Not all is going according to plan…
The Infowars app is rising in the Apple store’s rankings after a number of other major digital platforms cracked down on its content.
The app has surged in popularity in recent days from the 47th to the 4th most popular Apple store news app in the United States. That position places Inforwars over CNN, Fox News and The New York Times’s apps, according to app analytics site, App Annie.
Rex Murphy isn’t very impressed with Deborah MacLatchy’s recent op-ed:
The president of Wilfrid Laurier University recently published a statement on free speech at Laurier and in the academy generally. It was a sad effort.
She built a Giza-sized pyramid of clichés and virtue-speak about something she was pleased to call “better speech” — as opposed to that decayed old concept, hustled by the likes of John Stuart Mill, Voltaire, and the framers of the American Constitution, known as “free speech.”
Amid the vast waste of anodynes, platitudes and non-sequiturs, it was difficult to pick out a winner — the most tired, numb and vacant verbalism. But I struggled and chose, from her opening sentence, her claim that Laurier “has been at the centre of the campus free-speech conversation during the past year.”
Do read it in its entirety. Murphy’s dissection of MacLatchy’s tripe is brilliant.
Facebook has banned Republican congressional candidate Elizabeth Heng’s campaign video ad about communist crimes that led her family to flee Cambodia for the U.S., claiming the platform doesn’t allow “shocking, disrespectful, or sensational” content.
Elizabeth Heng, who is running for California’s 16th congressional district seat, made the video about her parent’s escape from mass-murder by the Khmer Rouge communists in the 1970s.
More: Twitter Suspends Libertarian Accounts, Including Ron Paul Institute Director
h/t Shamrock
If Donald Trump doesn't trust-bust the Silicon Valley alt-left cartels, they'll bust him. And they mean to do it this November. cc. @parscale https://t.co/pB3DvnDhZs
— Ezra Levant 🇨🇦 (@ezralevant) August 6, 2018
Do you remember Deborah MacLatchy? Wilfrid Laurier’s President and Vice-Chancellor has penned a special message for all Canadians in the Globe and Mail:
A university’s commitment to better speech demands a long-term focus on creating environments – both inside and outside of the classroom – where meaningful dialogue, not individual platforms, is the norm. One approach to ensure we uphold a high standard of discourse on our campuses is to practice inclusive freedom, a concept proposed by political philosopher Dr. Sigal Ben-Porath of the University of Pennsylvania. Inclusive freedom involves a vigorous commitment to free speech, coupled with the assurance that all individuals have an opportunity to engage in free expression, inquiry and learning.
Be sure to scroll to the bottom and read the comments. Here’s but one example:
WLU has severely tainted its credibility as a respected institution of higher learning and the administration is to blame. This article does nothing to improve that perspective and major changes at the administration level is definitely required.
h/t William McNally
[T]he 35-year-old is now a free man again after the Court of Appeal ruled there were technical flaws in the ruling of the judge who jailed him.
The original judge was found to have “rushed” Robinson’s trial and as a result the court did not hear which parts of his offending footage was problematic.
This meant that he could not defend himself properly, the Court of Appeal heard.
@ezralevant — I have just spent time with Tommy Robinson and his beautiful family. What a happy reunion for them. But I’m sorry, I must tell you the devastating truth on this victory day: Tommy’s treatment in prison can only be described as torture. I am sick to my stomach. Video tomorrow.
I’m sure you’ve heard all about them by now.
Defense Distributed’s controversial files are designed to 3D-print receivers. What comes out of the 3D printer isn’t a working weapon, but something that still must be mated to bolts, barrels, trigger groups, stocks, and other necessary parts before it ever fires a bullet. Defense Distributed’s Liberator pistol design is perhaps the closest thing to a complete printable firearm, but the enthusiast must still source key parts such as a metal tube for a barrel and a nail for a firing pin.
The U.S. government recognizes the right of citizens to build their own firearms, and all of these parts are readily available in gun shops or online, as they always have been. So all of this is perfectly legal. Where Defense Distributed and the government clashed is over the ability of people in foreign countries to download the files.
[…]
Building a gun this way from parts already on the market is much easier and cheaper than the new and controversial 3D printing method. I once did it in my own kitchen, and the result is a much more reliable, durable firearm than you’d get from 3D-printed parts. Frankly, 3D printing gun parts is the most complicated way for a criminal to get his hands on a firearm, after stealing a gun from a legal gun owner, buying a gun on the black market, and finishing an 80 percent receiver.
