| In late April 2016, we (Jim Rizoli, Joe Rizoli and myself) learned
that we had been banned from commenting on news articles in the
Metrowest Daily News
even if we were subscribed.
Evidence also shows that all our previous comments on articles were removed as part of a campaign to make us disappear!. We all had a good laugh when the Soviets did this to make their enemies disappear. Will our images also be removed from any group photos. Shown below is the reasoning by Richard Lodge, senior editor. Joe: You repeat many of the same bigoted remarks that you have made many times in our comments section. Those comments do nothing to encourage any type of constructive discussion in the public commenting portion of stories or opinion pieces, something that we are trying to promote. Repeated negative arguments, Holocaust denial and name calling do nothing to further an online discussion and discourage the general public from joining the discussion. As you are well aware, you have many ways you can publish and broadcast your beliefs online, other than our comments sections.
-- Richard Lodge
Mr. Lodge should be told he can publish his communistic views, rants and bigotted remarks on his own web site, rather than in the paper he is merely an editor of, and then try to sell it as meaningful bullshit. I'll ask him about whether banning us produced meaningful results to further an online discussion and encouraged the general public from joining the discussion. He sincerely believes that our comments discourage other readers from commenting. This is nonsense and reflects a special kind of genetic stupidity. In a way, I feel sorry for him. One suspects his print subscriptions are falling while online subscriptions are rising slightly. Overall revenues are declining? We have been chosen as the boogieman that is causing his declining readership, not the endless series of meaningless articles his staff write. Maybe, Lodge thought what we inserted as comments was more meaningful than his drivel.
There are many other ways the editors of the MWDN censor or squelch speech.
|
| Editorial: Freedom of expression must be defended. | January 9, 2015 |
|---|---|
| Richard Lodge, MWDN Senior Editor | Metrowest Daily News |
The primary victims of the terrorist outrage in Paris on Wednesday are the 12 people who were shot dead and several others who were wounded. This would be an unspeakable atrocity regardless of the motives that drove masked gunmen to attack the offices of the satirical magazine Charlie Hebdo.But the terrorists, who reportedly said they were avenging the prophet Muhammad, were aiming not only at individuals but at an idea: that freedom of expression includes the right to criticize and, yes, ridicule the cherished beliefs of others. Charlie Hebdo certainly had done that in publishing cartoons lampooning Muhammad and mocking Islam. President Obama alluded to this when he praised France's commitment to "universal values." German Chancellor Angela Merkel was more explicit, describing the carnage as an attack on "freedom of expression - a key component of our free democratic culture." It's tempting to see this tragedy as an example of the failure of some Muslims to adapt to Western notions of robust free speech, and there is some truth in that observation: Scurrilous depictions of Jesus Christ or the pope are far less likely to provoke violence than a violation of the taboo that Muhammad may not be lampooned (or even depicted). It's also the case that Muslim nations have been in the forefront of the campaign to have the United Nations condemn "defamation of religion." Yet the impulse to punish or censor sacrilegious speech isn't unique to Muslims. In the past, Christians also have used the law to punish irreverence, and blasphemy statutes remain on the books in some U.S. states (though they wouldn't survive a First Amendment challenge). Even many Americans and Europeans who support free speech in general would draw the line at protection for religiously offensive speech, just as many would make an exception for racist speech. Yet a moment's reflection should dispel the view that freedom of political speech can be separated from speech about race or religion - subjects that are entwined with politics and government all over the world. In a free society, the answer to offensive speech about any topic is more speech, not legal reprisals and certainly not violence or vengeance. Freedom of expression isn't just a peculiarity of European and American culture. It is enshrined in the U.N.'s Universal Declaration of Human Rights, which says: "Everyone has the right to freedom of opinion and expression; this right includes freedom to hold opinions without interference and to seek, receive and impart information and ideas through any media and regardless of frontiers." One way to honor the victims of Wednesday's massacre is to defend that principle, and not just in Western countries." |
|
|
The Metrowest Daily News declined to print this letter to the editor when I
submitted in on March 14, 2012. Clearly, Holmes and Lodge are
defenders of the faith even if they have no proof of their faith.
Once again, we are approaching the time to celebrate the death and resurrection of Jesus, one of the three heads of the imaginary Christian sky fairy. In Greek, mythology, Prometheus, a titan God and lowly challenger to Zeus's omniscience and omnipotence, stole fire from Zeus and gave it to mortals. For this inexcusable crime, Zeus had him tied to a stake on Mount Kaukasos and every day for hundreds of years, an eagle would swoop down and eat his liver, but every night, Zeus would heal him, until Herakles finally released Prometheus. Meanwhile, in Christian mythology, Jesus was nailed to a cross for a day. or two for his earthly sins to become a mythical martyr. Prometheus thus suffered for hundreds of years on the mountain cliff while Jesus suffered with his little ouchies on his hands and feet while on his cross having a bad weekend. Which mythical martyr deserves more sympathy from us, Jesus or Prometheus? Christianity, celebrating the irony of a carpenter being nailed to a piece of wood, for over two thousand years. On Easter day, the kids will say: "Thanks for dying, Jesus, the candy's awesome. It would be almost unbelievable, if history did not record the tragic fact, that men have gone to war and cut each other's throats because they could not agree as to what was to become of them after their throats were cut. |
| The MWDN refused to print this letter, in response to a letter
submitted by Alice Slattery. Once again, MWDN is a defender of the
faith.
