Here It Comes: With Obama`s Victory, Treason Lobby Moves To Suppress Free Speech


In

Obama`s
new improved
America
, we will all be
a lot nicer—or else. In the interests of everyone`s

self-esteem
, all cultural beliefs and practices will
be celebrated rather than criticized. (The really
heinous ones, like

slavery
, violent

witchcraft
and
FGM
will be conveniently ignored.) All the

darker aspects of human nature
—violence, greed,
hatred, etc—will be solved by the enforcement of a
kumbaya ideology of massive denial.

Knuckle-draggers
who can`t get with the program of
universal peace and love will learn to regret their
stubbornness in vegetarian reprogramming camps.

(That`s

black humor
—if we`re still allowed to use the term).

We already can see a preview of
things to come. The leftists are on the warpath about
what they construe as
"hate speech"—usually
just
reasoned debate
about borders, culture and
immigration. According to protectors of lawbreaking
foreigners from the
New
York Times

to

La Raza
, any suggestion of immigration law
enforcement unduly stirs the blood of Redstate citizens
(you know, the ones still clinging to religion and
guns), driving them to acts of violence and murder.

The New York Times in
particular has urged a crackdown on speech—which is a
little odd, considering how the press is

supposed
to venerate the First Amendment. The
NYT`s`
attitude is typified by a November 14
editorial,

The High Cost of Harsh Words
, which
essentially blamed the recent murder of Ecuadorean
illegal immigrant

Marcello Lucero
on the remarks of a local official,
Steve Levy, who has been a

stand-up guy for law and borders
.

"Words have consequences. Steve Levy, the Suffolk County executive, is
learning that the hard way during a horrible week. Seven
teenagers were arrested and charged in the fatal
stabbing last Saturday of Marcello Lucero, an Ecuadorean
immigrant, on a street in the Long
Island

village of

Patchogue
. […]

“Mr. Levy`s past harsh words and actions against undocumented workers
have now left him cornered with a tragically limited
ability to lead the county in confronting a brutal act
that surely pains him as much as anyone. "

It is downright bizarre for an
editorialist to respond to a despicable crime by
condemning a public official for speaking out against
immigration chaos. A bunch of roughneck teens got drunk
at a bar and decided beat up a Mexican, with horrific
results. There is no evidence whatsoever that anything
Levy said precipitated the crime.

Worse (perhaps), the Times
insulted the many millions of Americans across the
political spectrum who

want their immigration laws enforced
:

"[Levy] parroted extremist
talking points, going so far as to raise the alarm,

utterly false
, that illegal immigrants` `anchor
babie
s` were forcing

Southampton Hospital
to close its maternity ward. He
denounces racist hatred, yet his words have made him a
hero in pockets of

Long Island
where veins of racism run deep. "

It`s no wonder the Times
stock is
in the tank (
hitting a

52-week low
on November 14) when it calls some of
its readers "racists."
Insulting customers
is not usually good for
business.

Interestingly, another Times
article the same day [A
Killing in a Town Where Latinos Sense Hate
, by
Kirk Semple] noted
twice
that engaging in mugging was a regular pastime
among some students…

"PATCHOGUE, N.Y. — It was an occasional diversion among a certain crowd
at
Patchogue-Medford High School
, students said: Drink
a few beers, then go looking for people to mug, whether
for money or just for kicks. […]

“Acquaintances of the defendants said it was not unusual for groups of
students from the high school to go out looking for
people to mug. `It was just for fun, or for money,` said
Taylor Fallica, 15, a student at the high school who
said he was a friend of Mr. Conroy and the other
defendants."

Are robbery and assault no longer
crimes in New York State? If anything precipitated the
deadly violence, it was the apparent acceptance by
authorities that high school students get drunk and
mug—an attitude which encouraged kids to continue this
amusing activity.

And even assuming that the killing
of the Ecuadorean was rooted in

anger over community changes
caused by
massive illegal immigration
, what teenager would
take action based on the words of an adult authority
figure? Ask any parent how often that happens.

The major cause of the crime:

too much drinking by stupid adolescents.
It is
simply a fact that excessive drinking makes some people
mean. Yet no one is calling for another failed
Prohibition.

In telling contrast, in another
instance of controversial speech, the NYT emitted
a full-throated defense of the First Amendment in an
article titled,

Unlike Others, U.S. Defends Freedom to Offend in
Speech
[June 12, 2008]. The subject was the

contentious censorship trial
of columnist Mark Steyn
for a criticism of Muslims which appeared in the
Canadian magazine
Macleans
[The
future belongs to Islam
,
October 20, 2006].

