Killing Free Speech

Gatestone Institute, by Judith Bergman, September 21, 2018:

  • The OIC’s media strategy encourages “accurate and factual portrayal of Islam. Emphasis should be directed at avoidance of any link or association of Islam with terrorism or the use of Islamophobic rhetoric… such as labeling criminal terrorists as ‘Islamic’ fascists, ‘Islamic’ extremists.”
  • That part of the strategy has already had much success across the Western world, where authorities and media do not want to label Muslim terrorists as Islamic, but routinely describe them as “mentally ill.”
  • The OICs highly ambitious plans to do away with freedom of speech go severely underreported in the West. Mainstream journalists do not appear to find it dangerous that their freedom of speech should be supervised by the OIC, while Western governments, far from offering any resistance, appear, perhaps for votes, to be cozily going along with everything.

The Organisation of Islamic Cooperation (OIC) is trying to curb your freedom of speech — yet again[1].

In June, the first “I 1st Islamic-European Forum for examining ways of cooperation to curb hate speech in the media,” initiated by the OIC, ironically but sadly took place at the Press Club Brussels Europe.

The director of the information department of the OIC, Maha Mustafa Aqeel, explained that the forum is part of the OIC’s media strategy[2] to counter “Islamophobia”:

“Our strategy focuses on interacting with the media, academics, and experts on various relevant topics, in addition to engaging with Western governments to raise awareness, support the efforts of Muslim civil society bodies in the West, and engage the latter in developing plans and programs to counter Islamophobia.”

Unlike almost all other intergovernmental organizations, the OIC wields both religious and political power. It describes itself as:

“…the second largest inter-governmental organization after the United Nations with a membership of 57 states spread over four continents. The Organization is the collective voice of the Muslim world… espousing all causes close to the hearts of over 1.5 billion Muslims of the world.”

According to the OIC’s Charter, one of the objectives of the organization is “To disseminate, promote and preserve the Islamic teachings and values based on moderation and tolerance, promote Islamic culture and safeguard Islamic heritage,”[3] as well as “To protect and defend the true image of Islam, to combat defamation of Islam and encourage dialogue among civilisations and religions.”[4]

At the 11th Session of The Islamic Summit Conference (Session of The Muslim Ummah in The 21St Century) in Dakar, Senegal (13-14 March 2008), the member states of the OIC decided to “renew our pledge to work harder to make sure that Islam’s true image is better projected the world over…”[5] and to “seek to combat an Islamophobia with designs to distort our religion”[6].

In 2008, the OIC published its 1st OIC Observatory Report on Islamophobia. This document listed a number of interactions that OIC representatives had with Western audiences — including the Council of Europe, the Organization for Security and Co-operation in Europe (OSCE), and academics and others at universities such as Georgetown and Oxford — and stated:

“The point that was underscored in all these interactions was that Islamophobia was gradually gaining inroads into the mind-set of the common people in Western societies, a fact that has created a negative and distorted perception of Islam. It was emphasized that Muslims and Western societies would have to address the issue with a sense of commitment to ending Islamophobia… Islamophobia poses a threat not only to Muslims but to the world at large.”[7]

Since that 1st OIC Observatory Report on Islamophobia, the OIC opened its Permanent Observer Mission to the EU (in 2013) and also cooperates with the OSCE and the Council of Europe “to combat stereotypes and misunderstandings and foster tolerance.”[8] In December 2017, the OIC and the EU agreed on strengthening bilateral cooperation, when they held their second Senior Officials’ Meeting (SOM) at the OIC headquarters, during which both sides agreed on “strengthening bilateral cooperation through concrete actions”.

The OIC was concrete in its demands to the West. In a statement delivered at the Parliamentary Assembly of the Council of Europe, the OIC Secretary General called for Europe to “Prosecute and punish for racial discrimination… through the framework of appropriate legislation” and also to “Strengthen existing legislation on discrimination and discriminatory and ‘unequal treatment’ adopted by EU council directives”[9].

Today, many Western European governments are prosecuting their own citizens for criticizing Islam or Muslims in, for example, SwedenGermany and the UK, although it is unclear, whether or how much of this development can be directly attributed to the OIC.

In Sweden, for instance, pensioners especially have been prosecuted for making critical comments about Islam on Facebook. A 71-year-old woman referred to so-called unaccompanied minors as “bearded children” and said — not inaccurately (here and here and here) — that some seem to be “engaged in rape and demolishing their [asylum] homes”. In February 2018, a Swedish court sentenced her to a fine for “incitement of hatred against an ethnic group”.

