Will Freedom of Speech Be Restricted in U.S.?

[red-beard]

Former House Speaker and possible Republican presidential candidateNewt Gingrich says the U.S. will be forced to re-examine freedom of speech to meet the threat of terrorism. Gingrich told an audience in Manchester, New Hampshire Monday that a "different set of rules" — may be needed to curb terrorists' ability to use the Internet and free speech to spread their message and recruit people. A Gingrich spokesman tells FOX News the former speaker thinks it is reasonable to interfere with the terrorists' ability to do the country harm — and wants an examination of ways that might be accomplished.

http://www.foxnews.com/story/0,2933,232577,00.html

[red-beard]

Uh - oh

Me thinks tabby is right...

[john70t]

Brought to you by the Republicans- party of validating illegal ailiens, gay pedophiles, and states rights(except for pot, medicine, etc...).

Wave that flag.

[dd74]

Since the Patriot Act came into effect, I don't believe anyone - except those who have something to hide/fear - have felt their free speech compromised. When such threats come from Gingrich, Rumsfeld, Bush, or whomever, I think it tends to galvanize those who utilize words as commentary and/or weaponry in some cases.

Political correctness is more a threat to free speech than political interests.

[scottmandue]

Not to be a nit picker but shouldn't the title be "Will freedom of speech be more restricted in the U.S.?"

[nostatic]

it's ok...if you're not guilty you have nothing to fear.

Never mind those jackboots...

[Racerbvd]

The liberal have been restricting Freedom of Speech with the PC crap for a long time.
john, you might want to get your facts straight, it is the anti-American liberal aclu who defends those you list, and at least the Republicans who did do that crap, had the decency to step down, unlike the liberal POS dems who refuse the leave!!

[Moneyguy1]

Racer...You really believe one side is better than the other?

Keep in mind....everything has two sides. We need both extremes in order to create a balance. Eliminate one and watch the entire system collapse.

I, for one, can never understand such a one-sided point of view. Seems to me that an outlook like that eliminates the possibility of learning something new.

"Keep your friends close, your enemies even closer..."

[slodave]

**** that ****.

[slodave]

Dammit, censored already!

[m21sniper]

Political correctness is more a threat to free speech than political interests.

So, so very true.

[fastpat]

John McCain restricted free speech more than almost anyone recently with his campaign finance reform legislation, signed by G.W. Bush.

Remember that when you're called upon to vote for him in the future. McCain is no conservative, and no friend of the Bill of Rights including the Second Amendment as well as the first.

In fact, the Bill of Rights has no friends among any of the so-called front runners for the Presidential race in 2008.

[wheatdog]

Right you are Fastpat. There are parts of the campaign finance reform that were specifically set up to muzzle the NRA.

[fastpat]

Originally posted by wheatdog
Right you are Fastpat. There are parts of the campaign finance reform that were specifically set up to muzzle the NRA.

McCain railed against the NRA when he was demagoging his bill in the Senate. The NRA was his primary target.

[cstreit]

candidate Newt Gingrich says the U.S. will be forced to re-examine freedom of speech to meet the threat of terrorism.

Yes Newt, we're FORCED to, we just can't help it.... *sigh*

[wludavid]

Originally posted by m21sniper
So, so very true.

Why do you think this?

[john70t]

But isn't "political correctness" essentially the same thing as "group think"?