Anonymous ID: c215f0 June 27, 2023, 9:51 p.m. No.19087095   🗄️.is 🔗kun

Why is the words

harvest festival

and shootings

standing out to me.

Why similiar?EVERYRHING seems to be jewish movie scripts?

Everything is suspect.

I do not trust the media or history.

 

2017 Las Vegas shooting

On October 1, 2017, Stephen Paddock, a 64-year-old man from Mesquite, Nevada, opened fire on the crowd attending the

Route 91 Harvest music festival

 

Operation Harvest Festival

Operation Harvest Festival (German: Aktion Erntefest)

was the murder of up to 43,000 Jews

at the Majdanek, Poniatowa and Trawniki concentration camps by the

by the SS, the Order Police battalions,

and the Ukrainian Sonderdienst on 3–4 November 1943.

Anonymous ID: c215f0 June 27, 2023, 10:02 p.m. No.19087135   🗄️.is 🔗kun   >>7149

>>19087108

>>19087092

 

The First Amendment does not entrust that power to the government's benevolence. Instead, our reliance must be on the substantial safeguards of free and open discussion in a democratic society. Effectively, the Supreme Court unanimously reaffirmed that there is no 'hate speech' exception to the First Amendment.

 

 

 

This article was published more than 6 years ago

https://www.washingtonpost.com/news/volokh-conspiracy/wp/2017/06/19/supreme-court-unanimously-reaffirms-there-is-no-hate-speech-exception-to-the-first-amendment/

THE VOLOKH CONSPIRACY

Opinion Supreme Court unanimously reaffirms: There is no ‘hate speech’ exception to the First Amendment.

From today’s opinion by Justice Samuel Alito (for four justices) in Matal v. Tam, the “Slants” case:

 

[The idea that the government may restrict] speech expressing ideas that offend … strikes at the heart of the First Amendment. Speech that demeans on the basis of race, ethnicity, gender, religion, age, disability, or any other similar ground is hateful; but the proudest boast of our free speech jurisprudence is that we protect the freedom to express “the thought that we hate.”

 

Justice Anthony Kennedy wrote separately, also for four justices, but on this point the opinions agreed:

 

A law found to discriminate based on viewpoint is an “egregious form of content discrimination,” which is “presumptively unconstitutional.” … A law that can be directed against speech found offensive to some portion of the public can be turned against minority and dissenting views to the detriment of all. The First Amendment does not entrust that power to the government’s benevolence. Instead, our reliance must be on the substantial safeguards of free and open discussion in a democratic society.

 

And the justices made clear that speech that some view as racially offensive is protected not just against outright prohibition but also against lesser restrictions.

 

In Matal, the government refused to register “The Slants” as a band’s trademark, on the ground that the name might be seen as demeaning to Asian Americans. The government wasn’t trying to forbid the band from using the mark; it was just denying it certain protections that trademarks get against unauthorized use by third parties. But even in this sort of program,

 

–the court held, viewpoint discrimination —

 

including against allegedly racially offensive viewpoints — is unconstitutional.

 

And this no-viewpoint-discrimination principle has long been seen as applying to exclusion of speakers from universities, denial of tax exemptions to nonprofits, and much more.

 

(Justice Neil Gorsuch wasn’t on the court when the case was argued, so only eight justices participated.)

Anonymous ID: c215f0 June 27, 2023, 10:07 p.m. No.19087149   🗄️.is 🔗kun   >>7158 >>7165

>>19087092

>>19087108

>>19087135

We can say what others deem hateful.

Get over it fhags.

 

SCOTUS re-affirms

No such thing as hate speech exception to the 1st amendment.

 

https://www.washingtonpost.com/news/volokh-conspiracy/wp/2017/06/19/supreme-court-unanimously-reaffirms-there-is-no-hate-speech-exception-to-the-first-amendment/

 

-[The idea that the government may restrict] speech expressing ideas that offend … strikes at the heart of the First Amendment. Speech that demeans on the basis of race, ethnicity, gender, religion, age, disability, or any other similar ground is hateful; but the proudest boast of our free speech jurisprudence is that we protect the freedom to express “the thought that we hate.”–

Anonymous ID: c215f0 June 27, 2023, 10:14 p.m. No.19087170   🗄️.is 🔗kun

>>19087165

 

In [ brackets ]

 

Opinion of Justice Samuel Alito

 

[The idea that the government may restrict] speech expressing ideas that offend … strikes at the heart of the First Amendment. Speech that demeans on the basis of race, ethnicity, gender, religion, age, disability, or any other similar ground is hateful; but the proudest boast of our free speech jurisprudence is that we protect the freedom to express “the thought that we hate.”–

Anonymous ID: c215f0 June 28, 2023, 2:28 a.m. No.19087692   🗄️.is 🔗kun   >>7696

Remember tbat video of kid for ed to sing this in clown makeup by a guy that looked like john podesta. Who has that vid and where is john?

Anonymous ID: c215f0 June 28, 2023, 2:51 a.m. No.19087711   🗄️.is 🔗kun   >>7715

>>19087702

>>19087703

>>19087707

I guess kid is fine

just creepy vid

harmless parents, made unfortnate vid

man looked like podesta.

All is fine.

2 yr. ago

An Update on The Boy in the Music Video

 

https://www.reddit.com/r/NExpo/comments/o31cvq/an_update_on_the_boy_in_the_music_video/

 

https://www.facebook.com/photo?fbid=1200170906672112&set=a.149127185109828

 

Thank God