Stanislaw Rajmund Burzynski, M.D., Ph.D and “Freedom of Speech”
“The most stringent protection of free speech would not protect a man in falsely shouting ‘fire’ in a theater and causing a panic.”
United States Supreme Court ruled 3/3/1919
Schenck v. United States, 249 U.S. 47 (1919)
Am I implying on blogs, Facebook, and Twitter that Burzynski is perfect ?
But are critics who post their thoughts on blogs, Facebook, and Twitter, without seemingly doing “Fact-Checking” before “Inserting Foot into Mouth,” any better than someone shouting “FIRE” in a crowded theater?
I propose that they are NOT
I have made it clear why I am here:
Post #152 – Didymus Judas Thomas
Post #151 – OccamsLaser – Mr. Laser
Post #151 – OccamsLaser
Mr. Thomas –
“I hope it encourages you to hear that your efforts are definitely contributing to the public image of the defining characteristics of supporters of Dr. Burzynski; …”
Thank you for ignoring my above post #150!!
You just don’t “get it,” do you???
Let me quote from:
1997 – The Dividing Line Between the Role of the FDA and the Practice of Medicine:
A Historical Review and Current Analysis (Citing Burzynski)
1997 – The Criminalization of Innovation: FDA Misdirection in the Najarian and Burzynski Cases
Strong sentiments, pro and con, were expressed by jurors on both sides
The jury foreman, John Coan, favored acquittal:
He is quoted in the New York Times:
“The fact that we didn’t make a unanimous decision 1 way or another does not mean we didn’t make a decision,” Coan said
“The decision is that he is neither guilty nor innocent doesn’t mean he doesn’t need to do work within his practice, and the FDA obviously needs to pursue things as well”
This is an example of a page. Unlike posts, which are displayed on your blog’s front page in the order they’re published, pages are better suited for more timeless content that you want to be easily accessible, like your About or Contact information. Click the Edit link to make changes to this page or add another page.