In Germany, a journalist, Michael Stürzenberger, was handed a six-month suspended jail sentence for posting on his Facebook page a historical photo of the Grand Mufti of Jerusalem, Haj Amin al-Husseini, shaking the hand of a senior Nazi official in Berlin in 1941. The prosecution accused Stürzenberger of “inciting hatred towards Islam” and “denigrating Islam” by publishing the photograph.

In addition to cultivating high-level contacts with Western actors, the OIC also is pursuing a comprehensive media strategy, agreed upon in Saudi Arabia in December 2016 and focused on the West.

This OIC media strategy claims as one of its goals:

“To increase the interaction with media outlets and professionals, while encouraging accurate and factual/portrayal of Islam. Emphasis should be directed at avoidance of any link or association of Islam with terrorism or the use of Islamophobic rhetoric in the war on terror, such as labeling criminal terrorists as ‘Islamic’ fascists, ‘Islamic’ extremists.”[10]

Part of that strategy has already had much success across the Western world, where authorities and media do not want to label Muslim terrorists as Islamic, but routinely describe them as “mentally ill.”

The OIC also notes that it would like media professionals and journalists “to develop, articulate and implement voluntary codes of conduct to counter Islamophobia”[11], while at the same time engaging Western governments “in creating awareness against the dangers of Islamophobia by addressing the responsibility of media on the issue”[12]. The OIC additionally states that it would like to train foreign journalists to “deal with the phenomenon of hatred and defamation of the Islamic religion”[13]— as exemplified by the recent European-Islamic Forum, where attendees were introduced to the OIC’s “Program for Training Media Professionals on Redressing Stereotypes about Islam”.

As maintained earlier here, European journalists — helped along by the EU — are already very adept at censoring themselves, which means that the OIC’s work is probably already more than half-done when it comes to Europe.

Finally, the OIC media strategy calls for fostering a “network of high profile western public figures supporting efforts to combat Islamophobia in politics, journalism and civil society” as well as teams of scholars academics, and celebrities, who will be the faces of the campaign.[14]

The IOC mentions the following, among others, as examples of mass media campaigns it aims to launch as part of its media strategy[15]:

  • Television and advertising campaigns “targeting public transport (bus and metro) famous newspapers and magazines for each country two times in one year”.
  • Arranging three talk shows per year in key TV channels in US and Europe about Islam with the participation of selected members from Muslim countries.
  • 10 lectures per year in each country (universities, unions and suggested important centers) “about Islamic role in building cultures and connect between religions”.
  • Visits to schools and universities by OIC “specialist teams”.
  • Hosting 100 “Western activists” from various fields in selected Muslim countries where they “can interact with intellectuals, politicians, media figures, and religious scholars”.
  • Produce one-hour documentary “examining the growth of Islamophobia in the West and its impact on Muslims around the world and interfaith relations” for broadcasting “on mainstream networks such as Britain’s BBC and Channel 4 or America’s PBS”.

The OIC is being assisted in all these efforts by “prestigious public relations companies such as UNITAS Communications which is based in London, UK and Golden Cap based in Jeddah, Kingdom of Saudi Arabia”[16].

The OIC promises that it will also create a fund to support local anti-Islamophobia initiatives, and monitor media and place commentary and news stories in key Western publications.

It is important to note that in the years 1998-2011, the OIC sought to advance an agenda in the UN, banning “the defamation of religions”, but the OIC gave up on the ban after realizing that there was not sufficient support there for the proposal. “We could not convince them,” said Ekmeleddin Ihsanoglu, the Turkish head of the IOC at the time. “The European countries don’t vote with us, the United States doesn’t vote with us.”

Instead of pursuing the ban on defamation of religions, the OIC shifted its focus to UN Resolution 16/18 [17] which calls upon states to take concrete steps to prohibit discrimination on the basis of religion, “foster religious freedom and pluralism,” and “counter religious profiling which is understood to be the invidious use of religion as a criterion in conducting questionings, searches and other law enforcement investigative procedures.”

