The Left is working hard to destroy the freedom of speech and silence all those who dissent from the globalist, internationalist, socialist and pro-jihad agenda. Leftist politicians already maneuvered Trump into signing one measure against “hate groups,” when the Southern Poverty Law Center’s manipulative and propagandistic “hate group” list includes legitimate groups along with the KKK and the neo-Nazis, in an attempt to destroy them.
This whole concept of “hate groups” and “hate speech” is contrary to the freedom of speech. If “hate speech” is proscribed by the government, a tyranny will be established in which Leftists can simply outlaw and deny all platforms to those they hate by labeling them in this way. It’s coming, unless enough people wake up in time.
“‘War on free speech’: Conservatives warn Trump of ‘hate’ measure,” by Art Moore, World Net Daily, October 6, 2017:
A collection of conservative leaders have written to President Trump, Senate Majority Leader Mitch McConnell and Speaker of the House Paul Ryan expressing “grave concern” about a joint resolution approved by the Senate and House targeting “hate speech.”
Hastily enacted Sept. 14 without public debate, Public Law 115-58, the leaders write, could “lead to unconstitutional suppression of freedom of expression aimed at silencing those smeared by political opponents as, for example, ‘haters,’ ‘racists’ or ‘bigots.’”
“Many of us have been slandered in this fashion, falsely characterized as ‘white supremacists’ or some other, similarly disparaging epithet simply because we support, for example, traditional marriage, civil liberties rather than Sharia, secure borders and the enforcement of our immigration laws and/or effective counterterrorism policies,” they write.
Even worse, they say, the name-calling is “just the leading edge of an aggressive campaign to ruin the financial condition and prevent the widespread dissemination of the work of individuals and groups being targeted for what amounts to unrestricted political warfare.”
The statute “urges the President and his administration to speak out against hate groups that espouse racism, extremism, xenophobia, anti-Semitism, and White supremacy and use all resources available to the President and the President’s Cabinet to address the growing prevalence of those hate groups in the United States.”
The letter calls upon the attorney general, the secretary of homeland security and the heads of other federal agencies to engage in such activities as investigating “thoroughly all acts of violence, intimidation, and domestic terrorism by White supremacists, White nationalists, neo-Nazis, the Ku Klux Klan, and associated groups” and to improve “the reporting of hate crimes and to emphasize the importance of the collection, and the reporting to the Federal Bureau of Investigation, of hate crime data by State and local agencies.”
The problem, the leaders say, is that the statute does not define terms such as “hate group,” “white supremacist,” “extremist,” “anti-immigrant” and “xenophobia.”
“These open-ended mandates, they argue, “invite abuses of power by the state.”
Among the signatories are Frank Gaffney of the Center for Security Policy, retired U.S. Navy Admiral James Ace Lyons Jr., Mat Staver of Liberty Counsel, Robert Spencer of Jihad Watch, Brigitte Gabriel of ACT! For America, Joseph Farah of WND.com and DHS whistleblower Philip Haney.
The statute particularly gives legitimacy and power to “self-appointed arbiters of ‘hate,’ such as the discredited Southern Poverty Law Center and others on the radical left and their Islamic allies, the conservative leaders warn….
In their letter, the conservative leaders point to other bills “designed to further advance this agenda and now awaiting consideration may similarly be foisted upon the American people to their grave detriment.”
The bills include:
- “The National Opposition to Hate, Assault, and Threats to Equality Act of 2017” — the “No HATE Act” — which would expand governmental efforts to collect “hate crimes” data and create private rights of action for “crimes motivated by actual or perceived race, color, religion, or national origin.”
- Senate Resolution 118, passed in April, which condemns “any other form of racism, religious or ethnic bias, discrimination, incitement to violence, or animus targeting a minority in the United States.” The conservative leaders contend it cites discredited data about hate crimes to justify intensified federal action to “detect and deter hate crimes to protect minority communities.”
- “The Disarm Hate Act,” House Continuing Resolution 77, urges the president “to prohibit the hiring of individuals … who have supported or encouraged support for White supremacists” and “to use all available resources of the office of the President and the Cabinet to address the growing prevalence of such hate groups domestically.”
The conservative leaders contend the legislative initiatives “share a false narrative, namely that the United States is overwhelmed with large numbers of ‘white supremacists’ and individuals and groups allegedly associated with them who pose a threat to the rights of minorities and other Americans.”
