Tag: hate speech

Portland jury clears black man of assault because white man he stabbed had said the n-word

A black man was acquitted of stabbing a white man in Oregon after he claimed the attack was self-defense because the victim called him a racial slur. 

Gary Edwards, 43, was charged with second-degree assault for stabbing a man in Portland near a light rail stop on July 8, KPTV reported.

However, he was found not guilty of the crime on October 31 after the jury learned the victim was using racial slurs in the aftermath of the altercation.

Edwards, who is homeless and has a previous assault conviction, admitted to knifing the victim, Gregory Howard Jr., but claimed it was in self-defense because the other man called him the n-word, according to Oregon Live.

Security cameras, with no audio, captured Edwards, with a fixed-blade knife in hand, approaching Howard as he sat on a beach.

Howard immediately jumped up and pushed Edwards, then the two scuffled until Edwards stabbed Howard in the shoulder.

Edwards defense attorney Daniel Small reportedly told the jury that his client was approaching Howard to see if he would trade his knife for cigarettes. 

‘What other than racism could explain why Mr. Howard perceived hatred, animosity and aggression from a complete stranger,’ Small said.

Moments later, body camera footage from security officers captured Howard shouting a racist slur at Edwards after he had been stabbed.

It is unclear if there is any evidence to suggest that Howard used the slur before he was stabbed.

Prosecutor Katherine Williams told the jury it did not matter what the victim said after he was stabbed.

‘The defendant is not scared for his life. He didn’t retreat, he sauntered up – and he sauntered away after he stabbed someone. The defendant created the situation,’ Williams said.

Despite the prosecutors pleas, the jury found Edwards not guilty.

Edwards lawyer insisted the case never should have gone to trial.

‘I laid my cards out on the table and told the state how the trial would go, but it didn’t matter,’ he told Oregon Live.

Edwards, who is homeless, spent about three months in custody before the trail after prosecutors argued he was a threat to the public due to his lengthy criminal record, according to the outlet.

Keep reading

Why Banning Hate Speech Is Evil

We often hear demands to ban so-called “hate speech.” Negative remarks about various groups, including women, black people, homosexuals, Jews, Muslims, can it is alleged, have a negative effect on members of the group who hear or see the speech. It encourages people to hate them and cements negative stereotypes about them in people’s minds. In addition, hearing or seeing “hate speech” offends the members of the group. Free speech may have some value, but whatever value it has it outweighed by the evil of “hate speech.” Almost any group can claim to be victimized by “hate speech,” except for white heterosexual males and Christians, but “hate speech” applies primarily to members of so-called “protected classes.”

From a libertarian standpoint, the question of banning so-called “hate speech” is a no-brainer. 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 “hate speech.”

Some states have “hate speech” laws on the books. New York is considering a law, already passed in California that requires social media companies to report “hate speech.” This is the “Stop Hiding Hate Act” and has been passed by the State’s Assembly. Here is an account of the measure from Vince Chang, who favors it:

“Under pressure from the ADL [Anti-Defamation League] and other groups, internet platforms have voluntarily adopted measures to regulate hate speech. The ADL described some of the measures that have been taken: Facebook prohibited Holocaust denial content, hired a vice president of civil rights, changed parts of its advertising platform to prohibit various forms of discrimination; expanded policies against content that undermined the legitimacy of the election; and built a team to study and eliminate bias in artificial intelligence. Due to pressure from ADL and other civil rights organizations, Twitter banned linked content, URL links to content outside the platform that promotes violence and hateful conduct. Reddit added its first global hate policy, providing for the removal of subreddits and users that “promote hate based on identity or vulnerability.”

We can see how such laws have a chilling effect on speech if we look at bans on so-called “hate speech” in foreign countries where they are already in operation. I want to focus especially on the Scottish Hate Speech Act.

Let’s first look at an official summary of the Scottish act, from the Scottish parliament site:

“Hate crime is the phrase used to describe behaviour which is both criminal and based on prejudice.

There are already laws in place to protect certain groups from hate crime.

This Bill aims to do three things. It updates these existing laws and pulls most of these laws into one Bill. It also adds to the groups currently specifically protected by hate crime laws.

Criminal courts can generally take into account any prejudice when sentencing a person. Also, people are protected from hate crime through specific laws that apply.

Keep reading

California man who went by ‘Billy Badass’ busted for synagogue bomb threats, feds say

A California man who went by “Billy Badass” on social media allegedly threatened to bomb every synagogue within a 20-mile radius — then doubled down with more antisemitic rants even after cops threw him in a psychiatric hold.