Andrew C. McCarthy, a critic of Resolution 16/18, maintains that:

“Sharia forbids any speech — whether true or not — that casts Islam in an unfavorable light, dissents from settled Muslim doctrine, has the potential to sow discord within the ummah, or entices Muslims to renounce Islam or convert to other faiths. The idea is not merely to ban gratuitous ridicule — which, by the way, sensible people realize government should not do (and, under our Constitution, may not do) even if they themselves are repulsed by gratuitous ridicule. The objective is to ban all critical examination of Islam, period…” [Emphasis in original]

The OICs highly ambitious plans to do away with freedom of speech go severely underreported in the West. Mainstream Western journalists do not appear to find it dangerous that their freedom of speech should be supervised by the OIC, while Western governments, far from offering any resistance, appear, perhaps for votes, to be cozily going along with everything.

Judith Bergman is a columnist, lawyer and political analyst.


[1] See also “Organization of Islamic Cooperation’s ‘Islamophobia’ Campaign against Freedom” and “The OIC vs. Freedom of Expression”

[2] See also “The OIC/NGOs cooperation in combating Islamophobia” from the International Conference on Islamophobia, Istanbul 2007.

[3] OIC Charter Article 1(11)

[4] Ibid., Article 1 (12)

[5] 11th Session of the Islamic Summit Conference, Dakar Declaration, p 4

[6]Ibid., p 4

[7] 1st OIC observatory report on Islamophobia (May 2007 to May 2008) p 24 (section 4.5.)

[8] 1st OIC observatory report on Islamophobia (May 2007 to May 2008) p 30. (sections 4.5.7 and 4.5.8)

[9] Ibid., p 30 (Section 4.5.8)

[10] OIC Media Strategy in Countering Islamophobia and Its Implementation Mechanisms, p 2, (section I (2))

[11] Ibid., p 4, Section III (1)

[12] Ibid., p 4, Section III (3)

[13] Ibid., p 5, Section III (7)

[14] Ibid., pp 3-4, Section II(2) and (7)

[15] Ibid., pp 8-9, Section 7

[16] Ibid., p 6

[17] Resolution 16/18 on Combating intolerance, negative stereotyping and stigmatization of, and discrimination, incitement to violence and violence against, persons based on religion or belief. The resolution was passed in the UN Human Rights Council in 2011 with support from both OIC member countries and Western countries, including the United States.

Center Highlights Speech Restrictions At International Conference

Center for Security Policy, September 19, 2018:

The Center and its allies are participating in the Organization for Security & Cooperation in Europe (OSCE) Office for Democratic Institutions and Human Rights (ODIHR) Human Dimension Implementation Meeting (HDIM) 2018 in Warsaw, Poland.

The conference is supposed to be dedicated to a focus on Democracy & Human Rights within all of the 56 member states – official reps of each government plus a slew of Civil Society NGO reps.

The official theme for the plenary sessions held on September 17, 2018 was “Fundamental Freedoms” including freedom of expression and other core freedoms. The Center and its allies focused especially on the human right to free speech in their remarks.

The Center’s Executive VP Christopher Hull, VP for Research and Analysis Clare Lopez and Senior Fellow Stephen Coughlin specifically condemned the OSCE ODIHR HDIM organizers for attempting to impose a Code of Conduct that in effect constituted prior restraint on free speech. They also made specific & repeated mention of “shariah” as antithetical to the human right to freedom of expression and speech.

Click here to watch their remarks on the Secure Freedom YouTube channel.

***

 

The Successful Subversion of the OSCE, Gates of Vienna, September 15, 2018:

For the past nine years the Counterjihad Collective has been participating in and reporting on the gradual Islamization of the Organization for Security and Cooperation in Europe (OSCE). It’s been a long, tedious, and exhausting process, but now the subversion of the OSCE is all but complete. For readers who are interested in the details, see the OSCE Archives.

As with other trans-national institutions, the Islamization of the OSCE was accomplished via an alliance between Muslims (in this case, primarily Turkey) and the progressive Left. This year, for the first time, the OSCE has officially established a framework to silence critics of Islam and sharia. For an organization that was founded to promote free speech, that’s quite an accomplishment.

I’ve already posted material from the 2018 ODIHR (Office for Democratic Institutions and Human Rights) meeting of the OSCE in Warsaw, and will be posting more. For future reference, rather than repeatedly quoting it, here is the directive from OSCE headquarters mandating tolerance, inclusion, non-discrimination, etc blah yak. The relevant section is excerpted below, but the entire document may be downloaded (Word format) from the official OSCE website.

