U.S. Constitution now labeled as "harmful content".

[Ligurian]

It's always a good idea to read at least some of the other posts - especially those which disagree with the OP. That way you get a more balanced view.

A little research also does no harm and may stop you from jumping to half-baked conclusions about conspiracy theories.

OB

"How many shrinks does it take to change a lightbulb?
Just one, but the light bulb really has to want to change."
True.
People can't believe non-MSM unless they're ready to change their mind.
aka
"You take the blue pill—the story ends, you wake up in your bed and believe whatever you want to believe. You take the red pill—you stay in Wonderland, and I show you how deep the rabbit hole goes."--Morpheus, The Matrix

 

[iluvatar5150]

Well, I do actually. TPTB need to stop pretending they can control everyone else when they don't even control themselves.

But thanks for bringing this up.
Democrats Show They Don't Get How Critical Race Theory Hurts Military

The warning labels... It's the old don't put the frog into boiling water, routine. Haven't you noticed yet, that this is how the game is played on America? First they slap warnings on stuff they're teaching the kids in government schools to dislike. Then they slide in a few more warnings, and turn the temperature up a notch or two. Then they come for your guns and drag the whole constitution away. By this time, the pot has boiled dry and the frog's being passed around as an appetizer for what comes next.

A link within the first link... think this is true at all?
When Leftists Praise 'The Constitution,' They Don't Mean The Real One

more paranoid whining

 

[Ligurian]

Well, I do actually. TPTB need to stop pretending they can control everyone else when they don't even control themselves.

But thanks for bringing this up.
Democrats Show They Don't Get How Critical Race Theory Hurts Military

The warning labels... It's the old don't put the frog into boiling water, routine. Haven't you noticed yet, that this is how the game is played on America? First they slap warnings on stuff they're teaching the kids in government schools to dislike. Then they slide in a few more warnings, and turn the temperature up a notch or two. Then they come for your guns and drag the whole constitution away. By this time, the pot has boiled dry and the frog's being passed around as an appetizer for what comes next.

A link within the first link... think this is true at all?
When Leftists Praise 'The Constitution,' They Don't Mean The Real One

more paranoid whining

Paranoid? Or not so much.

John 7:20 The people answered and said, Thou hast a devil: who goeth about to kill Thee?

Paranoid: "Exhibiting or characterized by extreme and irrational fear or distrust of others."

Is it irrational to distrust people who prove to you, time after time, that they don't have your best interests at heart? Their obfuscation proves the point.

 

[iluvatar5150]

Paranoid? Or not so much.

John 7:20 The people answered and said, Thou hast a devil: who goeth about to kill Thee?

Paranoid: "Exhibiting or characterized by extreme and irrational fear or distrust of others."

Is it irrational to distrust people who prove to you, time after time, that they don't have your best interests at heart? Their obfuscation proves the point.

The Federalist is nothing more than a low brow hysteria rag feeding you nonsense so that you juice their ad revenue. They don’t have your best interests at heart and yet you seem to have no problem trusting them.

 

[Sparagmos]

If anyone still believes that our leaders are sincere when they take an oath to protect and defend the Constitution, they might want to read what they actually think of it, as if they haven't already made it clear already:

"The National Archives Records Administration placed a “harmful content” warning on the Constitution, labeling the governing document of the United States as “harmful or difficult to view.” The warning applies to all documents across the Archives’ cataloged website, including the Bill of Rights and the Declaration of Independence."
National Archives Slaps 'Harmful Content' Warning On Constitution

Also interesting is that the same people have also declared that their own Rotunda that houses the Declaration of Independence, the US Constitution and the Bill of Rights – is an example of “structural racism” and that the Founding Fathers and other White, historically impactful Americans are portrayed too positively.
National Archives task force cites Rotunda as 'racism' example

What a ridiculous misrepresentation. It’s a blanket statement covering the entire catalogue, saving them the time of identifying each document which may contain difficult material.

