![]() Without offering any examples of factual errors, my niece, Dr. Here’s my letter - which the New York Times refused to publish - in response to the op-ed by my niece, Dr. Those policies are obliterating the middle class, shifting trillions of dollars to billionaires, dismantling all the social programs created by Democrats since the New Deal and sweeping away the obstacles against our country’s dark slide into authoritarian plutocracy anathema to every value of democracy, liberalism and humanity. That’s the right that went first in every nation that stumbled down the trail to totalitarianism.”Īs Murrow predicted, the imposition censorship has masked the systematic demolition of our constitution including attacks on freedom of worship (including abolishing religious exemptions and closing churches), freedom of assembly, private property (the right to operate a business), due process (including the imposition of far reaching restrictions against freedom of movement, education, association with notice and comment rule making) and the 7th amendment right to jury trials (in cases of vaccine injuries caused by corporate negligence). Murrow’s warning that: “The right to dissent … is surely fundamental to the existence of a democratic society. We might recall, at this strange time in our history, my father’s friend, Edward R. It is self-identified human rights advocates who are supporting government policies that trample our constitutional rights. It is most ironic to me that it is self-identified liberals and liberal journals - once the most energetic first amendment champions - who are most fiercely calling for censorship. ![]() Censorship is violence and this systematic muzzling of debate which proponents justify as a measure to curtail dangerous polarization is actually fueling those divisions. It’s a bad omen for democracy when citizens can no longer conduct civil, informed debates about critical policies that impact the vitality of our economy, public health, personal freedoms and constitutional rights. Their complaint is that I question official pronouncements about vaccine safety. Neither of these long critiques by my family members cite a single example of a factual error by me. Politico likewise declined to print my thoroughly sourced reply. In May 2019, three of my other family members similarly defamed me in a long article in Politico. Orwellian censorship and the gaslighting of dissent in service to the interests of Big Pharma has more recently become universal in the liberal print and online news sites once presumed to be the antidote to corporate subversion of democracy. Yesterday, the Times let me know that they would decline to print my reply. ![]() ![]() I immediately submitted the thoroughly sourced letter below. ![]() On Saturday, my niece published an error-filled and defamatory article about me on the Times editorial page. The practice of reporting only facts and opinions that comply with official narratives has long been de rigueur in electronic media outlets dependent on Pharma advertising revenues. But the paper draws the line at anyone who questions orthodoxies promoted by the ascending Medical Cartel. The Times, which claims to encourage the expression of “a diversity of views” on its letters page, formerly extended this courtesy automatically to public figures who suffered criticism in its pages. TOWER OF TRAMPLE DISCORD PROFESSIONAL“When our output makes allegations of wrongdoing, iniquity or incompetence or lays out a strong and damaging critique of an individual or institution the presumption is that those criticized should be given a “right of reply,” that is, given a fair opportunity to respond to the allegations.”Įven where there is no legal right, respectable journalistic outlets, including the New York Times, have traditionally regarded it as their moral, ethical and professional obligation to publish the replies by people who have been criticized in their pages. The “right of reply” - the opportunity to defend oneself against public criticism in the same venue where that criticism was published - is a constitutional right in some European countries and in Brazil. ![]()
0 Comments
Leave a Reply. |
Details
AuthorWrite something about yourself. No need to be fancy, just an overview. ArchivesCategories |