While liberal Jewish activists have worked successfully to punish and silence politically incorrect speech in much of Europe, America maintains a fragile freedom. The Anti-Defamation League, architect of Orwellian “anti-hate” laws, is frustrated about it.
This was apparent in the Sept. 12 speech given by Christopher Wolf, chair of both the ADL Internet Task Force and the International Network Against Cyber Hate. He spoke at the 3rd International Symposium on Hate on the Internet sponsored by B'nai Brith, ADL’s parent organization.
In his speech, Wolf sourly admitted the difficulty in corralling thought criminals on the web, especially since America provides a “legal haven” for that hatred.
The US is a haven because we don’t yet have a federal hate laws bill, despite ADL’s aggressive attempts to pass one. A federal hate bill would severely limit free speech, and triple the penalties for crimes motivated by “bias” or “hate” against certain protected groups, like homosexuals. It would establish a vast anti-hate bureaucracy similar to the one in Canada, where Christian pastors have been punished merely for quoting from “hate literature”—the Bible!
Most countries of Europe (and 46 states in the union) have ADL-designed hate laws already. France, Germany, and Austria are examples of the most stringent; in these countries, you can be prosecuted just for questioning the six-million figure of the Jewish holocaust.
ADL is pleased with its success in banning free speech in these nations of Europe.
But America remains a loose cannon, a cowboy land of free speech where religions can still be criticized, homosexuality can still be publicly condemned, and ADL can still call Israel’s mildest critic an “anti-Semite.”
And, to ADL’s dismay, the borderless internet can beam American-made “hate sites” into other lands.
Unable to wield the law the way they’d like, ADL is trying a different tactic.
In his speech, Wolf advocates less legal ambush and more handwringing or, in his words, “exposing hate speech for its deceitful and false content.”
Wolf points out that attempts to prosecute “hate criminals” have backfired several times recently. For example, “The case brought against Yahoo! to enforce the French law that prohibits the selling or display of neo-Nazi memorabilia in the end trivialized the speech codes directed at Holocaust questioners, and created a series of precedents that could prove unhelpful in future, more serious prosecutions.”
In other words, the web is hard turf to police.
Wolf compares hunting down “cyberhaters” to chasing cockroaches: “….squashing one does not solve the problem when there are many more waiting behind the walls – or across the border. Many see prosecution of Internet speech in one country as a futile gesture when the speech can re-appear on the Internet almost instantaneously, hosted by an ISP in the United States.”
Don’t think for a minute that Wolf doesn’t want ADL-defined “haters” behind bars! He praises the recent prosecution of revisionist Ernst Zundel, and only advocates caution because he wants to make sure legal precedents are strong enough. For this reason, Wolf urges a judicious and careful use of the law, and ever more passionate “counter speech” against “haters.”
Certainly there are extremists who misuse the internet to advocate outright violence. But ADL doesn’t want just violence is prosecuted; the league’s ultimate goal is to outlaw politically incorrect speech, especially moral criticism of homosexuality and other expressions of Christian conscience.
The aim of hate laws was evident in the UK’s debate last winter over a Religious and Racial Hatred Bill that would have made the Bible an illegal piece of “hate literature” in Britain. (The bill was ultimately moderated. “Threatening,” but not insulting, religious language is now banned.)
Wolf’s speech is both heartening and gloomy. Heartening, because it reveals the frustration of ADL attempts to crack down on internet speech. But also gloomy, as it shows the fervor of ADL to control the thoughts and words of the entire world.
If they can’t regulate cyberspace through the law, they may be able to use the economy. Jewish-led telephone and cable giants, such as Verizon and Comcast, are working to control the content of the web. They are pouring millions into Congress, lobbying for permission to commercialize the internet and gain the right to discriminate against and exclude “cyberhaters.” (See, "Threats to a Free Internet")
But, for now, America and the internet remain fertile soils for free debate of political and moral truths. Yes, weeds grow there, too. But a few weeds in a flourishing garden are far preferable to a paved parking lot.
The best way to keep the internet free right now is to keep the big phone and cable companies from making a business of it. Legislation encouraging phone and cable takeover of the internet has already passed the House of Representatives.
Your US senators need to hear from you today. Call 202-225-3121 and say, “Please do not support legislation that will allow the internet to be commercialized by the big phone and cable companies.”
Harmony Grant, the niece of Rev. Ted Pike, is a staff writer and researcher for the National Prayer Network. For more of her articles go to www.hisnamesake.blogspot.com.
Learn much more about the threat of liberal Jewish activism at www.video.google.com. Google's video site shows Rev. Pike's videos, The Other Israel, Hate Laws: Making Criminals of Christians, and Why the Mid-East Bleeds, in their entirety, free of charge. Just search for "Ted Pike".
Please visit www.truthtellers.org
National Prayer Network
P.O Box 828, Clackamas, OR 97015