 

[Sparagmos]

I'm guessing the preamble and the constitution itself is what they really want gone.
The lame excuses are just the usual smoke and mirrors.

"Want gone?" These are literally the people preserving and making sure that everyone has access to these historical documents.

 

[Aldebaran]

"Want gone?" These are literally the people preserving and making sure that everyone has access to these historical documents.

Slapping a warning label on the documents they're "protecting" shows their dim view of those documents. I'd like to see the same treatment being done on one of biden's speeches sometime when he makes a racist comment. I'd love to see the reaction of democrats if the keeper of presidential speeches put a trigger warning for "harmful content" on a biden speech where he makes one of his gaffes.

 

[Sparagmos]

But what are they really hiding? Things like this, maybe?
The Soviet Union and the United States - Revelations from the Russian Archives | Exhibitions - Library of Congress
https://historycollection.com/20-forgotten-atrocities-committed-by-the-allies-during-world-war-ii/
Because once the war crime files are opened... won't people wonder why the Bolsheviks before, and the cold war after, made the Soviets good allies in the WWs between?

Who is hiding anything? These are the people preserving history.

"We hold as undeniable truths that the governments of the various States, and of the confederacy itself, were established exclusively by the white race, for themselves and their posterity; that the African race had no agency in their establishment; that they were rightfully held and regarded as an inferior and dependent race, and in that condition only could their existence in this country be rendered beneficial or tolerable.

That in this free government *all white men are and of right ought to be entitled to equal civil and political rights* [emphasis in the original]; that the servitude of the African race, as existing in these States, is mutually beneficial to both bond and free, and is abundantly authorized and justified by the experience of mankind, and the revealed will of the Almighty Creator, as recognized by all Christian nations; while the destruction of the existing relations between the two races, as advocated by our sectional enemies, would bring inevitable calamities upon both and desolation upon the fifteen slave-holding states."

"In all the non-slave-holding States, in violation of that good faith and comity which should exist between entirely distinct nations, the people have formed themselves into a great sectional party, now strong enough in numbers to control the affairs of each of those States, based upon an unnatural feeling of hostility to these Southern States and their beneficent and patriarchal system of African slavery, proclaiming the debasing doctrine of equality of all men, irrespective of race or color-- a doctrine at war with nature, in opposition to the experience of mankind, and in violation of the plainest revelations of Divine Law. They demand the abolition of negro slavery throughout the confederacy, the recognition of political equality between the white and negro races, and avow their determination to press on their crusade against us, so long as a negro slave remains in these States."

 

[Sparagmos]

Slapping a warning label on the documents they're "protecting" shows their dim view of those documents. I'd like to see the same treatment being done on one of biden's speeches sometime when he makes a racist comment. I'd love to see the reaction of democrats if the keeper of presidential speeches put a trigger warning for "harmful content" on a biden speech where he makes one of his gaffes.

Most of us do have a dim view of some of these writings.

"In all the non-slave-holding States, in violation of that good faith and comity which should exist between entirely distinct nations, the people have formed themselves into a great sectional party, now strong enough in numbers to control the affairs of each of those States, based upon an unnatural feeling of hostility to these Southern States and their beneficent and patriarchal system of African slavery, proclaiming the debasing doctrine of equality of all men, irrespective of race or color-- a doctrine at war with nature, in opposition to the experience of mankind, and in violation of the plainest revelations of Divine Law. They demand the abolition of negro slavery throughout the confederacy, the recognition of political equality between the white and negro races, and avow their determination to press on their crusade against us, so long as a negro slave remains in these States."

 

[Sparagmos]

Slapping a warning label on the documents they're "protecting" shows their dim view of those documents. I'd like to see the same treatment being done on one of biden's speeches sometime when he makes a racist comment. I'd love to see the reaction of democrats if the keeper of presidential speeches put a trigger warning for "harmful content" on a biden speech where he makes one of his gaffes.

If those speeches are archived in this library, they will be under the banner that so offends you. Do you not understand what this disclaimer applies to?

 

[Aldebaran]

Most of us do have a dim view of some of these writings.