“This narrative is unsupported by the facts,” they write. “More importantly, this narrative is based on the same undefined terms now codified in PL115-58, terms that are used to defame and incapacitate people and organizations like the signatories of this letter simply because they effectively oppose the agenda of those who have made a cottage industry of ‘hate’ and employ it as an instrument of political warfare.”…
Guest says
This is not about “publics safety” this is about taking power from the people and giving it to the government
johan elzinga says
My thoughts exactly!
Paul N Silas says
Hate = anti-Left, it’s that simple. These people have one goal,, and they will achieve it anyway that they believe that they can. A one world Globalist/Marxist world.
Right now we are seeing a war on Western Culture as that is what stops their political Satanic Religion.
Islam is just one of their weapons, lies, fake news, and violence are others.
In God we trust!
Shane says
This bill is so onesided as it assumes only White people can be haters. Certainly, groups like BLM, the Nation of Islam, NCLRaza, and many anti-White left-wing groups should be considered hate groups. We must kill this bill.
Benedict says
The Left will only learn when Muslims with their snake religion start to squeeze the air out of them. Until then they will continue with their appeasement policy.
steve k says
Thats the two pronged strategy
1. Declare any speech the left doesn;t like as “hate speech” and then
2. Outlaw so-called hate speech (or what they are doing now, socially criminalizing it)
That way they can control everything and no one can dissent.
The modern left call themselves “liberals” and “progressives” but they are really totalitarians
mummymovie says
Yes, no mention whatsoever of Islamic supremacy- Go figure!
gravenimage says
+1
SweetOlBob says
Sounds just like what Canada is doing under that cute little “Toodle Oooo” or whatever the hell his name is. He sure kisses lots of muslim fannies …. but he’s so cute !
katherine says
Muslim orgs. not mentioned among the Hate Groups ? That’s a revelation.
mummymovie says
Right???
katherine says
Trump really needs to employ a linguist or semanticist as a personal assistant. The way these Bills are presented, he wouldn’t know if he’s signing his own death warrant.
Ivanka and Kushner ? Those are fashion statements – not all Jews are created equal and where’s the dedication when you go on vacation with a crucial healthcare Bill being fought over.
mummymovie says
Trump really needs to employ a linguist or semanticist as a personal assistant. The way these Bills are presented, he wouldn’t know if he’s signing his own death warrant.
You said it.
The bills, and not just the way they are titled, but with the other addendums and often completely unrelated items they slip in there are very deceptively written.
In this case, though -especially with Brigitte, Frank and Robert’s names on them, let’s just hope the SOB reads the damn thing!
I have my doubts, and for good reason-
I’m very disappointed on DJT’s keeping the ‘refugee’ cap at a whopping 45,000; this is our big problem that is going to explode in our faces unless we do something about it. I was hoping Sessions (who has a mastery of knowledge where the refugee resettlement program is concerned) would lead the charge on pinching this program off altogether, but my hopes have been dashed. The travel ban is just a smoke screen, and DJT seems to just be McMasturbating around the white house these days, just like his predecessors.
Meanwhile serious efforts are underway to silence us right here in America.
carpediadem says
This is the difference between the conservatives and the Left.
Conservatives hope their representative will read their minds and figure electing him was enough. It isn’t.
The Left groups lobby directly to their representatives and politicians with very clear intent and communication – up close and personal.
Guy Forester says
Someone please show me where in the main body of the US Constitution or the Bill of Rights the government was given authority to define for us what we may say and think.
Steve's nephew says
Instead of using the term “hate speech” why not use the term “opposition speech.” I don’t hate them, but I am opposed to them and their ideology.
mortimer says
The Left has NO DIFFICULTY defining what they HATE… but the HATE of the LEFT is LEGITIMATE HATE, while everyone else is stigmatized as a HATER.
This is absurd.
The Left has arrogated to itself the SOLE right of defining what is HATE and nothing that the Left HATES is every called ‘HATE SPEECH’.
The SUPREME COURT has no definition of hate speech so it cannot condemn any opinion.
Even if Congress defined a definition of HATE speech, the Supreme Court could not grant the right of INFALLILIBITY to the Congress. How does Congress or any other government or parliament know for certain that any OPINION is the CORRECT or TRUE opinion? They cannot know and therefore the safest course is to allow freedom of expression so that the market place and science can determine what is true and what is without rational support.
Lydia says
In this context, hate = opposing their global agendas.
mortimer says
HATE CANNOT BE DEFINED UNDER THE US CONSTITUTION
FREEDOM OF SPEECH IS THE RIGHT TO OFFEND—EVEN TO BLASPHEME
U.S. law values and permits the right to blaspheme because THERE IS NO ESTABLISHED ‘American religion’. What is ‘sacred’ to one person may be highly ‘blasphemous’ to another. Without an officially defined state religion, it is not the responsibility of the judges to intervene.
