The idea of “free speech” lies at the very heart of Western intellectual, political, and philosophical foundations. This right is so important, it was listed as the very first right to be mentioned in America’s founding documents, the “Bill of Rights”. As written, “Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof; or abridging the freedom of speech, or of the press; or the right of the people peaceably to assemble, and to petition the Government for a redress of grievances.”

This idea of “freedom of speech” is not just enshrined in the Bill of Rights to the United States Constitution: the right to the freedom of expression is a universal right adopted by United Nations as UN Resolution 217 A (III) of 10 December 1948. This resolution is known as the UN UDHR, or the United Nations Declaration of Human Rights. The document was crafted via a committee represented by 50 countries and was adopted on December 10, 1948 with 8 abstentions and zero dissenting votes.

Article 19 of the UDHR reads:

Everyone has the right to freedom of opinion and expression; this right includes freedom to hold opinions without interference and to seek, receive and impart information and ideas through any media and regardless of frontiers. – source UN

To those of us rooted in classical Western civilization, “freedom of speech” or “freedom of expression” remains at the very core of traditional Western values.

The Incremental Destruction of a Core Western Value

The old adage, “How do you eat an elephant? Cut it into smaller pieces.”, surely applies to the agenda to destroy freedom of expression in the West. Conditioning the population to accept an infringement of a core right cannot be done openly: such objectives need to be achieved through stealth.

It is through “stealth” that a war on language is subtly waged, and in the process, core rights are limited. In the limitation of rights comes too the destruction of these very same rights.

In the case of the war on freedom of expression, there have been two primary points of focus that have proved successful: 1) The Holocaust(TM) and 2) Hate Speech.

In the case of the Holocaust(TM), no fewer than 15 countries have instituted speech and thought crimes covering this subject. Germany’s laws, imposed upon her after WWII, are clearly draconian in regards to freedom of expression.

Current attempts to institute “hate speech laws” across the Western world have a major precedent in the formation of the “Public Incitement Law” which reads as follows:

? 130 Public Incitement (1985, Revised 1992, 2002, 2005)

(1) Whoever, in a manner that is capable of disturbing the public peace:

shall be punished with imprisonment from three months to five years.

The “public incitement” law is often used in conjunction with cases regarding “Holocaust Denial” and so should be viewed as a particularly Jewish derived legal logic as the very foundation of such laws and ideas run counter to Western civilized traditions.

Tyranny by Fiat – The War Against Language

Freedom of expression has been serious “put to the run” in the West. Canada and Australia are already under the yoke of “hate speech laws”. People are being jailed for “what they say”, in clear violation of the UN UDHR. In the United States, organizations associated with Israel, such as AIPAC, the ADL, and many others, are active in the promotion of laws that seek to limit speech.

And since in the world of politics, “nothing is as it appears”, it has become apparent to all who are paying attention that the primary motivation of these Jewish groups is to put into place laws that limit dissent and preclude any political discussion which are important to these groups, whether such limitations are regarding their influence in the United States Government or to publicly raise the issue of Israel’s current overt violations of international law.

Hate crime laws are uniquely insidious in that their very intent is to enable an elite in power to rule by fiat and any complaint or attempt to participate in the political process in opposition to the ruling party by virtue of the way in which these laws are written, naturally finds oneself in violation of these very same laws.

We either have the freedom to express our political will, or we don’t. No amount of twisting of the language will change that, and we must be ever mindful to put to the run the very same groups and organizations who are intent on imposing un-American laws and ideals onto the colletive American body politic.