"In all the non-slave-holding States, in violation of that good faith and comity which should exist between entirely distinct nations, the people have formed themselves into a great sectional party, now strong enough in numbers to control the affairs of each of those States, based upon an unnatural feeling of hostility to these Southern States and their beneficent and patriarchal system of African slavery, proclaiming the debasing doctrine of equality of all men, irrespective of race or color-- a doctrine at war with nature, in opposition to the experience of mankind, and in violation of the plainest revelations of Divine Law. They demand the abolition of negro slavery throughout the confederacy, the recognition of political equality between the white and negro races, and avow their determination to press on their crusade against us, so long as a negro slave remains in these States."

Well, that's history as it was written at the time it was written. Some people could be offended by what is written today in 250 years. That would especially go for the "woke" speak currently being done. People living 250 years from now will read it and get a good laugh.

But think of this: Those who lived a couple centuries ago may have spoken differently than we're used to, and had somewhat different views on things, but they managed to break away from an oppressive government and find a new land to birth a brand new country that has become the greatest nation on earth. The "woke" of today could never accomplish anything like that, no matter how refined their newspeak is, and how politically correct they may try to be. The Founders of this country knew how to do what needed to be done, and make it last for centuries.

 

[rambot]

If anyone still believes that our leaders are sincere when they take an oath to protect and defend the Constitution, they might want to read what they actually think of it, as if they haven't already made it clear already:

"The National Archives Records Administration placed a “harmful content” warning on the Constitution, labeling the governing document of the United States as “harmful or difficult to view.” The warning applies to all documents across the Archives’ cataloged website, including the Bill of Rights and the Declaration of Independence."
National Archives Slaps 'Harmful Content' Warning On Constitution

Also interesting is that the same people have also declared that their own Rotunda that houses the Declaration of Independence, the US Constitution and the Bill of Rights – is an example of “structural racism” and that the Founding Fathers and other White, historically impactful Americans are portrayed too positively.
National Archives task force cites Rotunda as 'racism' example

This is an excellent example of The Federalist because it's terribly deceiving journalism...assuming you get to the second sentence.

. The National Archives Records Administration placed a “harmful content” warning on the Constitution, labeling the governing document of the United States as “harmful or difficult to view.” The warning applies to all documents across the Archives’ cataloged website, including the Bill of Rights and the Declaration of Independence.

my emphasis)
It was NOT put SPECIFICALLY on that one document. It was put on the entire archive ...blanket.

Do you really not think it's possible to find some pretty awful documents on there?

 

[Aldebaran]

This is an excellent example of The Federalist because it's terribly deceiving journalism...assuming you get to the second sentence.
my emphasis)
It was NOT put SPECIFICALLY on that one document. It was put on the entire archive ...blanket.

Do you really not think it's possible to find some pretty awful documents on there?

So they're saying the entire archive of founding documents is harmful? Imagine what they must think of the country itself.

 

[Ana the Ist]

If anyone still believes that our leaders are sincere when they take an oath to protect and defend the Constitution, they might want to read what they actually think of it, as if they haven't already made it clear already:

"The National Archives Records Administration placed a “harmful content” warning on the Constitution, labeling the governing document of the United States as “harmful or difficult to view.” The warning applies to all documents across the Archives’ cataloged website, including the Bill of Rights and the Declaration of Independence."
National Archives Slaps 'Harmful Content' Warning On Constitution

Also interesting is that the same people have also declared that their own Rotunda that houses the Declaration of Independence, the US Constitution and the Bill of Rights – is an example of “structural racism” and that the Founding Fathers and other White, historically impactful Americans are portrayed too positively.
National Archives task force cites Rotunda as 'racism' example

Huh?

 

[Gene2memE]

But what are they really hiding?

They're not hiding anything*. It's an online searchable archive of historical material available for public use. That's the opposite of hiding things.

*Well, except for the documents pulled in the 2000s for "national security" reasons.