Under “§ 3. Other provisions”, the OSCE Code of Conduct states:

1. Participants shall refrain from presenting or shouting any slogans that might be:

a. provoking or urging to disturb order and safety,
b. likely to give rise to violence,
c. discriminating other persons on the basis of their race, color, sex, language, religion or belief, political or other opinion, national or social origin, property, birth or other status (Maastricht 2003, Ljubljana 2005),
d. condoning terrorism or the use of violence.

ODIHR reserves the right to instruct HDIM moderators to interrupt any Participant who speaks in violation of these principles. In case of repeated non-compliance ODIHR reserves the right to void the Participant of the right to speak at the session, or as a last resort of the right to further participate at HDIM.

See also the op-ed about the OSCE by Chris Hull of the Center for Security Policy.

For links to previous articles about the Organization for Security and Cooperation in Europe, see the OSCE Archives.

***

Transcript: (Thanks to Gates of Vienna)

How ironic that this organization is itself violating fundamental freedoms.

For instance, at a February meeting this year, a senior official claimed that civil society must adhere to OSCE commitments.[1]

But we are not required to abide by those commitments — you are.

The OSCE Code of Conduct for Staff/Mission Members says you, and I quote, “shall comply with the… commitments of the OSCE.”[2] And what commitments?

1. First, “respecting human rights and fundamental freedoms, including the freedom of thought, conscience…or belief, for all without distinction as to…belief, political or other opinion.”[3]
2. Second, taking only “measures which do not endanger freedom of information and expression” in this space[4]; and
3. Third, that civil society members, “specifically those with relevant experience, are particularly encouraged to participate in the discussion of the selected topics and to provide their suggestions and recommendations.”[5]

But in spite of such requirements, ODIHR has now gone further.

For this meeting, you required us to acknowledge a new “Code of Conduct.” It says, “[p]articipants shall refrain from presenting…any slogans that might be provoking,… likely to give rise to violence, [or] discriminating [against] other persons on the basis of…religion or belief, political or other opinion.”

But that is what you are doing.

That’s why Secure Freedom joined 28 civil society representatives from 14 countries in speaking out against your repeated attempts to shut down our fundamental freedoms.[6]

That’s also why the U.S. Opening Statement objected “to content-based restrictions on the participation of civil society.”[7]

And yet last week, ODIHR used its power to interrupt Civitas Christiana Foundation for expressing concern about threats, repression and intolerance by those who hold radical views of sexuality.[8]

The truth? OSCE’s own Code of Conduct says:

1. “officials shall ensure that their own personal views and convictions, including their political and religious convictions do not adversely affect their official duties,” and
2. “officials shall respect the laws and regulations of the host country, as well as its local customs and traditions,” in this case those of Poland, whose laws, regulations, customs and traditions you’re violating.[9]

In fact, ODIHR is also refusing to respect the current governments of America, the V-4, Austria, and Italy, all of which are making hard choices on migration and terror to keep their people safer and their Fundamental Freedoms intact.

Without consensus of these countries, the policy should never have taken effect and should not be permitted going forward, as it violates civil society participants’ Fundamental Freedoms.

Secure Freedom recommends:

1. That ODIHR:
a. Permanently rescind content-based speech restrictions in the HDIM Code of Conduct;[10] and
b. Acknowledge that restrictions on fundamental freedoms violate the OSCE Code of Conduct for Staff/Missions; and
2. That America, Hungary, Slovakia, Czechia, Poland, Austria, and Italy speak out in favor of free speech and their own policies on terror and migration.

Notes:

