascal0826@xxxxxxxxxxx; david.burleigh@xxxxxxxxxx; luther.burney@xxxxxxxxxx;
joshua.carver@xxxxxxxxxx; dennis.clark@xxxxxxxxxx;
scott.mckenzie@xxxxxxxxxx; rjohnson01@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx;
rshapard12@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx; mrodriguez16@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx;
pherold@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx; danC@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx;
rJones@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx; Victor of Canada <victor.gouveia@xxxxxxxxxx>;
dgkerwood@xxxxxxxxx
Subject: [blind-democracy] Freedom of expression
Freedom of speech is the right to express your independent opinions and
convictions in public without being restrained, threatened or censored.
Ordinarily, the United States is prejudiciously portrayed as the paragon of
free expression worldwide. I distinctly destine to pick Americanism apart.
Each and everyone in many regions across the globe is entitled to opine his
opinion freely. The United States did not invent the right of free
expression. It is not exclusive to American Constitution or its amendments.
Freedom of expression is openly practiced therein as long as Islam is
incessantly denigrated.
Nevertheless, if someone oppugned the holocaust or its chronicle's
authenticity, for instance, he is instantly subjected to counterfeit
allegations of antisemitism. This is my endeavour concern of American double
standard. When a Muslim Commits mass murder, he is unhesitatingly labelled
with perpetrating terror. However, if a white supremacist committed mass
murder with even higher rate of fatalities, he is classified as a demented
and atypical individual. I have no idea, how to illustrate this plain
contradiction? How could you be fairish and oppressive simultaneously? I
respect decent Americans. Be that as it may, as to Americanism, how could
you consistently be guilty, jury and judge concurrently? Freedom of
expression is the major factor by which the United States is allegedly
portrayed with unprecedented prodigy. However, freedom of expression therein
seems to somewhat be infructuous. So for instance, as to America's
longstanding crisis of culpably perennial fatal mass shootings, the National
Rifle Association blocks any congressional bill which aims to relatively
rectify the pitiful situation. For them, the subject is just unforfeitable.
Thence, freedom of expression resembles emptied rhetoric at some point. If
your freedom of expression doesn't allow you to enact freely, your words may
equate some bunch of barking dogs.
Who cares if the dog barks at him? In other words, if the National Rifle
Association listens incautiously to periodical congressional criticism of
irrepressible munition across the nation, what is the significance of their
critique then? What is the point of congressional authorities being
critical of unrestricted gun mongers?
I urge you folks to ponder on my proposition. Yes, here in Egypt, freedom of
expression is perfectly missing. If someone spoke against Sisi's regime or
his coup based governance, he is emphatically subjected to scathingly be
detained, imprisoned and ruthlessly excruciated. We recognise that and we
fairly admit freedom of expression total absence. This is quite unfortunate
but factual. We couldn't deny it or wrongly fend for the military based
dictator.
However, we strenuously strive in the cause of favourably retaining its
prosperity. Liberal media may have spoke against Donald Trump and his
policies of implementing racial disparity in addition to farther major
catastrophes hitherto, they are not able to alter the way he deliberately
perpetrates cruelty. So for instance, as for the issue of remanded children
because their parents immigrated illicitly, why haven't they been just
expatriated along with their families? The media brought the subject briefly
and then, closed the file while the prob hasn't yet been resolved.
Principally, the conception of unequivocally free speech in the United
States is an enormous fib. Do you know what is really free in the States? It
is greed and corporal establishment. This vividly reflects the dominance of
patrician landholders of the American South as of pastoral panel and other
chiselers. Who could have spoke out against Israel's brutality which is
relentlessly imposed on decently innocent civilians as of women and children
in the congressional arena? There is no one member in the Congress who could
have spoke in the favour of Palestinian refugee crisis unless he aims to
infinitely lose his seat. Is this what you ironically call freedom? I
believe it is crucial to sincerely reconsider the American portraiture of
free expression and measure that according to actual information. Is
American vision of free expression sufficiently genuine? I won't answer this
question for now.
I'll rather leave it at your hand, so you could have a chance to think about
it and come up with the proper answer. I destine to considerably expand the
discussion of this subject because it is of mutual interest. I at least
think so. Thank you for reading, Mustafa Almahdy.
Best wishes, it is always hope that gives meaning to life.
___________________
