“The purpose of Newspeak was not only to provide a medium of expression for the world-view and mental habits proper to the devotees of Ingsoc, but to make all other modes of thought impossible.”
The new law would punish the owners of radio stations, television channels and newspapers that have attempted to “cause panic” and “disturb social peace,” Attorney General Luisa Ortega said.
It also would punish media owners who “manipulate the news with the purpose of transmitting a false perception of the facts.”
“Freedom of expression must be limited,” Ortega said.
He won’t lose the next vote to proclaim him dictator for life.
Well it won’t be a problem in Canada, we already have voluntary compliance here (just about 100% of our major MSM outlets slant the news through a p.c. filter and would probably not even displease the likes of Hugo Chavez).
Funny, Chavez’s agenda of telling folks what they can and can’t say is eerily similar to Obama’s…
I used to think Obama was just a straight up “progressive fascist”, but now I am pretty sure he is one more Chavistist. The problem is that Chavism doesn’t work where there is a real free press.
http://newsbusters.org/blogs/tim-graham/2009/07/27/bill-moyers-indicts-moyers-other-radio-hosts-inciting-riots-public-mind
They had better not film Chavez take Communion,!
double plus good!!
I will never understand the leftist mentality that propagates this slide into totalitarianism. As history has shown in China and the USSR you, even as an ardent and loyal supporter, can be an honoured guest in tomorrow’a firing squad. It doesn’t lead to a better way of life just misery and squalor. Yet the leftists always clamour for this perfect world where of course they are in charge.
People like commissar Hall and Jennifer Lynch will never see that removing the freedoms of others will lead to the loss of their own.
Huge picket free zones around abortion chop-shops is seen as harmless and the media’s seeming disconcern for the opposite viewpoint on almost any subject that isn’t one of their pet projects. But protest-free zones around the Olympic venues is viewed as a fascist attempt to shut-down malcontents.
“The jackboot is in the classroom, and the door is closed.”
“The Educational Jackboot”
http://www.williamgairdner.com/the-educational-jackboot/
Look for a special visit by Chavez to the White House right around the time Obama-Pelosi attempt to ram The Fairness Doctrine down the throat of America.
Venezuela: ‘Freedom of expression must be limited’
Deja vu! Who in this country have we heard advocate the same public control mechanism as Marxist Venezuela? I believe they even used the same phraseology.
Hint: They also defend CHRA section 13
This on top of Chavez, Castro, Ortega (the Nicaraguan one..) and Obama being on the same page on wanting to undo the Hondurans pre-empting another president for life maneuver. It’s enough to give you the dry heaves.
Before I hit the link I thought we were reading about the Big O and his attempt to quiet Rush;
or Lynch and co.
Too close for comfort.
Oh, don’t worry about that, bluetech, after all freedom of speech is an “American concept”.
Look at lefty web site comment threads for an insight. Express a contradictory opinion and ask a question they don’t want to answer, and you are disappeared to raucous cheers.
Obama = Pierre Trudeau reincarnated, in colour.
( Narcisstic, Closet communist)
Oh, I love this: In “Holidays in Hell”, P.J. O’Rourke, writing about Nicaragua in the mid-’80s when the Sandanistas were in power, quotes Nelba Blandon, Interior Ministry Director of Censorship (and really, shouldn’t that be Jennifer Lynch’s title?):
“They (La Prensa) accused us of surpressing freedom of expression. This was a lie and we could not let them publish it.”
(I know, I know, Nicaragua’s not Venezuela, but the way I see it they’re all hot countries where the people talk Mexican, so same diff.)
Oh, Sandinistas, I’d hate to get that wrong.
Bit by bit, Chavez is adapting the trappings of Stalinism. Full blown tyrany is as inevitable as a sunrise.
Chavez must be getting advice from the CHRC.
Science fiction is boring and oh-so 1984-ish. Don’t pay attention to the man behind the curtain.
The Venezuelan government must be the envy of the Obama administration.
The only thing standing between totalitarian puppet dictator Obama (and woe be Canada if that happens) and what’s left of our freedoms is a handful of country music loving red necks and Fox News. In Canada it’s Ezra Levant and Mark Steyn. Steyn works globally as well.
I know that most people say they value freedom, but most people don’t seem to understand the nature of freedom and are willing to bargain it away for the slightest of government guarantees.
Therefore they don’t truly value it because if they did, they would never give any of it away … none … nada … it is more valuable than anything we have including our health.
Without freedom what good is your health? Without freedom what good is life? In Mark Steyn’s State of New Hampshire their license plate reads … not sappy stuff like Beautiful BC or Ontario Yours to Discover .. it says “Live Free or Die”
That declaration should be on ALL license plates.
Is it just me or are the lights all going out all over the western hemisphere?
