Not so ‘Free Republic’: The Shot Heard Around the Net

The Conservative Voice ^ | Feb 11, 2005 | by William Gheen, President, Americans for Legal Immigration PAC

[Jim Robinson]

The shot heard around the Internet has been fired on FreeRepublic.com The owner Jim Robinson and his moderators have launched a sniper style purge against members that disagree with the President’s ‘guest worker’ amnesty or support more control of illegal immigration. Free Republic is an amazing tool for those looking for a good debate and news from around the country.

The problem for the administration of the site is that their creation is allowing the participants to learn that the Bush immigration record and plans are shockingly out of line with the views of most conservatives. The management’s answer to this conflict between the majority of conservatives and the influence of the White House on their Web site has become electronic executions and censorship.

Members and readers of Free Republic would be surprised to know that many members of their community have fallen silent on the discussions about illegal immigration lately because free speech is an illusion on FR.com. They are silent because they have been banned from the Web site without warning, cause, or explanation in most cases. For weeks the moderators have been suspending and banning new members that chimed in quickly on the immigration debates.

Now this trend has broadened as the first groups of long-term users were suspended or banned this past week. Although Robinson and his staff removed many members of the Free Republic community in the first few days of the purge, those that religiously support President Bush’s immigration plan, open borders and approve of public benefits for illegal aliens remain on the forum. Those that were banned were the members that wanted more done to control illegal immigration and a strict observance to the President’s Oath of Office.

[Howlin]

""Jim Robinson and his moderators have launched a sniper style purge against members that disagree with the President’s ‘guest worker’ amnesty or support more control of illegal immigration. ""

Here's a clue for you:

This guy doesn't know what he's talking about.

[Marine Inspector]

asgardshill and I are both Stargate SG-1 fans

I'm recording both shows now. I never miss them.

[The Coopster]

Joe Hadenuf had it coming. He just plain didn't like Mexicans, and anyone who called him out was an "illegal sympathizer". It's called "getting your come-uppance"

I have cracked open a celebratory beer......

[Not A Snowbird]

Amen.

[Junior_G]

That's his MO.

It caught me a bit off-guard. I need to learn to stay away from the immigration threads. They're absolutely infuriating.

[Marine Inspector]

I agree.

[Marine Inspector]

They're absolutely infuriating.

Yes they are. It's very hard to hold back your temper.

[Cold Heat]

What happens to the U.S. economy if we remove from it more workers than it requires to function?

Something like 1929.

[Howlin]

He called me a leftist. :-)

[MindBender26]

As someone said years ago:

Jim's house,
Jim's rules,
P.S, Wipe your feet!

Have a good weekend.

[patriciaruth]

I'm recording both shows now. I never miss them.

Welcome to our crazy club!

[jacquej]

What's this? A "divide and conquer" tactic?

ROTFLMAO in my jammies!

[ducks1944]

WE ARE BEHIND YOU ALL THE WAY JIM.

[FITZ]

Imagine Vicente Fox's fury if our leaders said that yes we need 25 million guest workers but they don't all have to be from just his country --- that the guest worker program would be opened up to citizens of every foreign country. Romanians, Chinese, Indian, every African country --- all would be seen as equal in the eyes of our government no matter what their ethnicity.

[82Marine89]

Almost every post I have had dealing with illegal immigration was to state that I was against the rewarding of illegal behavior. I have not been called a racist by name, but it was insinuated a few times. I guess its because I'm not a 'Bushbot.' I did have a thread pulled, but it was due to the title of the article. An article that came from PBS.org of all places. I wrote the moderator and apologized. I truly meant no harm. The article itself was a small history lesson about 1949 Immigration Enforcement Standards.

Finally, I would like to thank you for giving me a forum where I can vent, state my opinions, learn from others, celebrate with other vet's, and just have some fun.

Semper Fi JimRob.

[Irish Queen]

Thank you, Jim, for all you do. Your forum as given us a voice.

[familyop]

It's your publication and your right to allow whatever speech you believe to be appropriate. The Boy Scouts (v. Dale, if I remember correctly) won on their right to expressive association.

Ah, here it is, or part of it, I think. I'm not a lawyer, BTW.

http://supct.law.cornell.edu/supct/html/99-699.ZS.html
Excerpt (LII, Supreme Court Collection, Cornell):
"Second, even if the Boy Scouts discourages Scout leaders from disseminating views on sexual issues, its method of expression is protected. Third, the First Amendment does not require that every member of a group agree on every issue in order for the group’s policy to be “expressive association.'"

Amendment I

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; or the right of the people peaceably to assemble, and to petition the government for a redress of grievances.

[patriciaruth]

You understand probably also understand that we have a much easier task integrating Hispanics immigrants into our culture while they are helping to finance our retiring generation than Europe does integrating all those Muslims.

[stands2reason]

If you have a problem with this place, newbie, you can step off.

[F16Fighter]

Nice try.

I know exactly where you're coming from. NO Man's Land.