1. According to meeting participants.
2. ”OSCE CODE OF CONDUCT FOR STAFF/MISSION MEMBERS: Appendix 1 to the OSCE Staff Regulations and Staff Rules,” Permanent Council Decision 550/Corr.1, 27 June 2003, available at https://www.osce.org/secretariat/31781?download=true, retrieved August 30, 2018.
3. See “13th OSCE Ministerial Council Ljubljana, 5 December 2005 (All day) — 6 December 2005 (All day),” available at https://www.osce.org/event/mc_2005, retrieved August 28, 2018.
4. See “13th OSCE Ministerial Council Ljubljana, 5 December 2005 (All day) — 6 December 2005 (All day),” available at https://www.osce.org/event/mc_2005, retrieved August 28, 2018.
5. Modalities for OSCE Meetings on Human Dimension Issues, 23 May 2002 (OSCE PC Dec.476, Section I paragraph 9), available at https://www.osce.org/pc/13198?download=true, retrieved August 28, 2018.
6. See Center for Security Policy, “LETTER RELEASE: Organizations express concerns about OSCE’s attempts to shut down free speech,” September 6, 2018, available at https://www.centerforsecuritypolicy.org/2018/09/06/letter-release-organizations-express-concerns-about-osces-attempts-to-shut-down-free-speech/, retrieved on September 16, 2018.
7. See United States Mission to the OSCE, “Opening Statement As prepared for delivery by Ambassador Michael Kozak, Head of Delegation to the 2018 Human Dimension Implementation Meeting, Warsaw,” September 10, 2018, https://www.osce.org/odihr/393305?download=true, retrieved September 16, 2018.
8. See “A couple of noteworthy OSCE interventions,” September 14, 2018, available at https://youtu.be/vW8g_Dmjd1U, retrieved September 17, 2018.
9. ”OSCE CODE OF CONDUCT FOR STAFF/MISSION MEMBERS: Appendix 1 to the OSCE Staff Regulations and Staff Rules,” Permanent Council Decision 550/Corr.1, 27 June 2003, available at https://www.osce.org/secretariat/31781?download=true, retrieved August 30, 2018.
10. See “CODE OF CONDUCT AT THE OSCE HUMAN DIMENSION IMPLEMENTATION MEETING (HDIM),” Organization for Security and Cooperation in Europe, Office of Democratic Institutions and Human Rights, https://meetings.odihr.pl/dl/2943/f85414/CODE_of_CONDUCT_HDIM-1.docx, retrieved August 30, 2018.

Wall Street Journal Runs Editorial from Erdogan—World’s Biggest Jailer of Journalists

Turkey’s President Recep Tayyip Erdoğan meets with media in Ankara on March 22, 2017. (Kayhan Ozer/Presidential Press Service, Pool Photo via AP)

PJ Media, by Patrick Poole, September 11, 2018:

One-third of all journalists jailed worldwide sit in the prisons of Turkey’s Islamist autocrat, Recep Tayyip Erdogan.

So it’s startling that the Wall Street Journal (WSJ) has opened up its opinion page to him today.

Remarkably, this comes after Turkey imprisoned WSJ reporter Dion Nissenbaumfor two and a half days in December 2016, refusing to allow him to contact his colleagues or his family and later deporting him.

Then in October 2017, the Turkish regime convicted WSJ reporter Ayla Albayrak in absentia on charges of publishing “terrorist propaganda.”

And just today the Erdogan regime arrested another Western journalist:

Today’s Erdogan op-ed follows another New York Times op-ed by the Turkish dictator just a month ago — published on the same day the NYT editorial board questioned whether Turkey was still an American ally:

The bizarre love affair of the American corporate media continues as 169 journalists sit in Turkish prisons:

This has earned Turkey the title of the world’s largest jailer of journalists:

But Erdogan has not been content with just jailing journalists.

Since the so-called “coup” attempt in July 2016, Erdogan associates have taken over many of Turkey’s newspapers.

Just last week one of the few remaining independent newspapers, Cumhuriyet, had a new board installed, which promptly sacked the editor-in-chief and prompted the resignations of more than a dozen of its reporters.

And Erdogan doesn’t hesitate to show his contempt for media criticism, such as comments he made just two weeks ago:

When called out by the international media for jailing journalists, he’s defended his actions by saying that they’re not journalists but terrorists:

Not content to limit his attacks on the media to just Turkey, Erdogan’s regime has used a number of avenues to attack journalists abroad.

Just a few days ago Gissur Simonarson was notified by Twitter that one of his tweets reporting on the attacks by Turkish troops operating inside Syria had been proscribed by Turkish courts:

Turkish hackers have also targeted American media personalities, in some cases hijacking their Twitter accounts:

It was reported this past January that social media death threats targeting Belgian journalists had come from IP addresses assigned to the Turkish embassy in Brussels.

What explains the ongoing love affair between the American media and dictators around the world? What would compel a media outlet to give space or airtime to a brutal dictator who holds one-third of all journalists jailed worldwide in his prisons?

That’s a good question for the editors at the Wall Street Journal and the New York Times.

Liberals abandoning Democrat party through #WalkAway campaign

Life Site News, by Calvin Freiburger, July 9, 2018:

A social media campaign encouraging Democrats to leave their increasingly left-wing party is gaining notoriety – and followers.

