Story Comments
Posted by: hyperbola 7 months, 4 weeks ago
This page is a permanent archive of the comment below and its replies.
To view this comment in the context of the full discussion for the story, use this link.
-
0%
hyperbola7 months, 4 weeks ago
This comment is below the standard viewing threshold View It »
Well Spade, actually any patriotic American who believes in our democracy should vehemently reject "hate crimes" legislation. We do NOT need the government telling us what to think.
Reply
Criminalizing Criticism of Israel - The End of Free Speech
http://www.propeller.com/story/2009/05/07/criminal...
On October 16, 2004, President George W. Bush signed the Israel Lobby’s bill, the Global Anti-Semitism Review Act. This legislation requires the US Department of State to monitor anti-semitism world wide.
To monitor anti-semitism, it has to be defined. What is the definition? Basically, as defined by the Israel Lobby and Abe Foxman, it boils down to any criticism of Israel or Jews.
Rahm Israel Emanuel hasn’t been mopping floors at the White House.
As soon as he gets the Hate Crimes Prevention Act of 2009 passed, it will become a crime for any American to tell the truth about Israel’s treatment of Palestinians and theft of their lands.
It will be a crime to report the extraordinary influence of the Israel Lobby on the White House and Congress, such as the AIPAC-written resolutions praising Israel for its war crimes against the Palestinians in Gaza that were endorsed by 100 per cent of the US Senate and 99 per cent of the House of Representatives, while the rest of the world condemned Israel for its barbarity.
It will become a crime to note the disproportionate representation of Jews in the media, finance, and foreign policy.
In other words, it means the end of free speech, free inquiry, and the First Amendment to the Constitution. Any facts or truths that cast aspersion upon Israel will simply be banned.
Given the hubris of the US government, which leads Washington to apply US law to every country and organization, what will happen to the International Red Cross, the United Nations Commission on Human Rights, and the various human rights organizations that have demanded investigations of Israel’s military assault on Gaza’s civilian population? Will they all be arrested for the hate crime of “excessive” criticism of Israel?-
0%
hyperbola7 months, 4 weeks ago
This comment is below the standard viewing threshold View It »
...Many Americans have been brainwashed by the propaganda that Palestinians are terrorists who threaten innocent Israel. These Americans will see the censorship as merely part of the necessary war on terror. They will accept the demonization of fellow citizens who report unpalatable facts about Israel and agree that such people should be punished for aiding and abetting terrorists.
Reply
A massive push is underway to criminalize criticism of Israel. American university professors have fallen victim to the well organized attempt to eliminate all criticism of Israel. Norman Finkelstein was denied tenure at a Catholic university because of the power of the Israel Lobby. Now the Israel Lobby is after University of California (at Santa Barbara,) professor Wiliam Robinson. Robinson’s crime: his course on global affairs included some reading assignments critical of Israel’s invasion of Gaza.
The Israel Lobby apparently succeeded in convincing the Obama Justice (sic) Department that it is anti-semitic to accuse two Jewish AIPAC officials, Steven Rosen and Keith Weissman, of spying. The Israel Lobby succeeded in getting their trial delayed for four years, and now Attorney General Eric Holder has dropped charges. Yet, Larry Franklin, the DOD official accused of giving secret material to Rosen and Weissman, is serving 12 years and 7 months in prison.
The absurdity is extraordinary. The two Israeli agents are not guilty of receiving secrets, but the American official is guilty of giving secrets to them! If there is no spy in the story, how was Franklin convicted of giving secrets to a spy?
Criminalizing criticism of Israel destroys any hope of America having an independent foreign policy in the Middle East that serves American rather than Israeli interests. It eliminates any prospect of Americans escaping from their enculturation with Israeli propaganda.
To keep American minds captive, the Lobby is working to ban as anti-semitic any truth or disagreeable fact that pertains to Israel. It is permissible to criticize every other country in the world, but it is anti-semitic to criticize Israel-
100%
crespi7 months, 4 weeks ago
This comment is below the standard viewing threshold View It »
You are So right.
Reply
If I "accidentally" hit and kill a known NEOCON (but one with which I am not actually acquainted personally) with my car I might get off with reckless driving and lesser manslaughter.
However, under Hate Crime, if it was known that I HATE Neocons and think they should all die, I might face a murder charge.
I want to GET OFF EASY for my crime of intentional murder, don't I?
So NO hate Crime Bills! -
-
0%
hyperbola7 months, 3 weeks ago
This comment is below the standard viewing threshold View It »
If that is true, then there is no need for the legislation.
Reply
I outline below ways in which the proposed legislation can in fact be used to create and enforce corruption and exploitation. This is the thin edge of the wedge in creating thought crimes. That is why it is being "sold" to us using only issues that most people would react to in a defined emotional way (e.g. rejection of pedophilia). Totally unnecessary and thoroughly anti-American.-
100%
willottica7 months, 3 weeks ago
This comment is below the standard viewing threshold View It »
Isn't there? The motivation for violence is already enshrined as an important consideration when determining guilt. Murder 1 vs. Murder 2 vs. Manslaughter? They are considered different crimes based on motivation. Is this not just an extension of the same legal precedent? A person who kills in order to defend himself, or even in order to rid himself of an active enemy is killing for a purpose. A person who kills randomly (within a group) out of prejudice is far more dangerous to society.
Reply
-
-
-
-
loading ...
People Who Liked This Comment (0)
No one voted this comment positively. Is it really that bad of a comment?
Ciera-Marie
jordan11
ForrestPhelps
fsev41
airglide
scott4261
gwhiddon
Post Reply
You are not signed in to Propeller.com. Please sign in to post a reply.