Friday, July 28, 2006

Constitutional Backlash

"If you don't believe WN have a right to voice their opinions (regardless of how tasteless or horrible you think it is) then you DON'T BELIEVE IN FREEDOM OF SPEECH. Period." (Michael Blevins a.k.a. VonBluvens)

Some time back I wrote an article entitled "We Have Freedom of Speech - So Shut the Hell Up!" Interestingly enough, that article was written in response to another who was defending the actions of Michael Blevins…the same person quoted above. Now I find myself revisiting the whole freedom of speech issue once more.

Perhaps no words are spoken more frequently by the racist contingent than "We have freedom of speech." And, you know, they are right. Their right to spew their hatred from the mountaintops has been upheld time and time again - both in the courts and in the public domain. The fact that they have to keep reminding people or keep having to have the courts speak to the issue simply demonstrates how unpopular what they have to say really is.

So…they have freedom of speech and that should be the end of it. Not quite. Not really. While we may have to put up with their hateful and repugnant message being screeched from the steps of public buildings and beloved monuments - we don't have to 1) Like it; 2) agree with it; or 3) be silent. There is nothing in the Constitution of the United States that says while one person is exercising his/her right everyone else has to shut the hell up. That's the good news.

And there is more good news! They may have freedom of speech but that right does not give them license to abrogate our right to the very same freedom of speech. Case in point: one of the most virulently racist people in America today is Hal Turner. The over-the-top shock-jock of racism and sleaze consistently calls for violence, governmental overthrows, and assassinations of public officials, has admitted to having a good relationship with law-enforcement on all levels, and exercises his right to freedom of speech weekly on his radio show and daily on his website.

Hal Turner seems to continue to fly under the radar of law-enforcement in spite of his reprehensible incitement to violence. When I recently alluded to the fact that in my opinion Turner should be locked up, Michael Blevins took great issue with that belief, again citing "freedom of speech" and claiming that I, somehow, stood against the Constitution. It's a familiar argument and one that really is overused and patently ridiculous. And this is why…

When the Founding Fathers drafted the Constitution of the United States the document reflected the era - and the era was much different than 2006, on that we can all agree. Because of this it is absolutely amazing how that beautiful and insightful document has stood the test of time with very little alteration. It's also very true that the very mention of any such alteration is met, still today, with vociferous and strenuous resistance. There is an almost phobic reaction at the very mention of such a sacrilege.

What is that reaction all about? We, as Americans, have enjoyed freedoms unlike any other country on Earth for a very long time and we cherish those freedoms. Protection of our rights and our freedoms is taught to us through our parents and through schools. We are indoctrinated - and I think rightfully so - into believing that these things must be protected at all cost. We are told that others are envious of us and our freedoms, that wars are being fought to protect our freedoms (even if that is a lie), and that these freedoms are what make us the greatest country on Earth.

Patriotism is a wonderful thing. But…there is a problem. Does anyone believe that when the Constitution was written the authors could envision sometime in the future, a group of neo-Nazi's wearing armbands and waving swastikas around while advocating the overthrow of that very same government that is protecting them and their rights as they stand in front of a national monument wrapped in a mantra of "We have freedom of speech?" Could they see that far? I submit the answer is no.

Furthermore…isn't it interesting that the very group who would overthrow our government and replace it with their fascist views seems to so cherish and utilize the very document that makes our country great?

This same mind-set scrambles for media recognition and then cries "poor me" when the media presents them as they really are. While "using" the Constitution to its' own end, they would censor the press and those that disagree with them. And should they ever achieve their outrageous goals, they would then engage in what they call "The Day of The Rope" where the "Jewish" media moguls, "race traitors," liberals, would be hanged. Sure…the Constitution was meant to protect that.

So, where do I stand? Am I against the Constitution and free speech? Not at all. I recognize the brilliance that those preceding us displayed in writing one of the most perfect of all documents. I also recognize the wisdom and thought that went into the ratification of each of the amendments that changed that document. The value of the Constitution is unquestionable - as is the protection of those rights which belong to all of us.

I find it appalling that there are those within the boundaries of this country who would abuse and denigrate the work of our predecessors to achieve their own despicable agenda. Regardless of how often they invoke their freedom of speech, they seem to forget that with rights comes responsibility. They also fail to recognize that when the exercising of their rights denies us our rights their rights cease to exist.