Things like this, maybe?
The Soviet Union and the United States - Revelations from the Russian Archives | Exhibitions - Library of Congress
https://historycollection.com/20-forgotten-atrocities-committed-by-the-allies-during-world-war-ii/
Because once the war crime files are opened... won't people wonder why the Bolsheviks before, and the cold war after, made the Soviets good allies in the WWs between?

The US relationship with the Soviet Union during WW2 was an alliance of convenience, forced on both by the war. It fell apart rapidly in the years immediately following the war.

The pre-WW2 relationship between the US and the Soviet Union was limited and tenuous. The Soviet Union was primarily inward looking, and there was a strong streak of isolationism in the US - which was only exacerbated by the Great Depression.

Are you not taught any of this in the US?

 

[Aldebaran]

Huh?

Weird stuff, I know.

 

[Ana the Ist]

They're not hiding anything*. It's an online searchable archive of historical material available for public use. That's the opposite of hiding things.

*Well, except for the documents pulled in the 2000s for "national security" reasons.



The US relationship with the Soviet Union during WW2 was an alliance of convenience, forced on both by the war. It fell apart rapidly in the years immediately following the war.

The pre-WW2 relationship between the US and the Soviet Union was limited and tenuous. The Soviet Union was primarily inward looking, and there was a strong streak of isolationism in the US - which was only exacerbated by the Great Depression.

Are you not taught any of this in the US?

Not really no...I think high school likes to focus on the civil rights stuff, barely mentioning the cold war except to make it sound silly and overblown.

There's really no talk of the great terror, great purge, gulag, labor camps, mass starvation, and the total failure of communism in every nation that took a stab at it.

We love talking about nazis though.

 

[rambot]

So they're saying the entire archive of founding documents is harmful? Imagine what they must think of the country itself.

No, I'm not saying that.

Have you read the actual warning or been to the site?

That said, i am glad you now see the horse wallop that is reporting at The Federalist.

 

[SamanthaAnastasia]

If it's not the Constitution, the Constitution should not be included under the blanket statement.

That’s ridiculous.

But what are they really hiding? Things like this, maybe?
The Soviet Union and the United States - Revelations from the Russian Archives | Exhibitions - Library of Congress
https://historycollection.com/20-forgotten-atrocities-committed-by-the-allies-during-world-war-ii/
Because once the war crime files are opened... won't people wonder why the Bolsheviks before, and the cold war after, made the Soviets good allies in the WWs between?

If they were hiding it, you wouldn’t be able to find it in NARA.

"How many shrinks does it take to change a lightbulb?
Just one, but the light bulb really has to want to change."
True.
People can't believe non-MSM unless they're ready to change their mind.
aka
"You take the blue pill—the story ends, you wake up in your bed and believe whatever you want to believe. You take the red pill—you stay in Wonderland, and I show you how deep the rabbit hole goes."--Morpheus, The Matrix

I’m sorry but did you just quote The Matrix?

They're not hiding anything*. It's an online searchable archive of historical material available for public use. That's the opposite of hiding things.

*Well, except for the documents pulled in the 2000s for "national security" reasons.



The US relationship with the Soviet Union during WW2 was an alliance of convenience, forced on both by the war. It fell apart rapidly in the years immediately following the war.

The pre-WW2 relationship between the US and the Soviet Union was limited and tenuous. The Soviet Union was primarily inward looking, and there was a strong streak of isolationism in the US - which was only exacerbated by the Great Depression.

Are you not taught any of this in the US?

This.




Y’all acting like you ain’t talkin to a librarian or somethin

 

[Nithavela]

But what are they really hiding? Things like this, maybe?
The Soviet Union and the United States - Revelations from the Russian Archives | Exhibitions - Library of Congress
https://historycollection.com/20-forgotten-atrocities-committed-by-the-allies-during-world-war-ii/
Because once the war crime files are opened... won't people wonder why the Bolsheviks before, and the cold war after, made the Soviets good allies in the WWs between?

Yes, the stuff you were easily able to find is the stuff they're "really hiding". That checks out.