19 votes

Leave Michael Nystrom alone and stop talking about your 1st amendment rights here

Now some of you will down vote this without even reading it which makes you twice as ignorant and help prove my point.

This is a common problem and I am sick of it. Leave the guy alone or start your own forum.

Why does Michael need a reason at all to explain his actions or how he runs his website? It's his site he has the right to do what he wants without having to explain it to anyone.

For those of you claiming he is censoring me, ok so what if he is? You have the right to censor someone on your site too.

This is my personal favorite.

For those of you that are going to claim that he is infringing on your 1st amendment rights are plain IGNORANT and need to go back and re read the constitution and bill of rights. It says CONGRESS SHALL MAKE NO LAW, not Michael Nystrom shall make no law, what rights do you think you have here? Answer, NONE! You are a guest on someone else private property, you are free to start your own site and run it how ever you wish; however, you have NO RIGHT to tell anyone on their private property what to do.

That's a big problem around here, many claim to want to defend the constitution and stand up for their right but they don't even understand the constitution or their rights. How do you protect and defend something when you have no clue what it means? This makes all of you that are ignorant of your rights and the constitution no better than the people you complain about daily.

There is a saying, better to sit there and look like an idiot, than to open your mouth and remove all doubt.

Please, before you speak about rights and the constitution as fact, know what you are talking about first. Ignorance does not help our cause.

Disclaimer : I am in no way speaking for Michael Nystrom and have no direct knowledge of censorship or not, I am just an upset and concerned DP member that one day hopes some of you that are ignorant will become educated and help our movement.

Trending on the Web

Comment viewing options

Select your preferred way to display the comments and click "Save settings" to activate your changes.

If you

are on my private property talking smack, I will first ask you to leave, then I will force you.

Until then....


Ron brought the Liberty movement together, Rand is expanding the crap out of it! :)

wolfe's picture

That was quite possibly...

the most painful thing I have ever seen in my life. I had to watch it to the end, I don't know why, but please for the love of god/universe, don't ever post that again. I strongly suspect multiple viewings would generate genetic mutations in my future offspring.

And through the whole thing I kept trying to figure out, if it was real/fake, male/female, if this person is a secret stalker...

And who is this Britney he/she speaks.

The Philosophy Of Liberty -


Brittany Spears.

Ron brought the Liberty movement together, Rand is expanding the crap out of it! :)

I 2nd that...

Libertarians who believe in all public property are just communists who believe in civil liberties. Private property is essential to libertarian philosophy, and this is Mike's private property.

One world, under government, with power and money for the elite

I haven't seen anyone harp on Micheal lately

so I am not sure why you brought this up again!! But since you did and since I haven't said much on the matter in the many, many times this has already been brought up, I will now.

I am fully aware that this is Micheal's site and he can do with it what he wants. That is largely why I haven't said too much.

1. I like the Peace and love theme and I hope people keep those things in their hearts whether they stay here or not.
2. The gold part is all Micheal because he is a monetary guy and well, the world does seem to revolve around it.
3. I am saddened by the loss of some posters here in the most recent battle-- the Boston Bombings. I have a post in my head about this if I ever put it down into words. The title would be "even when it is fake, it is real"
4. I am totally offended by moderators changing people's posts, their words. I expect when someone's name is on something that it is their words. This makes me reluctant to post here. Many many moons ago I left a motorcycle forum for that very reason. No, that is not meant as a threat, as nobody would miss me here. But it is information Micheal might want to consider since this is a business and all.


He is Defending Freedom

...His freedom, to keep things that look like wacko talk to a minimum. Even if a conspiracy is true, if it makes us look bad to talk about it, and is hard to prove, posting it too much just turns potential supporters away. It is better to ask questions, or present facts that conflict with the current spin, ...like Swann does, and let the reader come up with the conspiracy theory themselves, thinking it is their own idea, after being presented with nothing but provable facts.

A wise man once said

When you defend freedom, you may not like what others choose to do with their freedom. Michael and the mods certainly have the right censor anything they deem worthy of it; but is that defending freedom?

Michael Nystrom's picture

It is defending the ultimate freedom

The freedom of association. The freedom of private property.