Hmmm, “phraseology”. Is that kind of like “Climatology” where you make stuff up, try to scare people via the MSM and live happily ever after?
Lance, dude, you forgot the bulldozer picture.
But come on, is Chavez really any different than Iggy? They both seem to have the same policies. Cut ol’ Chavez some slack, he just wants what’s best for the proletariat… d’oh I meant The People.
You know, like Iggy. 🙂
Next up: shutting down talk radio in the U.S. The good stuff, that is.
“This on top of Chavez, Castro, Ortega (the Nicaraguan one..) and Obama being on the same page on wanting to undo the Hondurans pre-empting another president for life maneuver.”
The President of the United States finding himself on the same side as those three.
Reminds me of a great “Leave It To Beaver” moment when the Beav says, “I guess I shoulda known somethin’ was wrong when Eddie Haskell was on our side.”
We alreeady have something like that in Quebec. Certain powerful Liberal backroomers own LaPresse and most other media outlets.
It is forbidden in Quebec to report anything positive about Harper’s Conservatives.
It is encouraged to look for all things positive about Liberals even if they have to wipe the slime off the rocks they look under.
Wanna bet the Canadian Human Rights Commission is studying this to see how they could implement it here ??
well now I am confused.
MSM is a pariah here at SDA, this measure which no doubt will be passed restricts the exaggerated claims and manipulations coming from MSM.
there’s an incongruency here, but then, that’s how newspeak works so I guess I do get it after all !!!
“In Mark Steyn’s State of New Hampshire their license plate reads … ‘Live Free or Die'[.]”
Well, Momar – to take it to its logical conclusion – an orthodox libertarian state would not have license plates at all.
Freedom of the press always works well as long as you own the press.
“MSM is a pariah here at SDA, this measure which no doubt will be passed restricts the exaggerated claims and manipulations coming from MSM” – Curious George (Never can get enough of Bush bashing)
George,
This blog is not about limiting what can be said in the MSM. This blog is about critically analyzing the MSM in light of other facts which they often choose to omit. If you can’t see the difference, you have a serious problem. I have heard lots of right of center commenters say they won’t watch the MSM, I have never heard one say they should be shut down. It would be against core conservative beliefs to suppress speech. Honest. Shouting down and shutting down opponents is a lefty tactic.
I would like you to find an example of a right of center entity of any kind which has tried to shut down somebody’s right to speech. If you are going to give the Anthony Watts example, please explain why his response that “he just wants the video to acknowledge his copyrights on copyrighted material which was used” is an attempt to suppress speech.
Soccermom:
Lot of talk in the U.S. about bringing back the Fairness Doctrine, which mandates that public broadcasters present all sides of a controversial story. That it would mostly be used by the political left to silence the political right is virtually a given (e.g., bring Fox News to heal, while leaving objective sources such as CNN untouched.)
I doubt, however, that today’s U.S. Supreme Court would allow it to stand. Times have changed.
“I doubt, however, that today’s U.S. Supreme Court would allow it to stand. Times have changed.”
I hope you’re right, rabbit. But I still think they’re gonna give it one heck of a good try.
Because right now, Fox and talk radio is the only powerful opposition to the Obamessiah. So they’ll try anything.
SM:
My comment was definitely optimistic. But one of main judicial justifications for the doctrine was that restrictions were defensible when only a few broadcasters could be supported. Given this age of virtually unlimited bandwidth, including cable, satellite, and internet, that justication no longer applies.
I hope.
One reason not to. The ‘Beer Summit’. A parochial event, a Pres. that speaks without thinking and a countdown clock for the ‘summit’. Joe invited to avoid the appearance it was 2 black guys against one powerless white guy. Officer Crowely also brought a police union rep and a lawyer but I never read much about that. No news, no money.
Well at least Chavez has passed a law and will only arrest the journalists and owners of news outlets.
Russia’s Putin just has them murdered.
“Human rights groups want Obama to raise the issue of murdered Russian journalists. The New York-based Committee to Protect Journalists says 17 journalists have been killed since 2000.”
From:
http://www.guardian.co.uk/world/2009/jul/03/obama-russian-visit
Isn’t there similar language about ‘punishing the owners of radio stations, television channels and newspapers that have attempted to ’cause panic’ and ‘disturb social peace'” in the cyber security or hate crimes bill in the US?
Because that’s what I thought this post was referring to at first blush…
The Gates incident was orchestrated by Obama as one of the levers to SNEEK attack free speech using the race card. It’s more so a precursor that serves as a shield to cover the rising constitutionalist (Birthers) tide and the upcoming march on Washington DC on Sept 12; another Tea Party event. Watch for more and more MSM outlets that will come up saying that it is mostly angry white people who do not accept a black President.
