Select date

May 2024
Mon Tue Wed Thu Fri Sat Sun

The trial of John Doe vs. [Censored]

31-10-2019 < SGT Report 56 699 words
 

by Jon Rappoport, No More Fake News:



The trial took place in a quiet empty room, in an underground bunker, at an undisclosed location in [Censored].


The Judge sat behind a high table. John Doe stood below him.


Judge: You are John Doe? You have a website called Doe Doe?


Doe: Yes, Your Honor. May I know your name?


Judge: Of course. It’s Judge.



Doe: That’s your title.


Judge: It’s also my name.


Doe: You’re Judge Judge?


Judge: Correct. Now, let’s get down to business. You’re the author of an article you posted on your site. The title of the article was, “A Catalog of Sexual Assaults and Other Crimes Committed by Migrants in [Censored], 2015-2017.” The subtitle was, “Soaring Migrant Crime Rate Is a National Disaster—[Censored] Women Fear for Their Safety.”


Doe: Yes.


Judge: How did you assemble this “catalog?”


Doe: I cited articles in the [Censored] press. I obtained access to police reports in [Censored]. I interviewed over two hundred citizens and their families. I interviewed law-enforcement officials.


Judge: You traveled to [Censored].


Doe: Correct.


Judge: And as you were exiting the country, you were detained by [Censored] Customs and Immigration and told your visa was canceled and you were banned from returning to the country.


Doe: That’s true.


Judge: That’s certainly a black mark against you.


Doe: I don’t see it that way. The government didn’t want me to accumulate all that information and spread it.


Judge: You’re aware of a foundation called “Anti-Hate-Crime Speech?”


Doe: I am.


Judge: The foundation was formed by GoogleFacebookTwitterYouTubeFooFooShooShooAmazonStarbucksMerckTheCIA
FoundationForBetterLiving
 and 167 other groups.


Doe: So I understand.


Judge: And several of those groups canceled your donation account, de-monetized your videos, deleted your site from six search engines, and convinced a local delivery service to stop bringing pizza to your house.


Doe: Right.


Judge: You’re accused of hate speech against immigrants.


Doe: I published facts. I wasn’t speaking against anyone off the cuff.


Judge: But that’s how it was interpreted. Your article was incendiary, because it inspired a negative view of immigration.


Doe: Inspired? I wrote facts. How others took those facts was their business.


Judge: It’s a question of the greater good. Exposing a few cases of wrongdoing versus alarming and biasing a whole population.


Doe: There is another element. Suppressing important information. Keeping people from seeing what’s happening to their communities and their nation.


Judge: Hate speech cannot be tolerated.


Doe: Who says it’s hate speech?


Judge: A non-profit in Alabama. Two media outlets. They’ve been hired by the Anti-Hate-Crime Speech Foundation to scour articles and identify hate.


Doe: Well, they’re wrong.


Judge: They can’t be wrong.


Doe: Why not?


Judge: Because they’re authorities.


Doe: According to whom?


Judge: These groups are setting a standard. Someone has to.


Doe: How about someone else setting a standard?


Judge: Who would that be?


Doe: The point is, I was exercising my 1st Amendment rights.


Judge: Your what?


Doe: I have a right to speak and write.


Judge: Not if it upsets the good order of the community and causes suffering on the part of people associated with those you accuse of committing serious crimes.


Doe: I disagree. And why shouldn’t I disturb “the good order” if the order is ill-advised and based on the fear of speaking out?


Judge: Let me explain something, Mr. Doe. You have created a generality of hatred.


Doe: A what?


Judge: By publishing your article, you created a generality of negative reaction against a whole group.


Doe: I reported facts, not generalities.


Judge: What you reported can’t be divorced from the effect it had on other people.


Doe: Of course it can. My work didn’t have an automatic effect on other people. They inferred whatever they inferred from my article.


Judge: The overriding principle is: everything is connected to everything.


Doe: You lost me there, sir.


Judge: Everyone in this world is connected and interdependent. Therefore, whatever you do spreads like ink on a blotter.


Doe: How can that be? I gathered specific facts. Those facts don’t apply to all people.


Read More @ JonRappoport.com





Loading...




Print