Listen, before I ran the Daily Paul, I ran a bulletin board at Bull! Not Bull. (www.bullnotbull.com) Back then, before I learned what I did from Dr. Paul, and before I truly understood the First Amendment, I held the attitude that (I think) you hold.

Wait, since it is hard to tell exactly what you are saying from a short comment -- whether you're being sincere or sarcastic -- I'll just speak for myself: My attitude back when I was still running that great board at Bull! Not bull was all,

Oh, everybody has a right to say what they want and everyone's opinion has equal weight and should be heard.

Boy did I get a lesson! There was one user on that board - and it was such a good discussion board. It rivaled the DP in terms of the level of discussion - but there was one user who called himself "Lord Rothschild," and he took over that board. There is at least one guy here on the DP - user #4, the strangerr - who was there and witnessed it.

Lord Rothschild took over that board and dominated it with all kinds of crazy BS. Took the discussion down weird rabbit holes and out the other end. Absolute nonsense, and he basically ruined that discussion board. He ruined it because I let him. I let him because I didn't understand the concept of private property. I didn't understand that Bull! Not bull was mine. I was steeped in all the communistic, collectivistic BS that we all get fed in public school, the kind that says,

Oh, everybody has a right to say what they want and everyone's opinion has equal weight and should be heard.

Back then - 2005 - this whole thing - the internet, discussion boards - it was all new. No one knew the rules. We were making them up along the way, as we still are.

Back in 2005, I didn't understand what you don't understand, and what apparently half the people who have voted this thread down down understand.

And BTW, thank you neverquit for posting it. I guess it just has to be said again and again and again and again and again and again because 1) so many people got such a crap education, and 2) they never learn. Not even after the whole cycle with Dr. Paul and what he was teaching. They still didn't learn the lesson.

And while I don't practice hagiography either (hat tip to dwalters for the new word), for those of you who do (and I know you're out there!) I once spoke to Dr. Paul about this very subject. About kicking people off the site who then biatched and complained to high heaven about it as many here to, and continue to, through their proxies. And Dr. Paul said,

"That's ridiculous. Its your property - you can do whatever you want with it."

So all you folks who whine that Ron Paul would never endorse "censorship" - stuff it! I'm tired of hearing your ignorant ramblings.

But really, it is nothing on you, dear reader, because I suffered from the same illusion until I met Dr. Paul and he clarified these things for me, as he has done for many of us here. For some people that hasn't sunk in yet. And it is you that I'm addressing it to: Shut your pie hole long enough to listen, and think.

For God's sake. For once. Just THINK.

I had that mushy "Oh, everybody has a right to say what they want and everyone's opinion has equal weight and should be heard" because I had only the vaguest understanding about the First Amendment. But as the post above clarifies, the First Amendement applies to the government.

If The Government has any use at all, it is to protect liberty. I can do what I want with my person, and my property, and no one else has a say in it. That is my right. That is yours, too.

- - - -

As things stand, on balance, I enjoy having this non-stop conversation, this never ending party known as the Daily Paul. I enjoy this conversation within certain parameters. You are all my guests. But what kind of a host would I be if I did not maintain a certain level of decorum, a certain level of intellectual integrity, and a certain level of courtesy.

The Daily Paul may be a party, but it is not a college kegger.

So the other day we banned a guy who put up a post claiming that no one actually died on 9/11.

Now, to quote one of the commenters on that post,

"There are some conspiracies that have legs and are worth pursuing, others are just grasping at straws."

I can hardly say it any better.

In the same post, that guy - the guy trying to push the "No one died on 911" meme - went on to list about a dozen names on here that he claimed were "Government disinformation agents."

- - - - -

And now, we come to the end of the preable where we can address your question directly.

Michael and the mods certainly have the right censor anything they deem worthy of it; but is that defending freedom?

You tell me. Is that defending freedom or not? I believe that is utter nonsense. Why should I allow the Daily Paul - my property - to allow someone to push that meme?

If I have no control over my own website, and I go back to that mush-brained idea that "Oh, everybody has a right to say what they want and everyone's opinion has equal weight and should be heard", then what happens to my freedom? If I were to submit to that kind of mob mentality, then I would be back in 2005, letting the "Lord Rothschild's" of the Daily Paul run the site into the ground.

