The 90 Miles Mystery Box: Episode #475

You have come across a mystery box. But what is inside? 

It could be literally anything from the serene to the horrific, 

from the beautiful to the repugnant, 

from the mysterious to the familiar.

If you decide to open it, you could be disappointed, 

you could be inspired, you could be appalled. 

This is not for the faint of heart or the easily offended. 

You have been warned.

Hot Pick Of The Late Night - EMILY RATAJKOWSKI!

Georg Gärtner, the last German POW in America.

Does Silicon Valley Manipulate Users?

The Misogynistic WAR on FEMININITY

Girls With Guns

"If We Do Not Advocate A Love Of Country To Our Children..."

#Melania Trump

When You Spend Your Hard-Earned Money - Remember This:

..And Never Buy Levi's OR Dockers...

Levi Strauss Announces Massive Gun Control Campaign, Turns Employees into Political Activists

Levi-Strauss Doubles Down on Gun Control Push

What brands does Levis own?

The Sordid Origin of Hate-Speech Laws

The Sordid Origin of Hate-Speech Laws

All western european countries have hate-speech laws. In 2008, the eu adopted a framework decision on “Combating Racism and Xenophobia” that obliged all member states to criminalize certain forms of hate speech. On the other side of the Atlantic, the Supreme Court of the United States has gradually increased and consolidated the protection of hate speech under the First Amendment. The European concept of freedom of expression thus prohibits certain content and viewpoints, whereas, with certain exceptions, the American concept is generally concerned solely with direct incitement likely to result in overt acts of lawlessness.

Yet the origin of hate-speech laws has been largely forgotten. The divergence between the United States and European countries is of comparatively recent origin. In fact, the United States and the vast majority of European (and Western) states were originally opposed to the internationalization of hate-speech laws. European states and the U.S. shared the view that human rights should protect rather than limit freedom of expression.

Rather, the introduction of hate-speech prohibitions into international law was championed in its heyday by the Soviet Union and allies. Their motive was readily apparent. The communist countries sought to...

VISA/MASTERCARD AND THE ASSAULT ON CIVIL RIGHTS

Every day there is a new report about how Facebook, Google, Twitter, Snapchat, Instagram and other giants of social media censor content, banish certain commentators for incorrect views, and otherwise work in a steady if unsystematic way to homogenize political opinion within an acceptably progressive bandwidth. Ideas are scoured for “racism”—as contentiously defined by the intellectual stylebook of the hard left Southern Poverty Law Center, which the media have set up as an “authority” on hate speech; freedom of speech is seen a nuisance rather than a guarantee of personal liberty and true diversity of opinion.

But there is an even more sinister threat to the first amendment than the social media, a threat that operates in a stealth way in the most crucial arena of our economic system. It is corporate giants Master Card and Visa, which now use their unparalleled financial power to determine what speech should be allowed and what speech should be silenced.

Most Americans use a credit or debit card everyday and take these two corporations as much for granted as the light switch or the automobile ignition. We buy things with their cards ranging from the annual vacations to the daily groceries. These two interlocked corporations are the drum majors marching us into a cashless society. They are powers unto themselves, but their eminence rests on our money and the fees they exact to accommodate our transactions.

The cards they issue are even more critical to the vendors whom they pay. Without the ability to accept charges to these cards as payment many businesses would in effect be out of business.

Unlike the comparatively clumsy and very public efforts of the social media to erase “offensive”—all too often a synonym for conservative—opinion, the cognate machinations of Visa/Mastercard take place more remotely and without response in the dark space of the mundane financial transaction.

It is as simple and as faceless as a lethal injection: An individual who wants to support an organization online makes the digital donation and is then informed that Visa/Mastercard will not process it. Neither the individual nor the organization he wishes to support are told that it is on a blacklist, let alone informed how or got there or how to get off. The donor is denied his right to put his money where his mouth is. The organization he supports is condemned to death by strangulation in the dark in a world designed by Kafka.

The Freedom Center had such an experience a few months ago when online donations were overnight peremptorily refused by Visa/Mastercard with no reason given and no...

You Have No Rights That You Are Not Willing To Defend...

DOJ handling of Trump, Clinton probes shows potential ‘abuse of prosecutorial discretion’

The Justice Department's divergent handling of the Clinton email and Russia investigations -- avoiding false-statement charges in one, while pursuing several in the other -- could demonstrate an "abuse of prosecutorial discretion," The Federalist senior editor Mollie Hemingway argued on the “Special Report” All-Star Panel Monday night on Fox News.

She discussed the DOJ and FBI's conduct ahead of former national security adviser Michael Flynn's sentencing, set for Tuesday, on a false-statement charge to which he pleaded guilty. Several other individuals also have been charged for false statements in the Russia case -- though no such charges were pursued during the lengthy investigation into Hillary Clinton's private email use while secretary of state.

“We have a really good test case. We have the FBI and the Department of Justice going after Hillary Clinton for breaking the law on classified information in which we saw the Department of Justice and FBI just bend over backwards, you know, giving immunity -- handing it out like candy, getting nothing in return, declining to prosecute anyone for false statements even though a ton of people have made false statements," Hemingway said.

Hours earlier, former FBI Director James Comey was questioned behind closed doors on Capitol Hill, about the bureau's handling of both investigations. Exiting the interview, he bashed Republicans, demanding that they...