-Justice Clark in 1952 wrote: “…it is enough to point out that the state has no legitimate interest in protecting any or all religions from views distasteful to them. … It is not the business of government in our nation to suppress real or imagined attacks upon a particular religious doctrine.”
-Justice Frankfurter noted that beliefs that are “…dear to one may seem the rankest ‘sacrilege’ to another,” and added concerning “sacrilegious” speech: “…history does not encourage reliance on the wisdom and moderation of the censor.”
SweetOlBob says
and Freedom of Speech is also the right to say that some morons idea of a perfect man is a pedophile, a murderer, and a hallucinating madman !
mummymovie says
15 years imprisonment in England for viewing “far-right” material online??!?!?!?!?!!! You’ve got to be kidding me.
Is this what we have in store up around the corner here in the good ol’ USA?
How the hell did we get here all of a sudden??
What is the best way to counter the OIC, and support efforts in defense of free speech?
This is getting really scary.
Anybody have any suggestions?
gravenimage says
Yes–this is getting scarier all the time. I can’t believe what is going on with crushing freedom of speech in Britain and Canada–places that used to be bastions of freedom.
Kay says
I wish someone had some– some way to undo these legislations.
The situation is already worse here than most realize. Just search the required trainings your local public employees and teachers are required to attend. As always, go beyond the title. This stuff goes by lots of names now.
gravenimage says
Conservatives warn Trump that “hate speech” resolution is tool of Left to silence dissent
…………………….
True.
carpediadem says
So are conservatives going to form a a group about this or what? Or does writing letters, important as that is, constitute the full arsenal of their weaponry?
Do conservatives learn nothing from the methods of the Left? Organising a group is an excellent way to become visible, as is sending a representative or holding a (non-violent) demonstration in front of the White House, especially on a matter like this.
Text can be good, but face time counts.
Has anyone noted the lack of credibility of the SPLC?
eduardo odraude says
Support Robert Spencer’s AFDI and join Brigitte Gabriel’s Act for America. Act for America lets you get involved in these issues in a whole range of ways, from lightly, to very activist.
Creole Gumbo says
The 1st Amendment was written for the protection of “hate” and/or any other speech deemed to be unpopular. THERE IS NO NEED TO PROTECT SPEECH THAT OFFENDS NO ONE.
Aussie Infidel says
I, and no doubt many others, wrote to President Trump, urging him not to sign Public Law 115-58. But obviously, our protests had no effect. The enemies of free speech, in both the Democrats and the President’s own Party, now have one foot in the door to kill off the First Amendment. And as a bonus, they have created grounds for the President’s impeachment if they can only twist his arm a little further on some future issue.
Without strict definitions of what constitutes a “hate group,” “extremist,” etc, these open-ended terms will only be applied to individuals or groups who do not agree with Leftist or Islamic ideology. Look at what has happened in other countries like Britain, and also here in Australia, which have enacted similar legislation. Many people have suffered years of emotional and financial stress from legal action taken by the government because of a complaint from someone, that they have ‘offended’ their religious or cultural sensitivities. Limiting free speech is used simply to silence critics of those who want to limit free speech – and usually they have a nefarious covert agenda, or other issue to hide.
Freedom of speech cannot be limited without being lost.
eduardo odraude says
To all: Phone calls to representatives and government are literally about 100 times as powerful as email. Be polite and know what you want to say. A minute of research on the internet about call strategies is probably a good idea.
John Forbes says
I certainly hope that TRUMP stops this hate speech idiocy & get people like Ibrahim Hooper out of the US !
Gets rid of C.A.I.R & the Southern Poverty Law Group along with Linda Sarsour !
These groups & people want the US to be ISLAMIC & under SHARIA eventually & very few seem to really understand this !!
John Forbes says
The hate speech issue is all about silencing dissent & getting an EXCLUSIVE PLACE for ISLAM safe from criticism & scrutiny where the Muslim Brotherhood agenda can be safely actioned in the Democracy that they seek to DESTROY !
It is AMAZING that the LEFT is allied with ISLAM & this is something I simply cannot understand at all !!
eduardo odraude says
Several reasons for the alliance, in no particular order:
1) Many on the left feel unconnected to religion. To them, all religions look alike. So they figure opposition to Islam is just bigotry, not opposition to a uniquely totalitarian religion. The attitude of many on the left toward religion is analogous to that of the racist who, having no connections to another race, says they “all look alike.” But even if one is an atheist, one can see that the Islamic paradigm tends toward totalitarian outcomes to an extent that is way above and beyond that of the other major religions.
