April 7, 2015
The main attack on internet freedom is through talking about child-porno and how they have to stop child-porno even though it is already illegal. The second most important method used to try and shut us down is this talk of “cyberbullying.”
This is a direct attack on freedom of speech. And an attack on the Troll Army. In many countries, what we recently did to the Paki whore Sarah Sahim would be classified as criminal “cyberbullying,” despite the fact that all we were doing was collectively voicing a political opinion in response to her political opinion.
Colorado lawmakers cleared the way for a bill to make cyberbullying a crime on Monday, settling a dispute over religious speech.
The tentative agreement between three Democrats and three Republicans would say that online harassers wouldn’t be guilty of a crime if their remarks are based on religion, philosophy or personal belief. But the exemption would apply only if those remarks are already protected by the First Amendment.
Lawmakers from both parties have supported the bill to tackle online bullying, but conservatives wanted to make sure the attempt didn’t trample speech rights.
The bill had Democratic sponsors, but the Republican Senate amended the cyberbullying definition to exempt religious or philosophical opinions.
Okay so this time around the Troll Army is protected because ours is an issue of “religion, philosophy or personal belief.” Though next time these laws roll through – perhaps on the federal level – will that caveat be contained?
Especially with the way these Jews play this game.
That version had Democrats saying the exemption amounted to a blank check for threatening others’ lives on religious grounds.
“That really guts the bill,” said Rep. Daniel Kagan, D-Denver, arguing the amendment would allow someone to avoid charges for some kinds of speech that aren’t protected now, such as telling a Muslim that he should die.
“At the same time we’re adding the method of harassment, we’re saying the content of the harassment no longer includes any religious, political or philosophical harassment,” Kagan said.
Republicans on the negotiating panel agreed to tweak that change so that only “constitutionally protected” speech on such grounds would be protected. In other words, it could still be harassment to threaten someone, even if the threat has a religious basis.
But threatening people is already illegal, and constitutionally protected speech is already protected by the Constitution.
So what are we even talking about here, Jews?
This is yet another attempt to bring up something emotional – these untermensch who kill themselves because someone mocks them on the internet – and use it to SHUT IT DOWN.