If that is the standard we must accept at all times and all places, what happens to your freedom?

But let's look at it from the banned poster's angle. Has been muzzled? NO! This is the age of the internet. Take it to Facebook - they'll take anything. Likewise with God Like Productions. There are plenty of other sites out there that would be happy to host his "No one died on 911" fantasy. Nothing against any of those sites. But the Daily Paul is not one of them.

The Daily Paul cannot be all things to all people. And my old mush brained idea that "Oh, everybody has a right to say what they want and everyone's opinion has equal weight and should be heard" has been replaced with a new one:

Not all opinions are created equal.

silly question

Is the user name "Lord Rothschild" available on the DP? :)

This discussion takes me back to April!

Some 2 1/2 to 3 months ago, a few forum members got all wound-up and mega-defensive in response to the fact that one or two DP Forum members got banned. I jumped into that discussion with a series of facts, rather than a defense based entirely upon "personal opinion". My only goal was to act as a "branch of defense" for Michael....for I firmly believe that he reserves the right to ban ANY DP forum member at ANY time, regardless of the reason. As I see it, this is Mike's place he's da boss! I am honored to be here as an equal participant. Here is a "copy n paste" for my Defense For Michael Nystrom....as it was posted on April 22, 2013.

- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -

As I read the numerous argumentive comments and responses to this post, it is important to go back to the roots of this site. Michael Nystrom created a guide for the Daily Paul, to which I have posted that link (obviously) in the subject line, above.

Here is a copy n paste of an excerpt from Mr. Nystrom's list of guidelines:

"This website is my private property. Participating here is a privilege, not a right. Understanding the difference between these concepts is fundamental to understanding the message of freedom and liberty".

As Michael clearly states, the Daily Paul website is HIS private property. We, as forum users, do NOT have the RIGHT to be here. Instead, Miichael has given us the "privilege" to be here. Therefore, Michael reserves the right to to ban a user from commenting at Daily Paul. Should Mr. Nystrom decide to ban a member of the Daily Paul forums, he does NOT owe anyone an explanation.

The ONLY person (to MY understanding) who maintains the RIGHT to be here, is Michael Nystrom. Feel free to correct me if I am wrong.

From my personal viewpoint, Michael Nystrom has proven himself to be a kind, fair, intelligent, reasonable and friendly individual. This site has served as an excellent source of information and comaraderie. For that, I thank Michael Nystrom, plus I thank all of the GOOD people who enjoy the "privelege" to post here.

Robby Lane

Robby Lane

best most epic rant ever.

best most epic rant ever.

Thank you

Thank you for a well written, thought provoking post on a subject that to me, is the heart of freedom: ownership.

To own oneself, thoughts, words, opinions, actions, ideas, products, choices, and to claim them, accept responsibility for them.

Ownership is responsibility. It's not seeking who or what to blame, but looking at ourselves and asking the hard questions: "What part did I have in what went wrong, or what went right, or why it works or doesn't?" Maybe that's why I see myself as a perpetual student here.. I'm always learning something. I thank you for that too.

"I'm always learning something."

That is why I still have hope :-)

However, lately...

Granger, are you going to Stand with Rand up until 2016 and then at the last minute pull the plug, the same way that you and your leftist neocons with an ulterior motive did to Ron? Are you still talking to rove? Sometime I like to seek who or what to blame by looking and asking the hard questions :-)

"What if the American people learn the truth" - Ron Paul

who are what to blame?

When you say that you are seeking, "who or what to blame", it occures to me that this is the foundation of our disputes.

I never seek, "who or what to blame".

I believe that the mentality of, seeking who or what to blame, comes from believing that you are not in control, a perpetual victim. It's someone's else's fault what happens in your life.

When events happen that I don't like, or want, I ask myself, "What did I do, or fail to do, that caused me to fail?" I blame myself.

I take responsibility for my life, my choices, my actions and lack of actions, my words, my deeds, and my lack of words and deeds.

Presently, I am standing with Rand in my elected committee seat, where I am not alone, and I see there is already an inside interest on who is going to the RNC to support Rand.

Presently, I am not interested in keeping my seat past 2014, when my term is up, which would disqualify me from going to the RNC.

