political dissidents "thin edge of the wedge" example - was Re: Whom you may not criticize? - USA avidly chasing Germany's Zio-laws

[Zenaan Harkness]

This "backward European" nation provides a fine sample of what's
coming down the pipeline folks, both EU and US - "we" collectively
fail to handle oppression by the state, and so "our" states end up
handling us, over and over again (second para gives the guts of this
story):


http://theduran.com/russian-civil-society-needs-save-polands-soviet-era-monuments/

 The Polish authorities recently signed into law a hyper-nationalist
 motion which will lead to the removal of hundreds of Soviet-era
 monuments in the country, with some being placed in obscure
 “museums” and others being destroyed. Approximately 600,000 Red Army
 soldiers sacrificed their lives to save Poland from Nazi occupation
 and genocide, as well as to liberate the many death camps that the
 fascists constructed on the country’s territory. It’s a terrible
 affront to these martyrs and their Polish allies that Warsaw is
 undertaking such a radical approach to historical revisionism, but
 all moral objections aside, there seems to be little that can be
 done to reverse this decision and ensure that the monuments remain
 standing in their original locations for generations to come.

 Polish dissident Mateusz Piskorski was organizing a grassroots
 campaign to save these statues in the run-up to the looming passing
 of this controversial legislation, but he’s since been imprisoned
 for over a year already on politically trumped up allegations of
 supposedly being Russian and/or Chinese “spy”. Leaving aside the
 ridiculousness of the accusations being levelled against him, his
 arrest deprived Polish civil society of a strong voice to lobby on
 behalf of historical justice, and it probably also intimidated many
 of his supporters from carrying on the cause.

 ...



"European values" indeed.

Good luck fellow humans,



On Tue, Jul 25, 2017 at 12:59:18AM +1000, Zenaan Harkness wrote:
> Well, well, well ... an amazing yet serious GTFOOH moment:
>⋅
>⋅
> So. As we know, in just over a dozen countries 'tis a criminal
> offense to verbally challenge the ziocaust narrative, Germany being
> target #1.
>⋅
> Of course in the land of the free, home of the brave North America,
> the First Amendment guarantees the freedom of speech.
>⋅
> Except when (((they))) introduce (arguably, possibly, debatably)
> illegal statute laws such as H.R. 1697.
>⋅
> Goyem, the brazenness on display by (((your rulers))) is something to
> behold - kiss your first amendment goodbye:
>⋅
>⋅
> US CONGRESS: Israel first  First Amendment second
> http://theduran.com/us-congress-israel-first-first-amendment-second/
> Senators and Representatives in the US Congress are attempting to
> pass legislation which would criminalise the boycotting of Israel and
> also criminalise the advocacy of such boycotts. The legislation is
> clearly unconstitutional, yet this hasn't stopped many in Congress
> from advocating for new restrictive laws.
>⋅
> In March of 2017, bills were introduced in the US Senate (
> https://www.congress.gov/bill/115th-congress/senate-bill/720/text?format=xml
> ) and House of Representatives (
> https://www.congress.gov/bill/115th-congress/senate-bill/720/text?format=xml
> ) which would criminalise support of the Boycott, Divestment and
> Sanctions (BDS) movement as well as other organisations which
> advocate for a boycott of Israel and Israeli products.
>⋅
> Journalist Rob Wolfe summarised (
> http://www.vnews.com/Israel-Boycott-Bill-In-Congress-11374160
> ) the effects of the proposed legislation as follows,
>⋅
>     “The bill, which goes by H.R. 1697 and S. 720, would prohibit
> ·   American businesses or individuals engaged in interstate or
> ·   foreign commerce from ‘supporting any boycott fostered or imposed
> ·   by an international organization, or requesting imposition of any
> ·   such boycott, against Israel,’according to a congressional
> ·   summary”.
> ...
>⋅
>⋅
>⋅
>⋅
>⋅
> In case the obvious thin edge of the wedge got missed, the trial run
> for "criminalization of a boycott by a business" was that well
> publicized case against the Christian bakery couple who chose to
> boycott serving a Homosexual couple asking for a "gay wedding cake".
>⋅
> Litmus test folks, litmus test it was.
>⋅
> So now America gets to have its Zio cake and eat it too.
>⋅
> Only real question - are there any USAians not so cowardly they
> would readily suffer jail for such "crimethink"?  Doubtful...
>⋅
>⋅
> She'll be comin' down the gas pipe when she comes; yee haw!
> She'll be firing the gas oven when she comes; yee haw!
> She'll be burning first amendments, jailing all free thinkers,
> She'll be FEMA martial law camps where you're done!
>⋅
>⋅
> It'll be sad from one perspective, cleansing from another - Razer,
> you wanted something to --really-- go to war over? It's gettin close
> bro, getting closer by the month!