Do I think Hal Turner needs to be locked up for what he says? Oh yes, I definitely do. Whether he, in and of himself, presents a danger isn't the question. What is in question is his irresponsible behavior. As a public figure - which he certainly is among the racist and internet crowd - he has a responsibility to the populace to not incite others to violence or criminal behavior. When he shirks that responsibility then he has abused his right and the rights of others to feel secure in their homes and their surroundings.

When Michael Blevins and Michael Schnieder aired their January, 2005, program with the slogan "No Jews Alive in 2005," and called for a mass attack on Jews - they should have been arrested. They should have been dealt with and kept away from a public forum, in my opinion.

That being said, it didn't happen just as it won't happen with Hal Turner. And why? Because the Constitution of the United States protects them.

Within the last couple of days, this issue has become even more argued as the Vanguard News Network, along with its' forum, was closed down over perceived threats to Canadian officials. As the arguments and debates seem to find no real substance or solution it will be interesting to see how all of this plays out given the fact that a foreign governmental power seems to have been able to abrogate what the racists call their right to free speech. In review of what was supposedly said by Linder and taken as a threat by public officials, I can say that I doubt very seriously, when compared to other statements being made across the web, that what Linder said would be in violation of American law. At any rate, we might be seeing the setting of a new precedent.

In the meantime, the racists and hate-mongers of America will continue to spew the most venomous of all diatribes across America and be protected while they do it. And while that document is protecting them, they will keep on using that protection as they search for the opening or the opportunity to deep-six the document and the ship it came in on. They will praise Al Qaeda, and suck up to Iran - because they have freedom of speech. They will call for the assassination of congressmen and women and applaud the murder of federal judges. They will try to rewrite history and advocate genocide. And they will be protected. But what they fail to understand is Karma - the blowback is a real bitch.


  1. Well, while I would like to see Turner in jail and VonB get some psychiatric help, I don't actually understand your post.

    You're saying that VNN didn't violate US law in your opinion - yet you approve of it being shut down. You then squirm around trying to reconcile these irreconcilables.

    As an outsider who wasn't indoctrinated from birth about the US constitution (a 'perfect' document that has been modified many times) I would suggest that the fault lies with US law.

  2. What I said - or meant - was, that in light of other statements which have been made repeatedly and regularly by people like Hal Turner without reprisal, the reported statement made by Linder does not appear to be in violation of American law. Unless there is more to the story than what was reported, then I do not believe his statement to be any more threatening than one of Hal's rants. But...there is another variable in play here and that is the Canadian authorities and Canadian law. I am wondering if a precedent is going to be set here. If it is, then when Hal Turner calls for the assassination of Israeli officials, cannot those officials do the same thing?

    It is interesting to watch this kind of thing unfold. You say that the fault lies with US law. Others say that Canada has overstepped its' bounds. Still others blame the US company (I believe AT&T) for giving into to Canadian demands. Who's right and who's wrong?

  3. What you say or mean is that you are a hypocritical bitch, you'd censor me but believe your own beliefs and lies should be above reproach.

    Feel free to censor this comment and prove me right :)

  4. But Tom Falater doesn't mind it when Hal Turner and Vonbluvens censor the postings of their opponents.

    Hypocrisy to the highest degree.

    I've learned one thing. When a racist cries about the 1st amendment, they only cry about it for themselves. They want to surpress it for everyone else.

    And if Bill White is correct and they are arresting Canadian VNN posters (I doubt this though), that means one thing. Linder is fully cooperating with Canadian law enforcement by turning over records.

    Just as pornography is not free speech nor is Al Qaeda, nor is shouting fire in a crowded theater, one must think if hate speech is in those categories.

  5. Give me LibertyJuly 29, 2006 1:11 PM

    Porn shoud be free speech as nekkid bodies are much more healthy than death threats.

    Having said that, would not want to live in a country where anyone was not allowed to get on their soap box and scream their ideas despite whether others found it offensive or not.

    That is their rights as Americans.

    If you don't like it, you can counter back with your rights to free speech and speak out against them, or choose to ignore them as senseless ranting.

    But, you can't control people's thoughts or speech.

    I might not like hate speech, but supression of free speech is far more dangerous than a few ugly racial slurrs.

    I do agree that there should be a line drawn when that speech includes death threats or invokes and insights any kind form of act of terrorism.

    But hate speech in it's self is legal and must stay that way.