If it is someone and something you feel the need to place blame, by all means dear (((((PAF)))) blame me. Bury me in your garbage.

That's what friends are for.

"Bury me in your garbage."

That comment would offend somebody who is not confident, yields no results, or is not active. That comment is something that glenn beck would say on a routine basis. I can see now who you follow.

I feel that as a friend I can tell you anything, so here goes: Give up. Do what you want. With my momentum and yielding results, it does not matter if you are in this fight, or not, or even on the opposing side.

(((((Granger))))), you always put a smile on my face :-)

"What if the American people learn the truth" - Ron Paul


I'm so relieved that you can now see.

I don't follow any media.. the only gb I have ever seen are parts of some clips here on DP.. I'm not a gb fan, nor do I listen to radio or watch tv.. never did..

Friends don't tell friends to give up.

And I agree, it does not matter if I am in this fight or not.

What matters is that you are in this fight.

DON'T GIVE UP! ((((PAF)))) http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=bx796zSg5gs

Michael, you never have to

Michael, you never have to thank me for speaking the truth, that is my duty as a citizen. I am just tired of the backlash you get, it is unwarranted. I know from experience that whenever someone sticks their neck out for the cause, many try and chop it off because they are uneducated.

It saddens me, it isn't supposed to be this way, we are all supposed to be on the same team, fighting for the same things. I am at the point and have said before.

Go to Salon.com and read their bullshit propaganda, the so called libertarian magazine. Yes they have you back.

LEAD, FOLLOW OR GET THE FUCK OUT OF THE WAY, I don't care what path you take any more, just take one and shut the fuck up. ignorance does not help our cause when people state their ignorant comments as fact, it makes all of us look ignorant. The media has afield day with it.

Think about it, I used to live in Chicago, we had murders on a daily basis, they never found the guy in a suit to do the interview, they always found the brother with the pink curlers in his hair and why? Because it takes away from the seriousness of the context.

Wake up people, stop being assholes and grow up.

I know I sound harsh, but that is the way it is. I am speaking my freedom and if I offended some of you GOOD, now look in the mirror and think about the context of my post.

Michael keep up the good work, I support you man.

libertarians (small "l" on purpose) should be grateful...

that this site exists.

It is one of the few places on this vast internet that we know our voices will be heard - given that they don't quickly sink into the DP abyss of non-influential posts.

Whether it be through fortunate URL or design or otherwise, this site is one of the most frequented liberty sites out there.

Private property is private property. If some racist bastard comes into your house, you certainly have the right to kick him or her out. A website is no different.

We should all thank Michael for allowing us to stand upon his property and voice our opinions from this prime real estate where the acoustics are so marvelous.

Thanks Michael.

where ol Rodney King

when you need him

cain't weall just get along (tongue piercing thru three butt cheeks)

RE: Site ownership

"Why does Michael need a reason at all to explain his actions or how he runs his website? It's his site he has the right to do what he wants without having to explain it to anyone."

He doesn't but any revenues generated by this site require:

1. Happy advertisers with an audience for ads.

2. Happy paying subscribers.

Furthermore, since the property card has been played and this site is nothing more than intellectual property that means intellectual property exists according to the OP. So, if I walk into your house do you own the shirt on my back? If you have a policy that states if I walk into your house that you can take possession of the shirt off my back because you now own it have you justly acquired my shirt because I entered your publicly accessible property? Since the OP is essentially arguing for IP, does the same apply to all the ideas espoused herein? Does a sign which states some shirts will be forcefully removed make it a just policy? If someone was invited in your house, because it is accessible to the public, wearing a shirt you found offensive would you just walk over and take it from them without saying anything?

I am not all that opinionated on this topic. I just wanted to chime in because every rant has opposing points. Nor am I offering any suggestions to any points raised in my comments but I do think in general (which is my own meaningless personal opinion) if you would not do a thing to someone who has been invited in your publicly accessible house, it ought not be done here including moderation. This site, like any other site that can be accessed by the general public, offers a de facto invitation to people.

Finally, if anyone is going to make an issue out of reading the general disclaimer or any other site policy I would consider a perfectly reasonable response to be: "No, because I was not offered any payment or benefit for my time to do so."

