Nigel Stringer, who has been a court magistrate for 26 years, now finds himself being prosecuted for defending his family against an armed gang who stormed his home. Stringer fought one of the intruders off with a hockey stick and used a racial epithet. Police arrested Stringer and his son on suspicion of a racially aggravated attack.
The Southern Poverty Law Center (SPLC) claims to combat hate, racism, and bigotry, but it has a history of listing groups that it disagrees with as ‘hate’ groups. The SPLC agreed to apologize and pay $3.75 million after it accused Maajid Nawaz and his group that counters extremism, Quilliam, of being anti-Muslim. Nawaz has dropped his threatened lawsuit alleging defamation by the SPLC. The SPLC has gained unprecedented power over censorship since it partnered with Google, Youtube, Facebook and Twitter.
A 60-year-old man from Sweden is facing two years in prison for posting a message on Facebook that read, “Only every fifth Somalis have IQ over 70.” The prosecutor claims that the post targets a protected group of people based on their national origin and is therefore hate speech. The case is yet another example of what is now being referred to as “hate facts,” statements that are generally true yet are negative towards politically protected groups.
Social media users who post or share racist or anti-gay comments will face jail under newly proposed rules. Judges are being advised to order harsh punishments for those found guilty of stirring up ‘hatred’ against racial, religious, or sexual minority groups. Hatred in these cases is a euphemism for criticizing someone or hurting their feelings.
Her crime appears to be only that, after ten years of asking authorities for proof that there actually were six-million executions in the Nazi prison camps, and never receiving any response to her request, she concluded that the Holocaust story was a politically motivated myth. For holding this opinion, she has been imprisoned. What do you think? In a free society, even if Haverbeck were a believer in the Nazi collectivist ideology or, for that matter, in the Communist collectivist ideology, should that be the basis for punishment by the state?
France is prosecuting hate speech laws to stifle opposition to mass immigration by the right, including three politicians from the Front National party who characterized a migrant accused of attacking a hospital worker as “one of our new inhabitants, invited by our governments, housed, fed, helped, cared for, all for free, with a little bit of pocket money.” Meanwhile, Marine Le Pen faces a penalty of up to 75,000 euros and potential prison time for posting an image of ISIS brutality on social media in 2015.
South Africa: Vicki Momberg, a white woman, was convicted of ‘hate speech’ and sentenced to two years in prison for yelling a racial slur at a black policeman after thieves broke into her car. A video of her rant went viral in which she requested a white or Indian officer and said that black people are “plain and simple useless.” [Far worse things now are being yelled at white people in South Africa but, as always happens when there are laws to control thoughts and speech, they are applied unequally, depending on who controls the government. You cannot change people’s thoughts and opinions by making them illegal. Good example is the only way.]
The Anti-Defamation League (ADL), with UC Berkeley, have created an artificial-intelligence program, called the Online Hate Index, to detect “hate” speech and create definitions for it. [For years, the ADL has promoted far-Left political agendas while accusing those who oppose those agendas of being anti-Semitic. Most people are not aware that this organization is using its Jewish identity as a cover to promote a Leftist political agenda. The time is drawing near when any expression of opposition to Leftist agendas will be defined as hate speech, and that will justify denying Internet access to those who hold such opinions.]