The Times piece was written
by Adam Liptak, [Email
him
]a reporter who

attended the tribunal
against Steyn in
British Columbia
. It offered a
thoughtful explanation of the

American view on free speech,
while comparing it to
less robust protections in every other society.

"Earlier this month, the actress Brigitte Bardot, an animal rights
activist, was fined $23,000 in
France

for provoking racial hatred by criticizing a Muslim
ceremony involving the slaughter of sheep.

“By contrast, American courts would not stop a planned march by the
American Nazi Party in
Skokie
,
Ill.
, in 1977, though a march
would have been deeply distressing to the many Holocaust
survivors there.

“Six years later, a state court judge in New York dismissed a libel case brought by
several Puerto Rican groups against a business executive
who had called food stamps `basically a Puerto Rican
program.` The First Amendment, Justice Eve M. Preminger
wrote [PDF],
does not allow even false statements about racial or
ethnic groups to be suppressed or punished just because
they may increase `the general level of prejudice.` "

Well, no one has accused the New
York Times
of intellectual rigor of late,
particularly when the subject is immigrants. Telling the
truth about immigration—that decades of unskilled,

unassimilating foreigners
have harmed American
society deeply—is threatening to elite liberals like
those at the Times who are invested in the
ideology of multicultural utopianism. The paper is
therefore happy to smack down speech with which it
doesn`t agree, in the larger effort to dissolve the
American nation.

The underlying problem: for all the
elites` enormous power in business, education and media,
there was still enough representative government in
place for an aroused citizenry to

defeat amnesty
last year.

Unquestionably, the Open Borders
brigade believes that a verbally inhibited electorate
will be better for their side. And that means lots more
accusations of racism—and worse.

The big escalation this round: the
attack on free speech by connecting it with violence
against non-Americans. Saying that illegal aliens, ahem,
are "breaking the
law"
is apparently too upsetting for
America
`s marketplace
of ideas.

Hence the Main Stream Media`s
treatment of the Lucero murder. As usual, the New
York Times
leads and others follow. The Associated
Press had this headline November 10:

Advocates say rhetoric fuels anti-Hispanic crime
.

"Observers and Hispanic advocates blame a climate of harsh rhetoric
surrounding the national immigration debate.

“`I don`t think it`s merely coincidence that these hate crimes are going
up at the same time there`s a violent at times debate
over immigration,` said Kevin [Johnson,]
[email him]

dean of the law school
at the University of
California-Davis.

“`We talk about immigration, we`re not particularly careful in the
terminology,` he said. `Inflammatory

terminology
is frequently used, that helps to sort
of rile people up.` "

But what are citizens supposed to
do when the truth is inflammatory? Shut up to please La
Raza and the New York Times?

This is the reality: Millions of
foreigners routinely cross the border illegally, buy

stolen identification
and unlawfully take jobs that
by law are supposed to be held by citizens and legal
immigrants. Employers` use of exploitable foreign
workers has figured largely in the loss of the
blue-collar middle class: occupations like

construction
and

meatpacking
no longer support families as they have
in the past.

A century of labor progress
in terms of wages and
workplace safety has been wiped out by open borders.

In areas of high influx, the social
service system designed for citizens is strained to the
breaking point.

Schools
and the

healthcare system
are buckling under the needs of
foreign families that are

poor, unskilled and uneducated
.

These are facts. It is the
ruination America for
profit and

ethnic transformation
that is inflammatory, not the
words used to describe it. Anti-sovereignty activists`
focus on shutting down free speech is a strategy to
suppress opposition. If they can repress Americans`
outspoken condemnation of border anarchy, then the
possibility for a massive amnesty is much enhanced. Only
the high-decibel fury of citizens stopped the last
attempt.

The MSM`s supposed concern about
the death of Mr. Lucero would be easier take seriously
if there were any comparable attention to the many

crime victims
of illegal aliens and immigrants
generally.

But there isn`t.
With very few exceptions, crime victims of illegal
aliens and immigrants are noted in

local media
only. For information about

victims of criminal aliens
you have to read
VDARE.com
and other internet sites dedicated to telling the truth
about immigration anarchy.


One-Worldism
is the goal of elites and utopian
leftists.

Censorship of dissenting views
is a means to that
end.

Friends of American sovereignty and
culture don`t need name calling and epithets. The truth
about America`s immigration disaster is
harsh enough.


Brenda Walker (email
her) lives in Northern California and publishes two websites,

LimitsToGrowth.org
and

ImmigrationsHumanCost.org
. She recently added a fine
new John Stuart Mill quote to the files:
"Free
institutions are next to impossible in a country made up
of different nationalities. Among a people without
fellow-feeling, especially if they read and speak
different languages, the united public opinion,
necessary to the working of representative government,
cannot exist."
(From

Chapter 16 of Representative Government
)