Hate is a terrible thing, isn't it? Or perhaps that depends on the target of that hate. Is it wrong to hate war? To hate poverty? To hate lies? To hate bigotry?
These issues can be subjective, because it is not always wrong to lie, and depending on how it is defined, bigotry can be a good, bad or indifferent thing. Therein lies one of the many problems of an organisation that sets itself up to "prevent hate". Or perhaps that should be "ostensibly to prevent hate". There is at least one such organisation Down Under, the deceptively titled Online Hate Prevention Institute.
Below is a screengrab from its "About" page.
Can you spot the four grammatical mistakes? More to the point, can you spot the willful attempt to deceive the public? No? Okay, let's do a little critical reading.
"Our definition is wider than both that of the law and that of platform providers".
Translation: "We decide what constitutes hate, not YouTube, not the law, not you. And if we decide it constitutes hate, we're not going to let you watch it. Period".
"We aims to promote debate".
Translation: "We aim to stifle debate that is not on our terms".
"We also seek to raise awareness about the dangers that hate, whatever form it takes, can have on individuals and their physical and emotional health".
Translation: "If we
decide without reference to anyone or anything else, that someone will find a particular video hateful or offensive, we will order
it to be removed from YouTube or any other platform, and there will be no appeal against our
Who is behind the Online Hate Prevention Institute, and what is their real agenda? A list of their current board of directors can be found here
. Seven of the eight names listed are identifiably Jewish, and at least two of those are by their own admission active supporters of Zionism. Now what does that tell you?
Their main target at the moment, and most likely the perverted inspiration for this sinister organisation, is Dr Fredrick Töben. You can read about Dr Töben's misadventures elsewhere, but below are two screengrabs from a recent mailing he sent out.
Notice the slightly paranoid wording, "Jews" are out to get him. Why does he believe that? Why does he believe "Jews" are trying to shut him up? Maybe it's for the same reason some people believe "Jews" or "the Jews" (all of them?) are trying to censor the Internet, because a clique of American Jews - the ADL
- is indeed trying to do so.
There is a widely held belief in certain circles that the media, specifically the American media, is controlled by Jews. Clearly both the ADL and the OHPI regard this claim as akin to hate, so how do they hope to refute it? By controlling the media, or at least the Internet. Hmm.
Okay, so the OHPI has made this poor bloke paranoid, but the second screengrab from this e-mail should make us all paranoid, because the claim is made - undoubtedly true - that YouTube has already removed no fewer than 1700 videos at the behest of this hate-filled clique.
Not only that, but the OHPI isn't satisfied with this response, and thinks when it shouts "Jump", the people at YouTube should ask "How high?"
One serious point here, is that undoubtedly many of the videos that have been removed by YouTube at the behest of the OHPI contain material that is largely or perhaps entirely accurate. It is possible to produce a video, a book or whatever that is 100% factually accurate yet is entirely misleading, intentionally or otherwise.
For example, a video about homosexual serial killers - of which there have been many - might be construed as hate by certain so-called gay
Videos relating to atrocities and human rights abuses committed in the Middle East and elsewhere can likewise be construed as "hate" by interested parties, and just damned liars.
If you don't want anyone, Jew, Gentile, Christian fundamentalist, Islamist, white, black, homosexual, feminist
, politician...to tell you what videos you can watch, what books you can read...the time to take a stand against these tyrants of tolerance is now, before they succeed not only in censoring anything they
find offensive, but in making it illegal.