    Europe is a fine example of how forbidden "hate speech" laws are a complete failure as Germany now has hundreds of skins and neo-Nazis organizing rallies in revolt.

    Their arrests for their expression makes them heros and actually an asset for their causes and their numbers are growing rapidly.

    While here in the states where we have free speech (thus far), 30 Nazis rally for a few hours, a crowd counters them and yells stuff at them (all rights of free speech on both sides), then eveyone goes home and nobody is the worse for wear as long as they don't get violent.

    I love this country, I love our Constitution, the principles and civil liberties our nation was founded on.

    I will not allow my rights to be taken away by some Nazi type group government take over, but neither will I allow my rights to be hampered by paranoid alarmism.

    You are walking a fine line here,...

  6. Tom - you are right - I deleted several of your posts in the wee small hours of the morning. Now, why would I do that? I did that because this is my blog - my house, so to speak. If a guest in my house were to speak the words that you wrote I would kick him out on his ears.

    I don't much like people shitting in my house and I have have a tendancy to take out the garbage regularly.

    As I said previously, with freedom of speech comes responsibility. All that you have shown me since you have been here is that you have no integrity, no character, and absolutely no class. You think that you are "shocking," or that you are "clever," or that people will get a charge out of you. All you really are is another low-life, idiotic, seeker of attention without a clue about the real world.

    Go ahead and play your little internet games - exercise that free speech of yours. Just remember, I have rights too - and one of those includes the right enjoy a peaceful and secure existence in my own home - that means I can kick your ass to the curb when you defecate on my blog.

  7. Liberty - I agree. This is a fine line. And I don't want to give up any of my liberties either.

    However, threats and incitement of violence towards others should not be protected, in my opinion. Calling on people to kill and maim men women and children is not something that I believe our fore-fathers intended to protect.

  8. Give me libertyJuly 29, 2006 2:27 PM

    Nikki- I think we are in agreement here to some degree.

    But, I will say this, as legal as their "empty" threats might be, IF some crazy impressionable person/s decided to act on these public threats made by WN leaders, the WN leaders can then be held responsible and liable.

    Yes, I know, it is after the fact and it could have been avoided if there were laws set up to protect the public from such threats, but these windbags who are spewing these threats out take a huge risk to themselves as well whether they are aware of it or not.

    Now, if they find that this guy:

    was inspired by what Hal has said on his show or what he has been posting on his site, Hal might be in for a whole lot of trouble.

    Big risk to prove a free speech point.

  9. This comment has been removed by a blog administrator.

  10. Schwartz the liberal mouth peace says:

    But Tom Falater doesn't mind it when Hal Turner and Vonbluvens censor the postings of their opponents.

    Hypocrisy to the highest degree.

    Now there you go again, putting words into 'ole Tom Shelly's mouth (I'm not even going to belate the fact that I am not Tom Falater boy, go with what you "know" [smirk], boy, go with what you know.).

    Had you bothered to investigate my site you'd know that Tom Shelly isn't necessarily a backer of either Vonbluvens or Hal. Tom Shelly is not a Nazi. Nazis make good racists look bad, especially ones that go marching around in WW II costumes. Shelly's sainted great grand dad died fighting the Nazis and saving your big eared relations (can you pick up HBO with them ears, boy?) from the ovens. Vonbluvens censors Tom Shelly even more than Nikki. Here is the rub mate, Tom Shelly doesn't have to win an argument with censorship. Tom Shelly has never and never will censor anyone from his sites unless they are advocating illegal activities such as shooting judges or illegal child porn in an illegal way. Can you say the same? I think you've already censored Tom Shelly as has Nikki. So don't tell me that you knee jerk liberals believe in free speech because you do not and don't talk about my hypocrisy, boy not when you've demonstrated copious amounts of it yourself. Game set and match, boy.

    Harry spews more liberal crap when he rants:

    Just as pornography is not free speech nor is Al Qaeda, nor is shouting fire in a crowded theater, one must think if hate speech is in those categories.

    Do you ever even bother to think for yourself or do you always just post some warped liberal byline?
    Pornography has been up held by the US Supreme Court to be protected by the constitution under free speech. See your fellow Jew, Al Goldstein's numerous lawsuits against against the federal government. Al fought and won.