In response to Alice Slattery's amusing defense of the Blessed Holy Trinity, I say that I am 65 years old, a mere fraction of her age, but I have seen zero evidence of such a three-headed entity in my life. There are currently 2.5 billion christians and across the span of 2,500 years, they have accumulated zero evidence for such a creature (BTW, why does it even need three heads?). Ancient Egyptian, Greek, Roman and Anastasi texts or tablets do not document such a creature in their domains. Everything is made of atoms formed in stars and to date, we have identified 118 elements. The standard model of matter to date, has some 200 subatomic particles. What sort of atoms and particles constitute the blessed holy trinity? What identifying factors make them "blessed" and "holy" versus "not blessed" and "unholy"? Inquiring minds wish to know. Judge David W. Cunis once told me "The burden of proof rests exclusively with the Commonwealth and it is a strict and heavy burden. The burden of proof is proof beyond a reasonable doubt." I'm sure Alice Slattery can ask the wise and learned judge David W. Cunis whose intellect towers above those of the tiny minded plebians wasting oxygen on this planet, to write a rivetting, enlightening and air tight case for the existence of such a creature, and providing hard scientific evidence as (a) matter of course. Scientific facts do not cease to exist because they are ignored. |
| The MWDN refused to print this letter, in response to a letter
from William Carey around May 24, 2016.
In response to William Carey's response to ("More questions for Framingham police," May 21), Mr. Carey stated that he worked with the these officers and can attest to their on-the-job performance as outstanding. Mr. Carey, am I to understand that a police force with a staff of about 170, costing the taxpayers $14 million a year can conduct an investigation for eight calendar months but cannot yet determine whether something was removed from their evidence room without authorization? Wow! That takes my breath away. It ain't rocket science. It ain't brain surgery. It's coverup. And whatever happened to that grand jury inquiry that can usually indict a ham sandwich? Is it time to treat the Town of Framingham as a very profitable criminal organization including our Town manager, Town Counsel and let's not forget the Board of Selectmen. One would think that for a salary of $170,000 a year, police chief Ken Ferguson might exercise more personal integrity or honesty. Alas, I live in Framingham, and I have to wear a paper bag of shame over my face. Lastly, I would like to request the resignation of our police chief Ken Ferguson, who is either remarkably incompetent, or he is definitely trying to hide something here. He has yet to release any paperwork requested concerning the Framingham police kidnapping of two children off my property without a 4th amendment warrant on August 19, 2015. Why not? Not enough time to investigate me? |
| The MWDN refused to print this letter, in response to a
editorial on scamming seniors, around July 1, 2017.
In response to "Seniors frequently targetted by scammers", let us define a scam. A scam is a fraudulent scheme performed by a dishonest individual, group, church or company in an attempt obtain money or something else of value. Scams traditionally resided in confidence tricks, where an individual would misrepresent themselves as someone with skill or authority, i.e. a doctor, lawyer, investor, priest or pastor. It is obvious to all who are not blind that religion is the biggest scam of them all ($71 billion) and it mostly victimizes the elderly who grew up learning to fear the imaginary creature called God or Allah. For an organization that tells us that money is the root of all evil, they sure do ask for a lot of it. Religion only offers a posthumous reward, just like the Darwin Award (the one that chlorinates the gene pool). Can someone please show me one instance when a church successfully pushed someone into heaven in exchange for tithing? This is a scam being run on the majority, so it's not a scam. Our intrepid Middlesex District Attorney Marian Ryan has always campaigned against scamming seniors but strangely enough doesn't touch religion. Her association with Stone Hill College leads me to believe she is catholic. Why doesn't she announce her religious bias for all to see and understand why she does not see religion as a scam. As mere peasants, are we not entitled to know? I think the Middlesex District Attorney's office is somewhat of a scam.
|
| The MWDN refused to print this letter, in response to a
Audrey Guzik, PhD, "The wealthy are like drug addicts",
I have long sought someone with a PhD to show me some evidence of the historicity of this Jesus character. If she is going to tout her PhD and make us believe that she possesses intimate knowledge about this Jesus, perhaps, Ms Guzik could show us some contemporaneous writings of his time in some documents outside the bible. In all of my readings, Jesus is a historically created myth.
|
Send comments to:
hjw2001@gmail.com
|
|
|