2) The left has fewer people who are concerned about an expanded state and growing state power, except when led by the right wing statists. Many people on the left are not vigilant about left wing statism and indeed have barely a clue about the danger, especially when the danger comes from a direction opposed by Republicans. One saw this for example with communism in the past, which many on the left assumed was not so bad, maybe no worse than a liberal democracy, and besides, if the people didn’t want communism, they would have gotten rid of it, right? Yeah, right, just tell Stalin to take a hike. Tell the KGB to take a hike. Don’t worry about the gulag and the tens of millions of its own people murdered by the communist state. Ignore the dozens of dissident testimonies. It took something like eighty years for that system to collapse. Yet people on the left blinded themselves or did not give a sh*t about all of that. People on the left tend to focus on problems with corporate abuse of power, a legitimate concern, but the left’s usual solution (expanded state power) often makes things worse. The solution is to develop stakeholder capitalism, which is happening (see benefit corporations, for example, supported by both Dems and Repubs, or check out the Mondragon capitalist cooperatives, which are independent of the state), but too slowly. But in any case, people on the left are much readier to sacrifice some individual freedom in the view that the sacrifice can bring a more compassionate society (largely false).
3. Many on the Left, noting that Islam is a minority religion in the West, see it, as they see all minorities, as potential allies in their progressive, “compassionate”, agenda.
The bottomline: the problem is selective blindness, i.e., self-deception.
Kay says
This was more of claiming the narrative. After all, who would dare say they are in favor of “hate”? It was a false choice, a twisting of words as is happening all too often.
solange silverman says
This has already happened on the internet. A bill was passed last year, one sponsored by George Soros, which now give legality to what the monopolizing internet giants are doing. I only wish I could remember the name of it. Now, of course, I can find no trace of it online, while, at the time, it was news. When Soros told us “not to worry,” that’ when I knew things were in earnest, and the globalists were ramping up their efforts. We are in the fight of our lives for our freedoms.
Smarty says
Trump is led around by the nose an awful lot. He simply cannot grasp the basic understand8mg of our constitution and I find it so annoying.
UNCLE VLADDI says
ALL liberal “hate-speech laws” ARE crimes!!!
“The whole concept of “hate speech” (laws against hurt feelings) is political correctness run amok, a leftist anti-free-speech tool that provides an unlimited excuse to shut down and punish anyone who openly disagrees with establishment dicta. Every totalitarian state has similar laws designed to protect the rulers. Such laws have no place in a free society.”
– Patrick1984 –
But Terminiello v. Chicago (1949), Brandenburg v. Ohio (1969), National Socialist Party v. Skokie (1977), R.A.V. v. City of St. Paul (1992), Virginia v. Black (2003), Snyder v. Phelps (2011) These SCOTUS cases show that unpopular speech is still protected speech.
SO: What is “hate-speech” and why should it be considered a crime if it’s NOT already: a) a threat; and b) slander (fraud)?
If it’s not either PHYSICALLY threatening speech – or emotionally threatening BECAUSE it could physically impact one’s life, like how fraudulent slander causes other people to react to one as if one were a criminal in need of hating and beating – then it’s THE TRUTH: and so it SHOULD cause one the emotional distress of ‘hurt feelings!’ So it isn’t objectively “offensive,” but is, in fact, socially beneficial in that it helps defend society from criminals, whether or not said predictably victim-blaming criminal is subjectively “offended” by their victims being notified about THEIR offenses!
Having no facts to justify their aggressive hypocrisy, all criminals will resort to using emotive ‘arguments’ to justify their crimes by playing the victims. So they (liberals, muslims) can be relied on to try to criminalize hurt feelings and to make offending people, (i.e: the criminals, by accusing them of their crimes) illegal, too!
ALL “Hate-Speech Laws” ARE CRIMES!
“Progressive” criminals – who like all criminals desire an equality of outcome over a true equality of opportunity, and to get it will always try to socially engineer ever-more rights and ever-less responsibilities for them selves, by offloading their responsibilities onto their victims by stealing their victims’ rights – pretend to hold submissive masochism as the highest virtue (for their victims to hold, not them) and the ultimate crime to be causing offense and hurting other people’s (criminal’s) feelings, (i.e: by accusing them of their crimes).
So they want to make it illegal to accuse criminals of their crimes, since that might hurt their feelings and in offending them with the often-painful truth, “make” them commit even more crimes!
Is there anything which really ought to qualify as hate speech and be banned?