    Al Qaeda, porn, hate speech, and fire in a crowded theater. Gee Mr. knee jerk, let's supposed for one moment that I'm not a lilly livered liberal. Can you somehow show that these nouns are some way connected together? Just how the hell is someone like an old perverted Jew, publishing naked pictures of women related to yelling fire in a crowed theater?
    Can you tell me that, boy? And is it possible for one moment that you could depart from the standar liberal thought train and possibly think for yourself?

  11. Still pretending to be Tom Shely, "Tom"?

    Someday, a loser like you will get his comeuppance.

    Too bad it won't come here, Nikki won't boot you as long as it serves her purposes.

  12. Tom could take you a little more seriously if you actually had the balls to post your name. I assure you that I am the original Tom Shelly and you are not. Get over your Tom Shelly envy.

  13. Complaint Referral Form

    Internet Crime Complaint Center


    Please review your complaint for accuracy, prior to submitting it to the IC3.

    The following information was provided by the victim and may be forwarded to the
    appropriate law enforcement or regulatory agencies.

    Your Personal Information* First Name:JAMES
    Middle Name:
    * Last Name:
    Business Name:NONE
    * Age:40 - 49
    * Gender:M
    * Address:
    Address (continued):BLDG III
    Suite/Apt./Mail Stop:
    * City:ROCHESTER
    Do you live within the city limits?: Yes
    State:New York
    * Country:United States
    * Zip Code / Route:14617
    * Phone Number:5853092121
    * E-mail Address:
    Name of your local police or sheriff's office:
    Is the complaint you are filing related to the Internet or an online service?
    Do you have pertinent documents in paper form?
    Information about the Individual/Business that victimized youBusiness Name:HAL TURNER SHOW
    First Name:HAL
    Middle Name:C
    Last Name:TURNER
    Address (continued):
    Suite/Apt./Mail Stop:
    State:New Jersey
    Country:United States
    Zip Code / Route:07047
    Phone Number:2014847809
    Other IdentifiersWeb Site:WWW.HALTURNERSHOW.COM
    IP Address:
    IRC Server:NONE
    Chat Room Name:NONE
    Usenet Newsgroup:NONE
    Monetary Loss*Please specify the total dollar amount of your loss from this incident:
    $ 0.00 (US Dollars)

    Please indicate the means of payment (select all that apply)

    Other (Specify Other) NONE

    Did you use a third party online payment service such as PayPal, BidPay, Escrow?
    Description of the Incident*Describe in your own words how you have been victimized.
    Be specific. Include date(s) of transaction(s), a description of any items that were not delivered or were counterfeited, any transaction numbers (from Ebay, Western Union, PayPal, etc.), and any other pertinent information that helps to explain how you were victimized. Also if you received anything by U.S. Mail, FedEx, or UPS, specifically describe the envelope, by the date, time, city and zip code shown on the stamp cancellation postmark.