“…punish the owners of radio stations, television channels and newspapers that have attempted to “cause panic” and “disturb social peace…”
Ummm, hav’nt Lou Dobbs and Glenn Beck just been crucified by the MSM this week for asking ligitimate questions and/or gave opinions that the WH does’nt like?
Here in Canada, the wafergate scandal that blew up in the Liberals and their MSM minion’s faces is another example of how corrupt AND POWERFUL the left is.
I think we are already half way there as far as severely loosing ground in our free speech or at least outlets that can carry the message to many. AM radio and blogs are about the only outlets left. Papers and TV are all but dominated by the left and this is where propaganda has it’s biggest impact on a spoiled, ignorant and lethargic society. If the left’s propaganda can’t reach it’s increasingly ‘absorb entertainment only’ masses, no problem. They’ll make sure Stewart, Colbert, Maher, Letterman and SNL will pass the message disguised as comedy.
FOX is fast loosing it’s bite IMO. Beck is the only mover and shaker there anymore.
The only thing that’s keeping the brakes on is the fact that Obama’s popularity is in free fall and that up here, Iggy is a wet petard.
There is still light at the end of the tunnel.
the problem we have is that our life spans are too short. each generation forgets what was learned by the past generations so everything is new. like socialism is new and should work but previous generations know it hasn’t. it would also seem that reading about what happened is not adequate.
like socialism is new and should work but previous generations know it hasn’t. it would also seem that reading about what happened is not adequate.
~old white guy
Socialism hasn’t been adequately discredited.
University Professors discredit Nazism, but lie about it saying it was Right wing rather than the Left wing socialism it really was.
The lesson about socialism hasn’t been taught to most people who haven’t, through life experience, figured it out for themselves or through diligent study learned the truth that is concealed from them by Leftist school teachers and Professors.
Most people would rather watch hockey or football, and the government spends our taxes on these diversions to keep it that way.
As poor as Venezuela is, it’s government spends money on soccer, while Cuba spends money on soccer and baseball, all to divert the great unwashed from how badly they are governed.
Bread and Circuses citizen, Bread and Circuses.
rabbit, the problem with the notion of presenting ‘all sides’ (Fairness Doctrine) is that it suggests that each side is legitimate in terms of facticity and logic, and that choosing between these sides is merely a matter of ‘taste’.
This suggests that truth does not exist – a rather weak and dangerous assumption, in my view.
It also suggests that societal rules are merel a matter of preference, of whim, of ‘taste’ and have no deeper foundation in basic axioms of the human capacity to reason.
Some situations are indeed a matter of ‘taste’ or even custom, but these are hardly a result of reason and logic but of habit and often, adaptation to a particular environmental reality (such as the veil in hot dusty climates). Therefore, presenting all sides of such a situation is hardly enlightening and conducive of further analysis and decision-making but merely a presentation of a mosaic of customs.
A democracy should, according to Popper, exclude only one type of change – a change which would endanger its democratic character, which means, its enthronement of the right of decision-making, in the people. The Fairness Doctrine, in my view, is one such change that endangers democracy because it reduces behaviour to an arbitrary custom rather than a result of reason.
In case someone forgot, socialists hate free speech.
And, dictators hate enemies of order.
Daniel in Venezuela has his commentary… for now!
http://daniel-venezuela.blogspot.com/2009/07/chavez-formal-attack-on-freedom-of.html
I like how the left loves this hateful anti-democratic dictator. Chavez is like a perfect symbol for the liberals’ true intentions
ET:
If you’re trying to convince me that the Fairness Doctrine is a bad idea, don’t bother. I have never supported it.
Lance, since you have included in your posting “He won’t lose the next vote to proclaim him dictator for life”
Here is some insight into those voting machines, and where the next electronic battle will be? in The Philippines in 2010…
“Smartmatic” it’s all we need to know.
http://alekboyd.blogspot.com/2009/07/smartmatic-does-philipines.html
“Freedom is a fragile thing and is never more than one generation away from extinction. It is not ours by inheritance; it must be fought for and defended constantly by each generation, for it comes only once to a people. Those who have known freedom and then lost it, have never known it again.”
I think this was spoken by Reagan. If not someone correct me please.
Momar said, “I know that most people say they value freedom, but most people don’t seem to understand the nature of freedom and are willing to bargain it away for the slightest of government guarantees.”
Exactly. The problem is that most naive people actually TRUST the government. Crazy when you actually use reason. Even if there are good people in government, government is always your enemy. You have to resist as they continually try to take over more and more aspects of your life. Even if they have good intentions when they are attempting to take control of these aspects, history shows that it will always turn out badly. RESIST, people, RESIST. We must continually fight our governments to retain our rights and freedoms.