NO – not because it’s “hateful” (because that sort of nonsense is only making subjective assessments based on emotions;) and “HATE” is really only the perfectly natural human response of perpetual anger towards ongoing crimes (like islam); without ‘hate’ we would never bother to accuse criminals of their crimes in order to stop those crimes.
Unreasonable false displays of hatred and anger on the other hand, are what the Left is good at – but that’s already illegal, not because of the anger displayed – that’s just the outrageous holier-than-thou virtue-signalling packaging used to disguise their preposterous extortion attempts – but because it’s fraudulent slander.
Such criminal leftists who try to make “hate” into a crime, only ever make it ‘illegal’ to hate crime itself!
Speech which is already disallowed is incitement of immediate violence and death-threats … and even those aren’t illegal, if say they call for the police to use violence to counter ongoing mob violence and looting, or call for the death-penalty for murderers!
….
Further, ALL politicians who craft “hate-speech laws” and ALL cops who arrest people for “hate-speech crimes” and ALL lawyers and judges who prosecute people for them, should themselves be fired and JAILED for putting “hurt feelings” before FACTS!
Especially in the case of islam!
Everyone who defends islam and muslims endorses crime.
Endorsing crime IS a crime, so those doing it are criminals.
Right in the Qur’an is: the permission to murder Jews and Christians (Surah 9:29), to terrorize all non-Muslims (8:12), to rape young girls (65:4), to enslave people for sex (4:3), to lie about one’s true goals (3:54), and the command to make war on all the infidels (9:123) and subjugate the entire world to Allah (9:33).
Are death-threats legal? NO.
Is extortion legal? NO.
Is slavery legal? NO.
Is murder legal? NO.
Is rape legal? NO.
THEN ISLAM IS ILLEGAL!
Rape, slavery, robbery, extortion and murder are never OK!
Everything muslims pretend to see as “holy” is already a crime!
So nobody has a legal right to practice islam anywhere on earth!
UNCLE VLADDI says
Since rational people get angry with criminals for their predatory choices, and criminals insist they have no choices because we’re all equally victims who should therefore tolerate the diverse differences between the kind of victim who attacks innocent others first, and those who don’t, they insist pity is always good and anger is always bad.
Since criminals expect that all is generally allowed unless and until it is very specifically disallowed in advance, the only real crime is trying to prevent them from doing whatever they want to do, to whomever they want to do it to, and whenever they want to do it. Such attempts are always seen by them as “mean!” or more recently, “HATEFUL!”
But as Robert Spencer noted:
Incitement to violence is easy to spot – but incitement to “hostility” is in the eye of the beholder; so all anti-free-speech initiatives conflate (anti-crime) free speech and even (what they call “hateful”) feelings with actual violent crimes; for instance trying to criminalize speech against a religion or race (say, against someone for their simply noticing that islam isn’t really a race or a religion, but is only a global crime-gang).
The whole notion of “hate-speech” and “hate-crimes” IS a crime! Having “hate” isn’t a criminal act, it’s EITHER the perfectly natural and neutral human response of perpetual anger towards ongoing injustices (like islam), OR it’s a victim-blaming slanderous HABIT; but either way, it’s only an effect, and not a cause of anything. I hate crimes & the criminals who commit them; so what?
“Hate crimes” are really only *thought*-crimes, which is a victim-blaming slanderous assertion made by criminals to deflect everyone’s attention away from their own crimes (since criminals are psycho-paths who hate thinking, of course to them nobody else should ever be allowed to indulge in potentially “dangerous” thinking, either) by asserting that anyone merely considering or feeling that one should dislike something bad – ANYTHING bad, aka crime and criminals – should be accused of committing the only “illegal crime” in itself: “Hate!”
Amy Smithe says
Everything that the lefters, the Dems and the liberals do is full of hate! What is right and good versus what is evil and bad is what we are living right now!. So they can stuff it!!…We have the right to freedom…that is why America Became a nation and was the greatest one in the world, until the idiots that took the other way! Is it right versus wrong, truth versus lies, faith God versus satan, left versus right…Dems who are wrong versus Republicans who are right!….it is a mess that only God can sort, it look like to me and when He does they will be floored where they end up! and some from the Republican camps too! Stupidity is sickening and so is ignorance….there is no excuse for those that cannot see and will not understand that it is THEY that are doing this to all of us! We cannot let that happen np matte rhw atit means: freedom is freedom, the truth is the truth and worth standing for and fighting for! We sure need new parties or new people in the parties and make sure they know what is in the Constitution and how the three branches are supposed to run….they sure as heck do NOT KNOW now!!