    MY NAME IS JAMES IN UPSTATE NY I AM REPORTING THIS AS A TERRORIST THREAT FOR THE PAST FEW MONTHS HAL TURNER OF NORTH BERGEN NJ HAS BEEN MAKING THREATS TO CONGRESS AND OTHER FEDERAL AUTHROITYS IN THE FEDERAL GOVERNMENT I HAVE ALSO BEEN RECEIVING NASTY EMAILS FROM THIS GUY ON SEVERAL OCCASSIONS WE ATTEMPTED TO HAVE THE IP BLOCKED BUT MY ISP TELLS ME THERE NOTHING CAN BE DONE ABOUT IT I have SCREEN SHOTS OFF THIS WEBSITE AND I HAVE MORE PROOF OF WHAT THIS GUYS BEEN DOING ALSO WE BELEIVE HE IS A TERRORIST AND NEEDS TO BE DELT WITH ASAP IF THIS MATTER NEEDS TO GO FURTHER I WILL FILE A COMPLAINT ALSO WITH THE NYS ATTORNEY GENERAL AND WITH THE FEDERAL PROSECUTERS OFFICE IN ROCHESTER ON INDICTMENT CHARGE OF TERRORIST THREATS AGGAVATED HARRASSMENT AND CYBER TERRORISTISM I WILL BE MONITORING THIS DAILY ANY QUESTIONS PLZ CONTACT ME AT THIS EMAIL THANK YOU JAMES PEROTTI P,S I AM TIRED WITH DEALING WITH HIM WERE TIRED OF HIS HARRASSMENT AND THREATS AND NASTY RACIST EMAIL MAILS THAT I WILL POST HERE ENCLOSED EMAIL Return-path: <> Received: from ms-mta-01 (ms-mta-01-smtp []) by (iPlanet Messaging Server 5.2 HotFix 2.10 (built Dec 26 2005)) with ESMTP id <> for ; Mon, 26 Jun 2006 17:35:34 -0400 (EDT) Received: from ( []) by (iPlanet Messaging Server 5.2 HotFix 2.10 (built Dec 26 2005)) with ESMTP id <> for (ORCPT ); Mon, 26 Jun 2006 17:35:34 -0400 (EDT) Received: from ([]) by with ESMTP; Mon, 26 Jun 2006 17:35:32 -0400 Received: from [] ( []) by (Sun Java System Messaging Server 6.2-6.01 (built Apr 3 2006)) with ESMTP id <> for ; Mon, 26 Jun 2006 17:35:02 -0400 (EDT) Date: Mon, 26 Jun 2006 17:35:06 -0400 From: Hal Turner <> Subject:[spam] Re: In-reply-to: <000701c69964$57e76680$6601a8c0@jamespjg4q7k3p> To: <.com> Message-id: <> MIME-version: 1.0 Content-type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1; format=flowed Content-transfer-encoding: 7BIT User-Agent: Thunderbird (Windows/20060516) References: <000701c69964$57e76680$6601a8c0@jamespjg4q7k3p> Original-recipient: rfc822; X-BitDefenderWKS-Flags:H_SPAMMY_HEADER_MAILS; X-BitDefenderWKS-Spam: Yes - 888 [spam] Return-path: <> Received: from ms-mta-01 (ms-mta-01-smtp []) by (iPlanet Messaging Server 5.2 HotFix 2.10 (built Dec 26 2005)) with ESMTP id <> for ; Mon, 26 Jun 2006 17:35:34 -0400 (EDT) Received: from ( []) by (iPlanet Messaging Server 5.2 HotFix 2.10 (built Dec 26 2005)) with ESMTP id <> for (ORCPT ); Mon, 26 Jun 2006 17:35:34 -0400 (EDT) Received: from ([]) by with ESMTP; Mon, 26 Jun 2006 17:35:32 -0400 Received: from [] ( []) by (Sun Java System Messaging Server 6.2-6.01 (built Apr 3 2006)) with ESMTP id <> for ; Mon, 26 Jun 2006 17:35:02 -0400 (EDT) Date: Mon, 26 Jun 2006 17:35:06 -0400 From: Hal Turner <> Subject:[spam] Re: In-reply-to: <000701c69964$57e76680$6601a8c0@jamespjg4q7k3p> To: <> Message-id: <> MIME-version: 1.0 Content-type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1; format=flowed Content-transfer-encoding: 7BIT User-Agent: Thunderbird (Windows/20060516) References: <000701c69964$57e76680$6601a8c0@jamespjg4q7k3p> Original-recipient: rfc822; X-BitDefenderWKS-Flags:H_SPAMMY_HEADER_MAILS; X-BitDefenderWKS-Spam: Yes - 888 [spam] FUCK YOU AND THE KIKE THAT YOU ARE YOUR A NIGGER A JEW AND A MUSLIM SANDNIGGER Hal Turner

    Please indicate any medium used by the individual/business in the course of the incident.
    Web site

    Please indicate the initial means of contact with the individual/business that victimized you.
    Was this initial means of contact unsolicited/uninvited?
    What was your relationship with the individual/business you are complaining about prior to the incident you are reporting?
    no prior relationship
    Did you conduct any research on the individual/business prior to the incident?
    How much time has passed since you determined you were victimized?
    2 - 3 months
    Contact InformationAre there witnesses or other victims to this crime?
    Have you reported this crime to any law enforcement or government agencies?
    Individual/business that victimized you

    Provide the specific name of each organization, contact name, contact phone number, email address, date reported, and report number (if known).

  14. what a stupid ass nigger loving cock sucker. did you finish the 3rd or 4th grade with those amazing spelling skills? did anyone ever tell you that typing with all caps is the same as shouting? hal has broke no laws. like it or not cunt, he is protected by freedom of speech laws.


All comments must remain civil. No threats, racist epithets, or personal attacks will be tolerated. Rational debate, discourse, and even disagreement are all acceptable as long as they remain on point and within the realm of civility.