Jim Robinson & FR accused of censorship

WhatReallyHappened.com ^ | 4 January 2002 | WRH.com goobers

[Vigilant1]

FREE REPUBLIC ADMITS IT IS PRO-WAR AND CENSORS ALL POSTS NOT IN ACCORD WITH US GOVERNMENT PROPAGANDA

NOW MAKING THE ROUNDS ON THE NET. Cited under "fair use" for educational purposes.

____________________________________________________________
Date: Wed, 02 Jan 2002 02:50:39 -0800
From: "Jim Robinson"
Organization: Free Republic
To: "Larry McDonald"
Subject: Re: What Are You Scared Of?

Those who are coming in here to post a bunch of propaganda to smear Bush or otherwise harm the war effort are going to be deleted.

I guess you missed my posts where I said that I am 100% behind our President and the war. I don't care if it's Ron Paul, Larry McDonald, or the head of the John Birch Society himself. I do not want it on FR. And I do not want a bunch of 40 year old conspiracy crap. Not interested.
____________________________________________________________

There you have it. Free Republic is not an objective reporter of the facts but a blatent supporter of the Bush administrations' war for oil, and by Jim Robinson's own admission.

In another post, Jim states...

____________________________________________________________
Jim Robinson (Free Republic)
by JIM ROBINSON in This thread

Lots of grumbling lately about deleted posts. Well, my friends, the simple truth is the game has changed. We are now at war.
____________________________________________________________

Of course, Jim Robinson has it wrong. We're not at war. Only Congress can state otherwise and there has been no formal declaration of war by anyone. Bush hasn't gone to Congress to ask for such a declaration because that would restore Congress to its role in the balance of powers doctrine on which the nation was founded. Bush has no intention of allowing Congress to second-guess him, and indeed Bush has flat out declared that he will not bother informing Congress of intelligence operations from this point forward as is required by law.

Yes, we have been attacked, but it's not really known by whom. Even the FBI admits the IDs on which they based their accusations were faked using the stolen identities of middle eastern Arabs, some of whom have since turned up alive. From this it should be obvious that we cannot really know who was on those planes, only who we are supposed to blame.

But Jim Robinson isn't interested in these facts. He's spiked threads pointing out that the FBI admitted the IDs used by the hijackers were phony. Jim Robinson has spiked threads about how some of the accused hijackers have turned up alive. Jim Robinson has spiked many of the threads dealing with the Israeli spy scandal and the fact that the US has classified evidence linking some of the arrested Israeli spies with the events of 9/11. Jim Robinson has spiked threads suggestng that Bush has exceeed his constitutional authority. Jim Robinson will tolerate no doubts about the righteousness of Bush's war for oil.

But more than that, Jim Robinson displays an arrogant assumption that the presence of a war justifies anything. He argues that we should get behind the government because (he claims) there is a war. But translate that to Germany of 1939. Was it the right thing for the German people to unquestioningly back Hitler because there was a war on? Or would the German people (and the world) have been better served taking a pause and a closer look at just what the government was doing? And if Germany should have examined their government's claims a lot closer, then how can we not do the same now?

Free Republic has shown its true colors. Jim is "not interested" in facts, only in selling Bush's wars. Free Republic isn't about news any more, only about propaganda.

[Howlin]

Move to the head of the class.

[Howlin]

It doesn't seem to matter what language you say it in; they NEVER leave.

After all, if they did leave, what would they have to do with their lives?

[Tolerance Sucks Rocks]

And you're right -- only Congress can declare war.

Correct. We should call our special forces "peace envoys."

[Don Joe]

"First: would sombody please tell me if this Rivera guy is the same writer wannabe, who publishes via a vanity press, that I never heard of until I read his tinfoil-hat-type-conspiracy-theorist drivel about Afghanistan, posted right here on FR?"

He's actually a well-known and highly animator (Pixar type), and you'll see his name on the credits of a lot of big name films. He's also won awards for his TV commercial work.

That said, he's kinda been whipsawing all over the brainscape lately, seeing helicopters under every rock, and seems unable to admit he's wrong even when confronted with incontrovertible evidence.

[headsonpikes]

RE: 'Whatreaalyreaallyhappened.com

It's sad that with all the unread books in this world, you chose to further wither your synapses with fraudulent pap.

I try not to be filled with despair when I realize how unburdened so many posters are by a broad education.

How vaingloriously psychotic to imagine that YOU hold the keys to Truth.

You and Michael and the rest of the Paranoid Legion should take a week off, hug your families, and take up your proper lives.

[lowbridge]

I think the Palestinnians have a lot of trouble because of Isreal.

Granted, the state of Israel is not exactly a saint, but I think the Palestinians mostly created and wallow in their own problems.

Your picture is not funny at all.

Okay then...is this one any better?

[1 FELLOW FREEPER]

It is not anti government to have a desire to shrink an already intrusive , bloated government, contrary to what those folks with less intelligence than yourself might think.