Let’s be clear about what has just happened. A federal court has issued a prior restraint on speech (it’s attempting to block the spread of information; it is not blocking the lawful home manufacture of firearms) that is already thoroughly and completely moot. The files are out. They’re all over the internet. They’ve been copied and reproduced. The judge’s order can’t change that fact.
Moreover, Defense Distributed and the Second Amendment Foundation are hardly the only sources for online files or blueprints that enable a home manufacturer with a 3D printer to make a gun. I’m honestly unclear what the court is trying to accomplish here, aside from targeting the Trump administration and/or targeting a disfavored private company.
Earlier today I published a lengthy explainer of the factual and legal issues surrounding the 3D-printed gun controversy. I’d urge you to read the whole thing, but the bottom line is easy to understand. First, home manufacture of weapons is clearly lawful, and it has been common practice in the United States since before the founding of the nation. Second, it is thus just as lawful to “print” a gun as it is to assemble one with parts in your garage. Third, the plans to print guns are widely-available on the internet — and have been for some time.
President Donald Trump accused Twitter on Thursday of “discriminatory and illegal practice,” vowing in a tweet to “look into” the matter.
Investors, already unnerved by Facebook’s plunge, shed Twitter shares. The stock was down 4.3 percent in early trading Thursday, including a 1 percent additional decline immediately after Trump’s comments.
Related.
The Leftist thugs strive to shut down free speech via violent protests on the streets. Their comrades in the media strive to marginalize them through their words.
And not the Dairy Cartel. Read the whole thread.
Chimo: Thank you. Yes I am a politician but I am trying to do politics differently. Don’t believe in vote-buying politics that led to today’s big government. Read this speech I gave in MTL eight years ago to understand why. Excerpts in following tweets. https://t.co/Hk95ccQ0iF https://t.co/GEOALltvXG
— Maxime Bernier (@MaximeBernier) July 20, 2018
On Sunday, The New York Times ran a front-page, 2,000-word report on how “conservatives weaponized the First Amendment.” Now, you might ask yourself why the most famous press institution in American history is questioning the wisdom of the First Amendment. You might also ask yourself how conservatives could have weaponized a freedom. This is sort of like saying that law-abiding citizens weaponized the right to be free of unreasonable search and seizure. But according to the Times’ Adam Liptak, conservatives have twisted the definition of free speech to enhance their own political goals.
Quoting execrable Supreme Court Justice Elena Kagan, Liptak explains that conservatives have been “weaponizing the First Amendment” through decisions that recognize the rights of non-union members, religious Americans, and people who want to spend money on elections
Language warning but well worth a listen:
Up for discussion were Trump, Trudeau and tariffs, the North Korea summit, and Lindsay Shepherd’s decision to sue her tormentors at Wilfrid Laurier University.
A podcast to enjoy with morning coffee.
“Tommy this, an’ Tommy that …an’ Tommy go away”
@SCOTUSblog — In Masterpiece Cakeshop case, Supreme Court holds that Colorado Civil Rights Commission violated baker’s rights under the free exercise clause…
The Supreme Court ruled in favor of a Colorado baker who declined to make a wedding cake for a same-sex ceremony.
The case – Masterpiece Cakeshop, Ltd v. Colorado Civil Rights Commission – asked the high court to balance the religious rights of the baker against the couple’s right to equal treatment under the law. Similar disputes have popped up across the U.S.
The decision to take on the case reflected renewed energy among the court’s conservative justices, whose ranks have recently been bolstered by the addition of Justice Neil Gorsuch to the high court.
Jack Phillips, the owner of Masterpiece Cakeshop in Lakewood, Colo., declined to make a cake for the wedding celebration of two gay men in 2012. Phillips told the couple that he would make a birthday cake but could not make a cake that would promote same-sex marriage due to his religious beliefs.
The ruling was 7 – 2 . (pdf) Or in the words of the Associated Press, “narrowly“.
Where the foxes caper unmolested, the government packs your school lunch and REDACTED UNDER PUBLICATION BAN.
Theresa May’s Britain.
Incredible scene on Downing Street right now as protestors gather in solidarity for jailed journalist Tommy Robinson, who was arrested for merely covering a story.
Chants of "Hey Tommy, Tommy" ring out! #FreeTommy pic.twitter.com/tci1PiG2yl
— The Columbia Bugle 🇺🇸 (@ColumbiaBugle) May 26, 2018
Story here.