Elijah Alexander King, 36, of San Luis Obispo, pleaded not guilty Tuesday to federal charges stemming from his August rampage of hate that has him staring down a decade behind bars.

King used his “Billy Badass” X account to spew the hate messages on Aug. 28. “I’m gonna blow up every synagogue in a 20-mile radius,” King threatened according to federal prosecutors.

“This is a real threat send the police and report me for terrorism,” said a second messaged ten minutes later. King then searched for synagogues nearby on his cellphone, prosecutors said.

Police found King and had him check into a psychiatric hospital for monitoring where he continued to spew hate from the “Billy Badass” handle, states. 

Keep reading

An Unexpected Con To End Free Speech

Rooting out terrorism and antisemitism was the supposed reason that plainclothed ICE agents arrested doctoral student Rümeysa Öztürk on a street in Somerville, Massachusetts, after she coauthored an op-ed calling on Tufts University to divest from companies with ties to Israel due to the killing and starvation of Palestinian civilians. There is an international movement to boycott, sanction, and divest from Israel, but in the United States, President Donald Trump is imperiling the freedom even to publicly discuss such ideas, which should, in effect, be considered a test case for his larger attack on free speech. So far, the test is going well for Trump.

In what seems a long time ago, in 2024, the Heritage Foundation, a right-wing think tank, released a blueprint for what it called “a national strategy to combat antisemitism” by addressing what it described as “America’s virulently anti-Israel, anti-Zionist, and anti-American ‘pro-Palestinian movement.’” In essence, and in what’s amounted to an extraordinarily effective work of political theater that has been sold to my own state, Massachusetts, among other places, that foundation dubbed its political opponents “supporters of terrorism.” It also labeled organizations working in opposition to its agenda a “terrorist support network,” and claimed for itself the noble mantle of “combating antisemitism” — even as it deftly redefined antisemitism from hatred of Jewish people to criticism of the U.S.-Israel alliance. President Trump has put the Heritage Foundation strategy into action and gone even further.

It may be his most original idea. As political scientist Barnett Rubin put it in September, “President Trump always says he’s very creative and accomplishes things no one has ever done before. And now he is building a fascist regime which is legitimized by the fight against antisemitism. Nobody ever thought of doing that before.”

Keep reading

Three charged for shouting slurs at praying Muslim students while waving bacon in Florida

Three men stormed a University of South Florida parking garage and harassed Muslim students during dawn prayer on Tuesday — an incident captured in videos that showed the group shouting slurs, waving bacon and crowding worshipers as they bowed, reports said.

Police identified the men as Christopher Svochak of Waco, Texas; Richard Penskoski of Canyon, Okla., and Ricardo Yepez of Tampa, according to the Tampa Bay Times.

All three face a felony count of disturbing schools and religious assemblies under Florida’s hate-crime enhancement statute, along with misdemeanor charges of disorderly conduct and disrupting a school or lawful assembly.

None have ties to the university, police said.

The charges followed a multi-day investigation sparked by footage showing the men approaching students during fajr prayer on the roof of the Collins Boulevard Parking Garage.

One man carried a cardboard box reading “Kaaba 2.0 Jesus is Lord,” while another wore a thobe emblazoned with “Jesus is God.”

Students said the group stood inches away as they prayed, shouted insults including “Bow down to lord Jesus Christ” and “Your prophet married a 6 year old,” and taunted them with bacon immediately after the prayer ended, according to a Reddit post.

Keep reading

Korean President Vows Harsh Penalties for “Hate Speech” and “Misinformation”

Korean President Lee Jae Myung has pledged to impose strict punishments for spreading what he calls “misinformation” and for engaging in discriminatory speech, warning that such behavior divides society and threatens democracy.

“We can no longer overlook hate or disinformation disguised as opinion,” he said. “Acts that distort facts or violate human dignity are crimes that must be punished as such.”

Yet the president’s vow, made during a Cabinet meeting on Tuesday, has also deepened unease among free expression advocates who fear that broad definitions of “false information” could open the door to government overreach.

“Truly anachronistic discrimination and hatred based on race, origin, and nationality are rampant in some parts of society,” Lee said at the Yongsan presidential office in Seoul.

“As our society becomes increasingly polarized, these extreme expressions continue to exacerbate social unrest.”

