Are you one of tens of millions of Christians who agree with the New Testament-oriented message in Mel Gibson's "The Passion of the Christ" that evil Jewish leaders incited a Jewish mob and persuaded Pontius Pilate to have Christ crucified? Guess what? The U.S. government now considers you "anti-Semitic." You are part of a worldwide scourge the U.S. government, Canada, Australia, and 55 European nations are uniting to suppress.
This conclusion was reached by Harmony Grant, a researcher who works for the Reverend Ted Pike and his ministry, Truthtellers.org. She published her findings in an essay on April 9th, 2008, after evaluating a report prepared by the U.S. State Department's Office of Global Anti-Semitism, entitled "Contemporary Global Anti-Semitism: A Report Provided to the United States Congress". Read the full essay HERE.
According to the report, the following ideas or actions are also consider inherently "anti-Semitic":
- Allege "intentionally or unintentionally" that the state of Israel persecutes Palestinians.
- Criticize "intentionally or unintentionally" Zionism or Israel if such criticism leads to lowering of the public opinion of Jews or the government, military, or people of Israel (p. 33).
- Compare the behavior of Israel 's leaders and military (in suppression of Palestinians) to Nazis (p. 22).
- Publish cartoons depicting the Israeli government and military as similar to Nazis.
- Diminish the six million figure of Holocaust dead in any amount.
- Question that gas chambers were the primary means of killing 6 million Jews (p.22).
- Allege that Jews exert undue influence in Congress and the White House.
- Allege that Jews exert undue influence in the media.
- Claim there exists a "Jewish conspiracy" to dominate society (p.19).
- Allege that American Jews are equally loyal to Israel (p.19).
- Deny the people of Israel their “right of self-determination.” This means upholding Biblical law that the Jewish people cannot reoccupy Palestine in unrighteousness. This also means denying them occupation through illegal settlements of all the territory promised to Abraham.
- Reveal hostility (as Christ did) toward Talmudic (pharisaic) Judaism.
Page numbers listed above refer to the Office of Global Antisemitism report. Additional references cited in Harmony Grant's essay include ADL's Foxman: New Testament is Anti-Semitic, John Hagee: False Prophet, and Jews Confirm Big Media Is Jewish.
Basically what this means is that any criticism of Jews or Israel will be considered anti-Semitic by somebody.
It is apparent that the Anti-Defamation League was behind the effort to create the Office of Global Anti-Semitism, at taxpayer expense, as a propaganda oracle of its own anti-Christian "hate crimes agenda." No other group seems to warrant this special consideration. Congress unanimously created this office of thought crimes disinformation in 2004. Cast your vote to end its influence: call your Senators and Representative. Call toll-free at 1-877-851-6437. Tell them: "Please revoke funding for the State Department's Office of Global Anti-Semitism. It does not represent scholarly research but the anti-Christian biases of the Anti-Defamation League."
And why is this important? Earlier, it was revealed that 58 nations are involved, to one degree or another, in this effort to limit free speech. Michael "VonBluvens" Blevins, the Florida State leader of the American National Socialist Workers Party (ANSWP), researched and compiled a partial list of other nations' "hate speech" laws, and posted it on the Vanguard News Network Forum. Here's his list:
* In the United Kingdom, incitement to racial hatred is an offence under the Public Order Act 1986 with a maximum sentence of up to seven years imprisonment.
* In Germany, Volksverhetzung (alleged incitement of hatred against a minority under certain conditions) is a punishable offense under Section 130 of the Strafgesetzbuch (Germany's criminal code) and can lead to up to five years imprisonment. Volksverhetzung is punishable in Germany even if committed abroad and even if committed by non-German citizens, if only the incitement of hatred takes effect within German territory, e.g. the seditious sentiment was expressed in German writ or speech and made accessible in Germany (German criminal code's Principle of Ubiquity, Section 9 §1 Alt. 3 and 4 of the Strafgesetzbuch).
* In Ireland, the right to free speech is supposedly guaranteed under the Constitution (Article 40.6.1.i). However, the Prohibition of Incitement to Hatred Act, proscribes words or behaviours which are "threatening, abusive or insulting and are intended or, having regard to all the circumstances, are likely to stir up hatred" against "a group of persons in the State or elsewhere on account of their race, colour, nationality, religion, ethnic or national origins, membership of the travelling community or sexual orientation."
* In Canada, advocating genocide or inciting hatred against any 'identifiable group' is an indictable offense under the Criminal Code of Canada with maximum terms of two to fourteen years (who defines what is hatred?). An 'identifiable group' is defined as 'any section of the public distinguished by colour, race, religion, ethnic origin or sexual orientation.' It makes exceptions for cases of statements of truth, and subjects of public debate and religious doctrine. The landmark judicial decision on the constitutionality of this law was R. v. Keegstra (1990).
* In Iceland, the hate speech law is not confined to inciting "hatred", as one can see from Article 233a in the Icelandic Criminal Code, but includes simply expressing such hatred publicly: "Anyone who in a ridiculing, slanderous, insulting, threatening or any other manner publicly assaults a person or a group of people on the basis of their nationality, skin colour, race, religion or sexual orientation, shall be fined or jailed for up to 2 years." (The word "assault" in this context does not refer to physical violence, only to expressions of hatred.)
* Victoria, Australia has enacted the Racial and Religious Tolerance Act 2001, which prohibits conduct that incites hatred against or serious contempt for, or involves revulsion or severe ridicule of another on the grounds of his race or religious beliefs.
* New Zealand prohibits "hate speech" under the Human Rights Act 1993. Section 61 (Racial Disharmony) makes it unlawful to publish or distribute "threatening, abusive, or insulting...matter or words likely to excite hostility against or bring into contempt any group of persons...on the ground of the colour, race, or ethnic or national or ethnic origins of that group of persons." Section 131 (Inciting Racial Disharmony) lists offences for which "racial disharmony" creates liability.
* France has made "hate" speech laws restricting the open expression of anti-Semitism, and ethnic bias in public, but it implies to guidelines in news journalism (i.e. newspapers and state-owned Television) in how to report (or be told not to discuss) those matters without creating social tension.
* Sweden prohibits "hate"speech, hets mot folkgrupp, and defines it as publicly making statements that threaten or express disrespect for an ethnic group or similar group regarding their race, skin colour, national or ethnic origin, faith or sexual orientation.
* Finland prohibits "hate" speech, kiihotus kansanryhmää vastaan/hets mot folkgrupp, and defines it as publicly making statements that threaten or insult a national, racial, ethnic or religious group or a similar group.
* Denmark prohibits "hate" speech, and defines it as publicly making statements that threaten, ridicule or hold in contempt a group due to race, skin colour, national or ethnic origin, faith or sexual orientation.
* Norway prohibits "hate" speech, and defines it as publicly making statements that threaten or ridicule someone or that incite hatred, persecution or contempt for someone due to their skin colour, ethnic origin, homosexual life style or orientation or, religion or philosophy of life.
* Serbia - Serbian constitution guarantees freedom of speech, but declares that it may be restricted by law to protect rights and respectability of others.
And this is just the tip of the iceberg. This assualt on free speech is spreading worldwide. And the constraints have not been uniformly enforced. This is even more reason why we must continue to vigorously exercise our First Amendment rights, and even more vigorously oppose any additional constraints on those rights beyond the customary limits of libel and incendiary speech.