The #WalkAway Campaign is the brainchild of “former liberal” and New York actor and hair stylist Brandon Straka. It bills itself as “dedicated to sharing the stories of people who can no longer accept the current ideology of liberalism and what the Democratic Party has become.”

“We want people on the right to use their voices and tell the world the truth about whom they are by making videos telling everyone what it means to be a conservative in America and what your values really are,” the campaign’s website says. “Tell minorities on the left, who have been told their whole lives that they are not welcome on the right because of the bigotry and hatred, that they are welcome. Tell them there is a seat at the table on the right for everybody.”

The campaign’s primary means of spreading this message is through written and video testimonials from former Democrats of various backgrounds explaining why they became Democrats and how they then came to reject the label.

That testimony ranges from stories about overcoming college indoctrination to being stereotyped as liberal for being a minority to women told they can’t think for themselves. Others simply recognized the Left’s increasing radicalization.

Among that radicalization in recent years has been the official Democrat platform removing its call to make abortion “rare” in 2012 and demanding the federal nullification of state pro-life laws in 2016; Democrat National Committee chair Tom Perez hailing self-proclaimed socialist candidate Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez as “the future of the party”; left-wing leaders like Rep. Maxine Waters openly advocating the harassment of Trump administration officials; boycott and intimidation campaignsover keeping men out of women’s restrooms; and attempts in numerous states to force private citizens to participate in same-sex ceremonies.

Straka, who is openly gay, launched the campaign with his own May 26 video testimony (full transcript here), explaining that he originally became a liberal out of opposition to hatred, discrimination, groupthink, censorship, and junk science, and that he walked away from liberalism when he came to believe liberalism embodied rather than opposed those ills.

“Liberalism has been co-opted and absorbed by the very characteristics it claims to fight against,” he said. “For years now, I’ve watched as people on the Left have become anesthetized to their own prejudices and bigotry, and the prejudices and bigotry of those around them who echo their values.”

“I have witnessed the irony of advocacy for gender equality morph into blatant hatred and intolerance of men and masculinity,” he continued. “I’ve seen the once-earnest fight for equality for the LGBT community mutate into an illogical demonization of heteronormativity, and the push to vilify and attack our conventional concepts of gender.”

At the time of this writing, Straka’s kickoff video has been viewed more than half a million times, his campaign’s official Facebook group has more than 73,000 members, and there is already reason to believe the movement may represent a deeper cultural shift.

Citing a Reuters/Ipsos poll from April, PJ Media’s Tyler O’Neil notes that whites between the ages of 18 and 34 are equally likely to vote Democrat as they are Republican, a nine-percentage-point decline for Democrats from the 2016 election. Many observers have attributed Trump’s unprecedented victory that year in large part to moderate and formerly left-leaning voters alienated by far-left stances and tactics.

Straka elaborated on his efforts in an interview Tuesday with Fox News’ Laura Ingraham. He said his homosexuality was the only reason he used to be a Democrat, and that he was still a liberal as recently as November 2016, when he cried in response to Hillary Clinton’s loss. But since then, watching the Left’s increasing intolerance toward dissent served as a “red-pill” experience.

On Thursday, Straka said that he entered a camera store to buy some equipment, and was denied service by one employee who recognized him from a TV appearance and didn’t want to facilitate a transaction for “alt-right” purposes.

“[Please] do not retaliate against this camera shop. All of the other employees could not have been nicer,” he said, noting that another employee completed the sale for him. “The reason I decided [to go] forward w/ the story is because I hope [to open] a conversation between me [and] gays on the left.”

***

***

This is not a bot:

My WalkAway was in 2016. The ironic thing is that it wasn’t Trump that made me WalkAway. It was the Democrats themselves. I saw my own (liberal) friends become ugly and hateful. I saw disgusting personal attacks, elitism, arrogance, and rampant stereotyping. I saw them insulting any one they disagreed with as a racist, bigot, xenophobic… etc. I saw identity politics ruining people’s sense of individuality and cultural Marxism pitting people into the “oppressors vs. the oppressed.” It reminded of the early years of the Chinese Cultural Revolution, particularly Mao’s Red Guards. I saw the calls for censorship and the repeated attacks on free speech. I saw the lies. I saw the hypocrisy.

