Heckler’s Veto: 66% Of College Students Say Stopping Speech Is Free Speech Authored by Jonathan Turley, We have previously discussed the worrisome signs of a rising generation of censors in the country as leaders and writers embrace censorship and blacklisting. The latest chilling poll was released by 2021 College Free Speech Rankings after questioning a huge body of 37,000 students at 159 top-ranked U.S. colleges and universities. It found that sixty-six percent of college students think shouting down a speaker to stop them from speaking is a legitimate form of free speech.  Another 23 percent believe violence can be used to cancel a speech. That is roughly one out of four supporting violence. Faculty and editors are now actively supporting modern versions of book-burning with blacklists and bans for those with opposing political views. Others are supporting actual book burning. Columbia Journalism School Dean Steve Coll has denounced the “weaponization” of free speech, which appears to be the use of free speech by those on the right. So the dean of one of the premier journalism schools now supports censorship.Free speech advocates are facing a generational shift that is now being reflected in our law schools, where free speech principles were once a touchstone of the rule of law. As millions of students are taught that free speech is a threat and that “China is right” about censorship, these figures are shaping a new society in their own intolerant images. The most chilling aspect of this story is how many on left applaud such censorship. A prior poll shows roughly half of the public supporting not just corporate censorship but government censorship of anything deemed “misinformation.” Perhaps the same citizens and academics will embrace the Chinese model on social scoring and praise actions that the reported move by Chase bank. We discussed this issue recently with regard to a lawsuit against SUNY.

Too Late… House Passes Amendment To Defund Wuhan Lab Middleman Outfit EcoHealth Alliance Authored by Steve Watson via Summit News, The House passed an amendment to the National Defense Authorization Act Thursday that will seeing all funding blocked to EcoHealth Alliance, the outfit that fuelled US money to the Wuhan Institute of Virology for gain of function experiments that some scientists believe led to the COVID pandemic. Republican Pennsylvania Rep. Guy Reschenthaler introduced the amendment, noting “It is deeply disturbing that EcoHealth Alliance funneled American taxpayer dollars to support dangerous and potentially deadly research at the WIV, a laboratory run by the Chinese Communist Party (CCP) and tied to military biological research and the probable origin of the COVID-19 pandemic.” Reschenthaler added “I am proud to lead this effort to end the flow of defense funding to EcoHealth Alliance, and I thank my colleagues for including my amendment in the defense authorization bill and ensuring Americans’ hard-earned money never again funds risky experiments in labs operated by our adversaries.” As was reported earlier this week, EcoHealth Alliance under head Peter Daszak attempted to secure millions more in funding from the Pentagon’s scientific arm DARPA to genetically alter viruses, including bat coronaviruses, to make them more infectious to humans, and then to spray nanoparticles containing skin penetrating SARSr CoV spike proteins into the air, just eighteen months prior to the subsequent COVID outbreak and pandemic. DARPA rejected the plan as being too dangerous to the human population, but the work may have gone ahead anyway. * The proposal calls for aerosol delivery of recombinant SARSr CoV spike proteins in nanoparticles or in orthopoxviral vectors. Not aerosol delivery of SARSr CoVs. — Richard H. Ebright (@R_H_Ebright) September 22, 2021 *  *  * Brand new merch now available! Get it at https://www.pjwshop.com/ In the age of mass Silicon Valley censorship It

Former TV journalist John Stossel has reportedly filed a lawsuit against Facebook seeking at least $2 million in damages, alleging that the company defamed him by adding “fact-check” labels to two videos he posted related to climate change. After Facebook’s labels, the lawsuit claims “his viewership plummeted due to both Facebook’s censorship and the reputational harm caused by the false labels.”