I look forward to any educational value of any responses to this comment.

If you came to my house

and I asked you to please not wear that slimy looking green shirt again. Then you do so, do I have to right to tell you to leave? Or is it that because of your freedom of speech I have to put up with your slimy green shirt? It IS my house, and you can wear that stupid shirt if you want to, but not at MY house.

I always thought that the

1st amendment was the right to speak out about the Government without the fear of a treason charge.
I didn't think it gave the "right" to all out name calling and cruelty, simply because you disagree with an individuals stance or life style.
After all, isn't liberty about individual tolerance?

you have some weird ideas

The first amendment tells you what it is about.

it is about not abridging freedom of speech

about not establishing a state religion

about not preventing the practice of religion

about the rights of free assembly

Nowhere is it confined to speech about the government or treason (and in fact if one commits treason the first amendment isn't going to help you much).

And liberty and tolerance are separate concepts. They both can co-exist, or not.

"Two things are infinite: the universe and human stupidity; and I'm not sure about the the universe."-- Albert Einstein

It am really amazed by some

It am really amazed by some of the comments, it's like the entire context was lost and you are looking for ways to support your own agenda in your favor, grow up please.

Let me address some things.

# 1 : Who ever said your opinion doesn't count here because you don't donate to the site? Where did that ever come up by anyone other than yourself?

# 2 : Yes you $5 a month members, I am sure Michael appreciates your support but that does not give you any rights to dictate how he runs his website, let the free market work, if you don't like what he has been doing you are free to leave and stop donating. Just because you donate to the site doesn't give you any additional say in how it's run. Michael believes in the free market, let the free market work.

# 3 : It seems many talk about how they love freedom, but when? Only if it is the freedom you want and support? What happened to people being free to make their own choices so long as they don't harm you or your property. You do not have the right to NOT be offended, you also don't have the right to tell someone else how to use their freedom.

Last, I think everyone on occasion needs to look in the mirror before they lash out at others. Sometimes before you can change things, you need to change yourself first.

My entire post

was tongue in cheek - or sarcastic (however you want to look at it).
I just said that about the not contributing before someone else did.

I'm sure, that if I had a legitimate suggestion, it would be considered and possibly implemented. As it is, I have no complaints about how it's laid out or ran.

Mostly that was post was just to show how ridiculous things could get. In fact they could get much worse than that - I know - I've seen it happen on other forums.

Of course I can't afford to contribute money

so my opinions MUST be the best and have to be regarded!
(that's said "tongue in cheek!)

If someone post something I don't like or totally disagree with then why would I even want to read it????

If I down check something I always try to make some post explaining why. I figure up checks speak for themselves.

I think he should include "Betty Boop" (http://3.bp.blogspot.com/-FoCoakQBi6g/Th2pfzW1zUI/AAAAAAAAAC...) in the header, along with "Puff the Magic Dragon" (http://1.bp.blogspot.com/_mBasfSNyWbg/SVcOjb1qRKI/AAAAAAAABu...)!

But then, what I think is irrelevant - It's Michael's site!

I find that most of the world's problems...

...derive from the fact that most people are idiots.

The DP is no exception to this rule.

"Alas! I believe in the virtue of birds. And it only takes a feather for me to die laughing."

Many months ago,

I misunderstood this point of private versus public property. Michael replied to my comment and pointed out the error in my thinking.

The right to be wrong cannot be infringed. ~Octobox

I thank Michael for recognizing this reality. I hate being wrong, but it happens.

Free includes debt-free!

The right to be wrong cannot be infringed. ~Octobox


I'm taking your comment and the quote as my cue to get on the ball establishing August 1 as 'Your right to be wrong day'.

Thanks bunches.

Tweeting occasionally as himself @cudnoski on the twitter.

Oh, I thought that was Constitution Day.

It has cost us $17 Trillion or more when The Constitutional Convention gave Congress the authority to borrow and tax. It's their right to be wrong, but not when it costs us.

Or when the Department of Treasury was created.

There has never been any treasure. Peter Schiff was right about that, too.

What's the point of wasting money on Treasury with no treasure. Nobody does stupid like government.

But I'll fix my calender.

Free includes debt-free!