The remarks come as groups hold anti-China protests in downtown Seoul, and after reports that the head of the Korean Red Cross made racist comments toward foreign diplomats.

Lee described such actions as “crimes” that threaten daily life and must be “eliminated.” He added that hate speech and falsehoods were “spreading indiscriminately” online and declared, “We can no longer tolerate this.”

He urged political leaders to help “eradicate these hate crimes and fabricated information.”

But that phrase, “fabricated information,” has caused worry that the government could classify dissenting political views or unpopular opinions as punishable offenses.

In recent months, activists, including supporters of impeached former President Yoon Suk Yeol, have staged demonstrations in areas like Myeong-dong and Daerim-dong, waving banners that read “China Out” and tearing down images of President Xi Jinping.

Their rallies have intensified following the restoration of visa-free entry for Chinese tour groups and Xi’s visit to the APEC summit in Gyeongju.

The animosity toward Beijing also reflects domestic political divides that widened after Yoon’s short-lived martial law order. His supporters accuse China of meddling in South Korean elections and claim the current government’s engagement with North Korea risks Communist influence.

Keep reading

Catholic priest, 57, who pretended to be a 16-year-old skinhead to post in neo-Nazi chatrooms where he threatened to bomb mosques as part of a ‘sexual fetish’ is spared jail

A Catholic priest who posed as a 16-year-old skinhead in neo-Nazi chatrooms where he threatened to bomb mosques as part of his ‘sexual fetish’ has avoided jail. 

Father Mark Rowles, 57, posted under the name ‘skinheadlad1488’ in a racist chatroom called Aryan Reich Killers, where he wrote racist and offensive messages.

Rowles wrote several messages on Telegram, including one where he penned ‘bomb mosques’. 

The priest, who was based in St John Lloyd Catholic Church, in Cardiff, confessed to three counts of sending menacing or offensive messages using the Telegram app in May and June of 2024.  

On Thursday, Rowles was ordered to pay £199, carry out 150 hours of unpaid work, and was handed a three-year Criminal Behaviour Order.

The Catholic Church in Wales is understood to be undertaking a review into the matter, as a spokesperson confirmed the priest had been suspended and had not been in active ministry since the allegations emerged. 

A counter-terror probe into extreme right-wing activity online unearthed the 57-year-old’s actions, and he was later taken into custody. 

In one message, he used an extreme racial slur, adding: ‘They should all be strung up and shot.’ 

And when discussing the ethnicity of Londoners, he wrote: ‘A few bullets to their brains would help’ 

When he was arrested and interviewed by police, Rowles told officers he was not racist, but that he said he was lonely and had a ‘sexual fetish for role play’.

His profile picture showed a young white man with a face covering with a German flag and the words ‘right hand path always’, the court heard.

Prosecutor Rob Simkins said Rowles’ posts showed ‘hostility based on religion and race’.

Jacqui Seal, defending, said: ‘Clearly this is a disturbing case. Throughout his life in the Catholic Church he has never been the subject of a complaint or disciplinary action.

Keep reading

ECRI Pressures Ireland and Finland to Adopt New “Hate Speech” Laws and Speech Monitoring Systems

The European Commission against Racism and Intolerance (ECRI) has issued another set of polite bureaucratic thunderbolts, this time aimed at Ireland and Finland, for not cracking down hard enough on their citizens’ conversations.

The group, operating under the Council of Europe, says both nations have been dragging their feet on what it calls “hate speech.”

In other words, they’re not censoring fast enough.

In Ireland’s case, ECRI was appalled to discover that the country’s “extremely limited” legal framework still leaves some room for public disagreement online.

The commission noted with concern that certain hate speech provisions were removed from the Criminal Justice (Hate Offences) Act 2024, and urged Dublin to correct the oversight by writing new laws to target such expression.

The report didn’t stop there. It called for a national data system to document “racist and LGBTI-phobic bullying and violence in schools” and a “comprehensive data collection” program for hate crimes and hate speech.

It even floated the idea of regulating “election-related misinformation, disinformation, and conspiracy,” which it deemed “critical to limit the spread of hateful ideas.”

So the plan is clear: build a bureaucracy that tracks words, ideas, and schoolyard insults, then hand election discourse over to regulatory authorities. What could go wrong?

ECRI did find time to congratulate Ireland for its National Action Plan Against Racism and inclusion programs for Roma and Traveller communities.

But after that brief applause, the hammer came back down. Hate speech, it concluded, remains “widespread.” More laws, more oversight, more policing of conversation.

