THE ONLY WAY TO STOP A POTENTIALLY ENGINEERED CRISIS IS TO CALL THEIR BLUFF AND EXPOSE IT. OROVILLE DAM COULD BE THE NEXT 9/11 UNLESS THE WORD GETS OUT NOW!
https://youtu.be/tPf6YEQJY78
Widespread rain expected from ‘unusual’ May storm as an unusually wet spring weather system is forecast to impact the area later this week. Get out now while you can!
https://youtu.be/vhuRAt7E3d4
The lake is currently at 888 feet and the SPILLWAY IS NOT OPEN AND ALL OF THE SPILLWAY CAMERAS LIVE FEEDS ARE NOT WORKING. THE NUMBERS 8 8 ARE SIGNIFICANT IN THE NEXT 9/11 LEVEL EVENT THEY HAVE PLANNED FOR THE UNITED STATES. LOOK AT THE WATER LEVEL OF OROVILLE LAKE AS OF THIS MORNING-888 FEET!
https://youtu.be/IB89qHUE5UM
THE OROVILLE DAM’S POTENTIAL FAILURE COULD BE IMMINENT-EVACUATIONS RECOMMENDED NOW!
https://youtu.be/YzyYaiY44fk
20 DOLLAR BILL-THE LAST 9/11 EVENT ON 9/11/2001 -FIRE?
https://youtu.be/da7MzPE9S8g
100 DOLLAR BILL-THE NEXT 9/11 EVENT-FLOOD?
THEY ARE CLEARING UNDER THE EMERGENCY SPILLWAY BECAUSE THEY KNOW THAT THE SNOW MELT IS COMING! THERE WAS NO WORK DONE ON THE TUNNELS AND we have underground seepage under the Weir!
https://youtu.be/yiI1B7bO53k
#1 by Jose Gallardo on May 16, 2019 - 2:35 pm
HATE SPEECH LAW – THE CURE THAT’S FAR WORSE THAN THE DISEASE
In the debate between free speech supporters and advocates of hate speech law, free speech supporters argue that, yes unfortunately in society there is a terrible disease called hate speech. However, despite this, the ONLY speech that should be penalised legally is threatening speech and speech that incites violence. We do have to think about things that can be done to lessen hate speech in society, see later, but making hate speech laws is not the answer. Why? – because the proposed cure for hate speech, hate speech law, IS FAR WORSE THAN THE DISEASE of hate speech. That old saying “the cure is worse than the disease” is so true in this debate. Of course there is a price that we have to pay for this allowance of freedom of speech, and that price is the possibility of being badly offended or upset by what others say, but this is a far lesser evil and price to pay than the negative outcomes that hate speech laws produce in a society or have on an individual.
What are the negative outcomes of hate speech laws for a society or for an individual?
• Hate speech laws stop people from saying what they really think, because everyone starts worrying that what they say will get them into serious legal trouble or make them lose their job. This means that totally free debate and the free flow of ideas are stopped. The positive outcomes that could have arisen from this free flowing debate and totally honest dialogue are all lost to society. Totalitarian states are always less creative and productive than free states.
• The fully free market place of ideas can flush out bad ideas. By exposing bad ideas to the disinfecting light of free speech we can improve society.
• With hate speech laws society becomes an Orwellian nightmare where everyone is afraid that other people will report on them. In addition some people will make false hate speech claims for revenge or other purposes. This would be a terrible society to live in.
• Hate speech laws can be used in a political way to further a political agenda by preventing political opponents from putting their case forward – a terrible outcome for society.
• In denying someone else’s speech you are denying yourself (and society) the right to learn something that might change your life (or society) for the better.
• The person who says something outrageous, in your eyes, may have put a lot of thought into what they have said and, even if outrageous to you, there may be a grain of truth in what they have to say that both you and the rest of society may learn a lot from.
• Other people’s outrageous views, in your eyes, may force you to look again at what you believe and why you believe it, making you go back to first principles and improving your understanding of why you believe what you believe and your understanding of the issues involved. A very valuable outcome.
• If you and society in general are shielded from different ideas and perspectives you (and society) will not reach your maximum potential.
• If people can’t say what they truly feel, they may become frustrated and take more aggressive or violent routes to vent the issues that they feel strongly about.
• It is particularly important to defend the speech of the person who thinks differently. That person may be you one day.
• The FIrst Amendment of the USA was particularly passed in order to allow a minority to say what the majority may find offensive. You may find yourself in that minority one day.
• By curtailing the free speech of others, you may in future find that you yourself are prevented from speaking, that is, you are in potentia creating a rod for your own back.
• In the USA you have no right to be free from being offended. If you don’t like what you hear it is up to you to debate and counter what you disagree with.
In addition we have to ask these questions
• Who would you want to entrust to decide, for you, what hate speech is?
• What individual on earth is uniquely qualified to make this critical decision for you?
• Who is to decide, for you, where the line is to be drawn between speech and hate speech?
• Do you want to be ruled by what is in effect a “Thought Police”?
• Once we as a society lose critical thought and freedom of speech what is left between us and totalitarianism?
In Conclusion
• Nobody should be in fear for their liberty for speech, unless it is threatening speech or speech inciting violence. Apart from these two exceptions it should never be “you can have free speech, BUT”. There should be NO BUTS.
• Hate speech laws produce far more pernicious results for societies and for individuals than beneficial results. As they say, the road to hell is paved with good intentions.
What CAN be done to reduce hate speech in society?
Of course some groups are more vulnerable to hate speech than others, so what CAN be done to protect these groups and reduce hate speech in a society?
Civility and respect codes can be used in institutions such as universities, instead of implementing hate speech laws. Within an institution such as a university a very high burden of proof would be required for people making hate speech complaints. If the proof was deemed good enough, the person deemed as making hateful comments could be given a lot of warnings before they are temporarily suspended. There would never be any legal prosecution for hate speech. They would be allowed to return to their job after a reasonable period of time and given more chances to resolve the situation. A faculty member would only lose their a job for example or a student would only be expelled from a university after a lot of repeated transgressions of this code. That is, the people in institutions would be secure in knowing that they could speak freely. They would know that if anything they said was deemed as offensive by someone, the person complaining would have to have a very well proven complaint. They would also know that they would not be in fear for their job except under extreme circumstances and would never face legal action. They would have plenty of time and chances to turn the situation around.
Outside of institutions eg in public spaces, civility and respect rules could also be in place, again with high levels of evidence required for reporting to police. The police could be required to give for example four or more warnings to someone and only after this could they ban that person from a public space. This would be temporary, for a specified period of time, but no legal action would be taken.
This much more lenient civility code system would mean that the vital free flow of ideas in institutions, and in society generally, would not be restricted by fear.
#2 by Anonymous on May 31, 2019 - 9:08 pm
I watched many of your videos and you are giving out some very crucial information for people to wake up with. Thanks for your service to humanity, without people like yourself we would never have a chance to take back our rights and freedoms around the world.