[Don Joe]

"and highly" = "and highly respected"

[lavaroise]

FR is scared sh!tless, not.

[AppyPappy]

Later!!

[BluesDuke]

It is not anti government to have a desire to shrink an already intrusive , bloated government, contrary to what those folks with less intelligence than yourself might think.

Indeed. But I think part of the problem is that, when you enunciate the anti-Statist position, there are always those who - uncognisant of the distinction between a properly construed government (which assigns itself nothing beyond protecting her citizens from criminals at home - real criminals, please, not mere vicemongers - and enemies and attacks from abroad) and an improperly consecrated State (which assigns itself as the source of her citizens' rights and, indeed, lives and livings, as remains assuredly the case today for these United States and only too many of the several states thereof) - assume that when you speak against the State you are speaking against any sort of government and, therefore, against any sort of civilised society, as if the sole legitimate soil from which any sort of civilised society springs is government. (Government, properly construed, is what is established to protect civilised societies; civilised societies are not established by the hand and light of government.)

As often as not, it is because they, or someone within their orbit, are an explicit beneficiary of the State's largesse without the slightest comprehension or concern for the plain enough fact that no one receives a benefit from the State which the State did not previously steal from someone else. Or, perhaps, it is because - their having seen little enough of the genuine alternative - they have known little much else beyond the State's having assumed for itself the arbitration of not merely our protections but indeed our very morals, ethics, and faculties for thought and reason (which is, I grant, something like expecting that we should permit our fiduciary responsibilities to be overseen by the James Gang) even where it is clearly beyond the State's competence or properly construed Constitutional mandate to do so.

And should you point forth the latter, you know as well as I that you are liable often as not to be jumped as an obvious moral miscreant, and never mind that time very much was when to the church or synagogue did we assign the tending of our moral and ethical gardens while to the properly construed government did we assign the business of tending such protection of our property and our lives as we could not tend ourselves as individuals.

And, it is simply impolite in too many places to say so (you notice how there are those among us here who all but explode, when you have construed one or another position of theirs as being obviously enough a position which tends to consecrate rather than undermine Statism), even in places which you might presume to be at least hospitable to the anti-Statist argument.

[Matchett-PI]

"GOD BLESS GEORGE W BUSH AND JIM ROBINSON"

DITTOS!!!!

I stand with George W. Bush and with his efforts to look out for America's interests here and abroad.

And since I believe that Jim Robinson is relying on God to guide and bless President Bush in the decisions he must make, Jim doesn't want negative, divisive mentalities on his forum undermining the decisions Bush is making.

God will cause even bad decisions to turn to the good, if people are relying on Him. End of story. Relax.

[Osinski]

What "old reunion"?

[alcuin]

Arator tells his points eloquently.

LOL!

It IS good to see Ara back, doing battle with the English language, sense, self-respect and other participle-booted oppressors. He usually loses, and therein lies the humour. I mean, eloquence.

[ . ]<<< The last Fly to flag Arator.

Not YET doctored.

[1 FELLOW FREEPER]

""And, it is simply impolite in too many places to say so (you notice how there are those among us here who all but explode, when you have construed one or another position of theirs as being obviously enough a position which tends to consecrate rather than undermine Statism), even in places which you might presume to be at least hospitable to the anti-Statist argument.""

My dear friend, it happens all too often here! I have to admit it saddens me somewhat, when I think of how well this country COULD be run, were it not for the well meaning cowards, and outright scoundrels we are currently stuck with in Congress. The prime function of our federal government should be to PROTECT us from our enemies, both here and abroad. The TRILLIONS our government has burned under the guise of Statist faux noblesse oblige is maddening,destructive, and, of course, ever expanding even under Bush.I also fear the constant usurpation of our individual rights, hiding inside the den of political correctness.There are too many posters here who posit the mantra"Thou shalt not criticize the President, ever!" Well, I for one believe that President Bush's policy on education is a billion dollar boondoggle, ripe to benefit only the NEA. And his morbid obsession with befriending the president of Mexico, scares the hell out of me.

[BluesDuke]

It's much as I said on another thread in the last couple of days: The President may be doing a sterling job as regards the war provoked by 9/11, but the era of big government, apparently, ain't over until it's over. And, incidentally, you could make all the restrictions, all the "reforms" you wish regarding the illegal immigration issue - yea, even sealing off the borders overnight - and you will never eliminate the problem until the great American welfare state is eliminated, once and for all. Until that day arrives, we will never be rid of illegal immigration (you could seal off the borders this instant and those desperate enough to get within reach of the American welfare state's gravy train will get there, as they always do, somehow) and back to the kind of immigration which we once enjoyed and with which we yet could live - imperfectly, of course, but a far shade from what we now contend with.

[Arator]

This whinning and crying gets so damn tedious after a while.

So does the gang-bashing of banished FReepers who can no longer come here and defend themselves.

[ruoflaw]

ref your Post# 211...I think they are crying out for shock treatments!