***

***

***

Brandon Straka facebook live encouraging people to do video testimonials to prove  they are not bots:

Also see:

Webinar Podcast: Free Speech Infringements in Michigan

The United West, June 22, 2018:

Free Speech Infringements in Michigan:  Islamist Censorship – Its Roots, Purpose & Role in the 2018 Michigan Governor’s Race

Deborah Weiss, Esq., is a Senior Fellow with the Center for Security Policy where she specializes in free speech and terrorism-related issues. She is considered an expert on the Organization of Islamic Cooperation, CAIR and Islamist censorship. She is the author of several books, including The Organization of Islamic Cooperation’s Jihad on Free Speechand her recently released book titled, Islamist Influence in Hollywood.

Geert Wilders: “Freedom is behind bars. Tommy is behind bars. And that is totally unacceptable”

Voice of Europe, June 9, 2018:

Thousands of protesters gathered in London today and demanded the release of activist Tommy Robinson. One of the event’s main speakers was the leader of the Dutch Party for Freedom, Geert Wilders.

Wilders, who leads the second largest party in the Netherlands, started his speech by telling the crowd “they never walk alone”. He said: “We are here to tell the world and the UK government in particular, to free Tommy Robinson!”

According to the Dutch MP, “Tommy Robinson is the greatest freedom fighter of Britain today. Tommy Robinson is a freedom fighter. He says what no-one dares to say. He has guts. He has courage”.

Later Wilders says:

“Every day, more people are joining our cause. The cause of freedom. Every day our members grow, and our demands are right and just. This is what we want. First, and most important: Free Tommy Robinson!”

“But we also want you to give our countries back to us. Stop selling us out. Stop the mass immigration. Protect your own people. Stop gagging us. Restore the freedom of speech.”

“My friends: long live Great Britain. Allow me, long live the Netherlands. Long live freedom. But most of all, long live Tommy Robinson!” Wilder said.

***

Anarcho-Tyranny in the UK

American Greatness, by Mytheos Holt, May 25th, 2018:

Disturbing news has come to light from the United Kingdom this morning, courtesy of author and journalist Lauren Southern, and of Cassandra Fairbanks at Gateway Pundit. Apparently, after being arrested while live on film, for nothing more than covering a trial of suspected participants in a rape grooming gang, the controversial anti-Islam activist Tommy Robinson has been sentenced to 13 months in prison. A prison, coincidentally, that is likely to be filled with Muslim criminals who will make it a point to kill Robinson. As Southern put it on Twitter:

She has since elaborated on the situation in a YouTube stream that can be viewed here.

Members of the European Parliament such as Geert Wilders and Gerard Batten have since spoken out against the situation, and rightly so. However, what may confuse the reader is that the situation has not been covered in the press. Even Breitbart London’s article on the topic mysteriously vanished earlier today, though an archived version does survive.

They are not alone. Multiple journalistic outlets have scrubbed their stories, and even direct eyewitnesses have been forced to take down their Tweets. The reason for this press silence is reportedly that the judge has issued a gag order preventing anyone from discussing Robinson’s arrest or sentence.

Let me say that again. It appears that a supposedly liberal Western government has thrown an activist in prison for something that in any other country would be regarded as an exercise in freedom of the press, and has then turned around and gagged the press in their country into not saying anything about the incident. If this is true, then in effect, the UK government has ‘disappeared’ Tommy Robinson. No word yet on whether Robinson will be tossed out of a helicopter.

Regardless of Robinson’s polarizing reputation, this is not supposed to happen to anyone. But sadly, it is not surprising. Recently, the New York Times ran a story pointing out the incredible fact that today’s centrists are the most predisposed to be favorable to authoritarianism. The supposedly “centrist” UK government is showing us what that authoritarianism looks like: a world where actual fascism is justified on the grounds of silencing those smeared as fascists.

This is the world dreamt by today’s technocrats. It is the duty of every lover of freedom and sovereignty to ensure the world wakes up to that fact.

Photo credit:  Chris J Ratcliffe/Getty Images

Mytheos Holt is a senior contributor to American Greatness and a senior fellow at the Institute for Liberty. He has held positions at the R Street Institute, Mair Strategies, TheBlaze, and National Review. He also worked as a speechwriter for U.S. Sen. John Barrasso, and reviews video games at Gamesided. He hails originally from Big Sur, California, but currently lives in Arlington, Virginia. Yes, Mytheos is his real name.

***

***

Tommy Robinson sentenced to a year in prison: The shocking facts UK authorities are trying to keep secret

***