by   Nicholas de Lioncourt on January 12 2021 16:13 zulu


TD;DR: the effort would be trivial to intimidate SCOTUS into reinterpreting "CONGRESS shall make no law..." as the 1st Amendment restricting ONLY CONGRESS. After all, the courts have easily and continuously reinterpreted, discovered magical exceptions to; and damn-near inverted, the prohibition of the word, INFRINGED, in the context of the 2nd Amendment "...the right of the people to keep and bear Arms, SHALL NOT BE INFRINGED". End.



I despise the State, that is to write 'Government', with an unyielding malevolence; and will never submit to this worship of government as paternal guardian.

But these actions do not violate the First Amendment-

Not when every effort to intimidate SCOTUS has been so successful.  SCOTUS will reinterpret "CONGRESS shall make no law..." as the 1st Amendment restricting ONLY CONGRESS. No one will fight. The People are so easy frightened by and deferential to empty threats.

Since the January 6th 2021 protests, less than one day into which 'intrepid patriots' abandoned all courage to run away, the most influential social media platforms - collectively 'BIG TECH' - have banned President Trump: Twitter, Facebook, Snapchat, Spotify, Twitch, Shopify and Stripe.

While others - Reddit, Pinterest, TikTok, YouTube, and even Parler - have imposed authoritarian resolutions announcing the mandatory, immediate removal of any sentiment written in support of President Donald Trump, his supporters, or a stolen election.

Too Late! The 'sanctuary' platform, Parler, has been removed from the Apple, Google, Amazon stores; and not long thereafter forcibly shut down by Amazon.

The response to tyrannical 'BIG TECH' has been lawsuits for reinstatement and indemnification, public demands of judicial and legislative retribution, and assertions that 'BIG TECH" has violated the First Amendment.



Violated the First Amendment? No...

After all, for decades the courts have easily, continuously reinterpreted, discovered magical exceptions to; and damn-near inverted, the prohibition of the word, INFRINGED, in the context of the 2nd Amendment: "...the right of the people to keep and bear Arms, SHALL NOT BE INFRINGED".

The 2nd Amendment is an atrophied protector of the other Unalienable Rights; nearly terminal, and not once have the People dared to protest and defend this waning Right. The Bill of Rights was written to be immutable. Untouchable Defenses, against which Government posed no opposition.



The Government did not give you those Rights, dear reader. Your mere existence gave you those Rights AGAINST the Government, to OPPOSE Government.

Did not know that, did you?

You have the guaranteed Right to OPPOSE Government. The Declaration of Independence was the foundational document establishing this country. YET CONSIDER! The Declaration of Independence did not, does not, specify with the phrases "JUST US, AND NEVER AGAIN..." and "JUST THIS ONE TIME..." when it declared your RIGHT by BIRTH:

"...That whenever any Form of Government becomes destructive of these ends, it is THE RIGHT of the People to alter or to abolish it, and to institute new Government..."

Read the entire passage. Can you find one condition, just one proviso, such as "JUST US AGAINST ENGLAND..." or "JUST THIS ONE TIME..." or "UNLESS GOVERNMENT SAYS YOU CANNOT..." or "BY CONSENT OF GOVERNMENT..." or "UNLESS YOU MIGHT BE CALLED 'EXTREMIST'..."?

No, cannot find even one constraint or precondition? Now consider why those phrases were not included.

(...and, if anyone claims otherwise; demand that person show written evidence within any foundational document, correspondence, or speech...)

Oh, well...



The First Amendment guaranteed unalienable that "Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof; or abridging the freedom of speech, or of the press..."

"CONGRESS shall make no law..."

The prohibition therein only applies to Congress; and to our disadvantage, Congress has made no mandate that 'BIG TECH' commit these offensives - and so - the incontrovertible truth is that 'BIG TECH' may at any moment independently restrict or forbid free speech at will. The citizenry has no recourse.

The Bill of Rights applies only to individuals; not organizations, and with the ascendency of Leftist reign, I suspect the courts will reinterpret this omission to conclude that while Congress may not legislate the speech of individuals, there are no such restrictions protecting organizations.

Some might understand this: individuals have NEGATIVE rights; organizations have POSITIVE rights.



So what recourse remains against 'BIG TECH'? Other than vocal and written expressions of outrage, none.

Actions have Consequences, and submission IS ACTION OF INACTION.

→ When the January 6th 2021 protest in Washington D.C., was abandoned in less than one day - LESS THAN ONE DAY...

→ When the participants exposed their absence of resolve - resolve that other activists as BLM and ANTIFA demonstrated for many MONTHS...

→ When the participants' emotions overwhelmed strategic planning, blinding them to infiltration and exploitation by federal agents...

→ When the participants descended into the chaotic tantrum of mob mentality, knowing well a weaponized double-standard would result...

→ When the January 6th 2021 protest was abandoned, as the public watched the many thousands of participants run away, then...

The Left, the Biden Administration, 'BIG TECH' all realized that their opposition's threats end in submission. The Left, the Biden Administration, 'BIG TECH' all realized the impotence of these protesters and, simply, lost all fear.

Actions - or the fear to take action - have consequences; and that 'BIG TECH' has initiated this intrepid 'war to silence' after January 6th 2021 is not coincidence.




categories: government | opinion | rights

:: commenting is not enabled for this article