The House of Representatives passed the “Anti-Semitism Awareness Act” on May 2, by a v**e of 320-91 in reaction to demonstrations on numerous university campuses and elsewhere against the brutal and genocidal policy of Israel in Gaza. The Act has now been sent to the Senate, where it seems certain to pass. This is an extremely dangerous bill that could criminalize the Bible, many Christian Churches, as well as any negative remarks about Israel and Jews. In brief, it threatens us with totalitarian thought control. We must do everything we can to oppose it.
https://www.nbcnews.com/politics/congress/house-v**e-antisemitism-bill-campus-arrests-rcna150170

First, let’s take an overview of the Act. It adopts the very broad definition of anti-Semitism of the “International Holocaust Remembrance Association.” The Act calls this definition “a vital tool which helps individuals understand and identify the various manifestations of antisemitism.”
https://www.congress.gov/bill/118th-congress/house-bill/6090/text

What does this definition say? “Antisemitism is a certain perception of Jews, which may be expressed in hatred of Jews. Rhetorical and physical manifestations of anti-Semitism are directed toward Jewish or non-Jewish individuals and/or their property, toward Jewish community institutions and religious facilities.” How you can be anti-Semitic toward someone who isn’t Jewish isn’t immediately apparent.
https://holocaustremembrance.com/resources/working-definition-antisemitism

The authors of the definition give someone examples of what they consider anti-Semitic. These include saying that the Jews control the media and Congress, saying that Israel is a r****t state, propagating the “blood libel” that the Jews k**led Jesus, minimizing or denying the Holocaust, and claiming that Jews in America have “dual loyalty.”

As a number of writers including Tucker Carlson and John Zmirak have pointed out, the definition allows large parts of the Bible to be banned. The most famous such passage is Matthew 27: 25. “His blood be upon us and our children.” This is the “blood libel” that the Act wouldn’t let us teach!

You might object that the Act would never be enforced in this way. The American people would never stand for it! But it would always be there, like a sword of Damocles, h*****g over our heads. And don’t be so sure it wouldn’t be enforced! The Scottish H**e Speech Act was passed in 2021, and people predicted it would never be enforced. Beginning in April 2024, though, it has been enforced, and many people have been fined and imprisoned for violating it.

The biggest problem with the Act, though, isn’t the definition of anti-Semitism. If it were, we could substitute a more reasonable definition, such as “hatred for all Jews.” Even if this were done, however, we would still be in an untenable position. Banning any kind of speech, whether it is good or bad, is incompatible with a free society. As the great Murray Rothbard has taught us, all rights are property rights. Everyone can set the rules for speech on his own property, and no one has the right to control what anyone says on someone else’s property. This includes speech which counts as “offensive.” Of course, we don’t live in a libertarian society, but we should come as close as we can in practice to it. This means following the strictest possible interpretation of the First Amendment. “Congress shall make no law. . .abridging the freedom of speech, or of the press.”. ‘No law” means “no law” and that includes laws against so-called “h**e speech.” As the great legal scholar Dr. Wanjiru Njoya says, “Jews must learn to live in a world where people say offensive things about them, same as anyone else. You shouldn’t jail people for saying offensive things about Jews or Israel.”

We need to ask ourselves, why the Act has been passed at the present time. The answer is obvious. It is to block all criticism of Israel. And Israel should be criticized, because of the genocidal policy it is following in Gaza. The US government, led by brain-dead Biden and his gang of neocon controllers, have supported Israel with money and advanced weapons throughout Israel’s invasion. Anthony Blinken, “our” Secretary of State, flew to Tel Aviv as soon as the invasion started and, standing beside war criminal “Bibi” Netanyahu, said, “I come before you not only as the United States secretary of state but also as a Jew.” See here. https://www.washingtonpost.com/world/2023/10/12/blinken-israel-netanyahu-hamas-gaza/

Is it “anti-Semitic” to report this? One of the examples the International Holocaust Remembrance Day Association’s definition of anti-Semitism is to say that Jews have a strong influence on American foreign policy. But it’s the simple t***h.

And what policy do Blinken and his cohorts support? It is Israel’s policy to exterminate the Palestinians who live in Gaza. The great Ron Unz has called it “the greatest televised massacre of civilians in the history of the world.” Under the Act, Unz could be prosecuted for saying that, because saying that Israelis are committing genocide, or comparing then to N**is, is forbidden. https://www.unz.com/runz/israel-gaza-the-masks-come-off-in-american-society/

As if that were not bad enough, conditions in Gaza are getting worse. Because of Israel’s constant bombing and interdiction of food shipments to Gaza, a famine is occurring there. According to Cindy McCain, the Director of the World Food Program, “There is famine, full-blown famine, in the north, and it’s moving its way south.” Now it will reach the south, because Israel has just blocked food shipments to Rafah.
https://www.nytimes.com/2024/05/04/world/middleeast/gaza-famine-mccain-israel.html

Should calling attention to horrendous news like this be an offense punishable by jail? You don’t have to be a libertarian to recognize that we can’t have a free society under the censorship conditions this Act would impose.

H**e has nothing to do with this. Trump is accused of breaking campaign finance regulations multiple times to hide his affairs with two women. And yes, you are right, affairs don't matter, and hiding affairs don't matter. But hiding them because you are afraid they are going to cost you the e******n does matter. This is where Trump crossed the line and committed campaign finance violations on at least 31 occasions.

So you could love Trump with the greatest of passion like Melania or h**e him with the greatest of passion like Micheal Cohen and it wouldn't matter. All that matters is whether the prosecutor is able to convince twelve people on the jury that Donald Trump willfully broke the laws in any of the 31 indictments against him. Now if just one juror thinks that the prosecutor hasn't fully met his burden of proof then you will have a hung jury and Donald will likely get off scot-free. Given the way things are going, that's probably the best that Trump can hope for.

But what it looks like is that Trump has isolated both the judge and the jury by denigrating them, demeaning them, and making personal threats against the judge's daughter. Remember, these are people who hold his fate in their collective hands. Even if he can't get them on his side he needs their objectivity unaffected. You can't achieve that by spouting lies each and every day.

What Trump should understand, but clearly doesn't, is that the judge has the power to only give him a slap on the wrist and let him go on his merry p**********l way or put him in jail for up to 4 years. So this is the man Trump made the choice to isolate on the first day. A bad case of dumb and dumber...

Now the thing that you conservatives have to grapple with is what are you going to do if/when Donald is convicted and very likely sentenced to jail? Now you MAGA conservatives would v**e for him if he turned red, grew horns, and a great big pointy tail but what of those in the independent middle? If you lose just 5% that's it, you'll be left out in the cold again and it will be no one's fault but Donald J. Trump's!

Thanks for the link. In 2021 I was tearing my hair out at work, having recently lost our executive director, who was also a good friend, to cancer, on top of trying to work through all the compliance issues we needed to address due to the p******c.

Reading the article, I vaguely remember hearing about it at the time, thinking it very silly. I never looked into it beyond that, didn't have the time at the time. 🙃😊 I'm curious about whether there was as widespread a push for that as there is now from the right.
The increase in the push to ban books over the last three years is impressive. And the numbers at the ALA include only those they hear about.
https://www.ala.org/bbooks/book-ban-data