Finland’s report read like a blueprint for speech management. ECRI announced that hate speech there “has increased and reached a critical level,” though it didn’t specify what exactly counts as hate speech, or how “critical” was measured.

The group praised Finnish police for maintaining “a regular presence in a web-based gaming platform” where officers act as “game police” and talk to young users about hate speech and online crime. It’s not satire, that’s in the official report.

ECRI proposed creating a national working group to design new policies against hate speech and advised police to unify their methods for “recognition, unmasking and official recording” of hate.

Schools, it said, should install systems to track “racist and LGBTI-phobic incidents,” while even non-criminal “hate incidents” should be formally recognized and logged.

Keep reading

Countries Call on the EU to Enforce “Values” Through Speech Rules

European governments are intensifying pressure on Brussels to tighten control over which organizations receive EU funding, using the language of “combating hate” to justify measures that could sharply restrict free expression.

France, Austria, and the Netherlands have jointly circulated a paper calling on the European Commission to withdraw financial support from any group that does not conform to “European values.”

The document, seen by Politico, urges member states to “redouble their efforts to combat racism, antisemitism, xenophobia and anti-Muslim hatred” and to ensure “no support is given to entities hostile to European values, in particular through funding.”

Behind the rhetoric of tolerance, the plan lays out a system that ties access to EU money directly to ideological loyalty.

Under the proposal, beneficiaries of programs such as Erasmus+ and CERV (Citizens, Equality, Rights and Values) would be required to sign pledges confirming that they “respect and promote EU rights and values.”

The Commission would also be instructed to apply existing budget rules that allow for excluding groups accused of “inciting hatred.”

The initiative arrives just ahead of a European Council meeting in Brussels, where leaders are set to discuss a range of topics, including Ukraine, migration, defense, and Europe’s digital and environmental goals.

A draft of the Council’s conclusions adds another layer by insisting that “EU values apply equally in the digital sphere,” with the “protection of minors” highlighted as a key aim.

What looks like a defense of European ideals increasingly resembles an effort to police opinions.

By expanding the concept of hate speech both online and offline, the document could allow EU institutions to label controversial or dissenting views as violations of European values. This would effectively hand Brussels the power to determine which voices are acceptable in public debate.

Keep reading

How the Free Speech Union Turned the Tide on Non-Crime Hate Incidents

As the Metropolitan Police announce the demise of non-crime hate incidents, the Telegraph has run a feature on the Free Speech Union, crediting its years of campaigning against NCHIs and support for cancel culture victims. Here’s an excerpt.

Sir Mark’s decision may well signal a wider turning of the tide on police investigations into “hate crime”. But the force’s decision to backtrack on Linehan’s case, and others like it, got only a lukewarm welcome from Linehan himself, who said he planned to continue his legal action against the Met.

That, however, is not because he has limitless pockets – cancel culture, he says, has cost him much of his lucrative writing gigs. Instead, his lawyers come courtesy of the Free Speech Union (FSU), the British campaign group set up to defend freedom of expression – be it from armed police, an overzealous student campus or HR managers intent on enforcing diversity policies.

Set up five years ago by the former journalist, Toby Young – now Lord Young, having been nominated for a life peerage by Kemi Badenoch last December – the organisation has handled more than 4,500 cases, from members of the public arrested over tweets deemed to be politically incorrect, to office workers disciplined for querying seminars on critical race theory.

For some clients, the FSU has simply won a written apology. But for others, it has secured a £500,000 payout at industrial tribunal.

If there’s one thing most cases have in common, according to Young, it is that they shouldn’t have happened in the first place. Linehan’s arrest, in which the Met acted “like the Stasi”, being a case in point.

“I think this statement from the Met shows that they have got fed up with this stuff – they recognise that the public want them to prioritise serious crimes like burglary, car theft and mugging,” says Young, who has called for all police forces in the country to follow Scotland Yard’s lead.

“I also think that in Linehan’s case, the police realised they’d been manipulated by a trans-rights activist who understood exactly how to weaponise the police guidance on investigating hate crime incidents, and to turn the police into an enforcement wing for their own agendas.”

Young is referring to Lynsey Watson, a transgender ex-police officer who is understood to have reported Linehan to the police over his social media posts, one of which read: “If a trans-identified male is in a female-only space, he is committing a violent abusive act. Make a scene, call the cops and if all else fails, punch him in the balls.”

Keep reading