Other sites don’t approve my similar posts on other places, though. Good to see this blogger -even if he is wrong-, he approves not only the pro-comments, but the criticism too.

And you DID write about free speech. Don’t you feel shame sometimes?

Free speech and hate speech, Actually there is only freedom of speech. But hey, we all know the liberals call hate speech all the facts they don’t like to hear. Afroamericans ruined New Orleans and Detroit? Hate speech! Los Angeles is full of Mexican gang members? Hate speech! The government is serving Israel? Hate speech. These are fact though. But some people don’t want to hear these facts.

“If it walks like a duck and talks like a duck…it’s a gang.”

What gang hand signs? There is no hand sign. There is only a poltiical hand sing. Just like some people show up the “V” sign as victory. “Winston Churchill popularised its use as a “Victory” sign”. I guess he was also a “gang member”, right?
The swastika is also a political symbol, not a gang symbol. Just like the donkey or the elephant. Or you think the Democrats and the Republicans are also gangs?

“they’re allowed to hide their violent streaks”

What violent streaks? Don’t get me wrong, but the police arrests the anti-NSM protesters, not the NSM members. Always. So who are the violent ones?

“Put simply, a gang is a group of people who share a common identity.”

Can I have a question? Do you think the same about those anarchist, communist guys, with their Anarchy symbol, the red stars, the hammer and sickle? They had black uniform. What about the Mexican Brown Beret guys? They have brown uniforms and they attacked people in California.

“But the second they start openly lacing that speech with violence and frightening innocent people, they lose me on the free-speech argument.”

Really? Did you see a single person, who was scared there? I did see few videos, I did see crazy mob, the anarchists yelled “death to the nazis” and such things, they threw stones and soda cans at the anti-illegal protesters. The words are just words, but it’s strange how do you hear the “bad words” from the nazis, and how do you ignore the worse words from the anarchists, communists, homosexuals and other groups.

“They’ll have identifying marks, signs, symbols or signals that represent the gang they’re affiliated with.”

No, those are Party symbols, a movement’s symbols. If you have no idea what do you talking about, why do you write articles?

“Arguably, I’d have to allow these guys to say exactly how they feel, right up until the fist meets the nose”

Well, my friend, the Brown Berets attacked the NSM in California. This means they are the violent ones, they tried to hit somebody’s nose. That means you want to BAN their group, and if they show up somewhere you go to protest against them. Right? Why I have the funny feeling you DON’T? Because you don’t. Because you are a hypocrite.

“It’s well known that one person’s highly suggestive, or even explicit speech can incite others to enact violence or go through with hate crimes.”

You forgot to mention, they never have speeches about killing or beating up people. This means you say something, what is not true. But hey, Bush and Obama did lead this country to several wars, why don’t you speak up against them? They actually killing people. Really. Not only in your fantasy.

“We don’t sanction the promotion of gang violence, so why are we protecting people whose speech incites hate crimes?”

Because they have no pro-hate crime speeches. But why do you worry about 100 peaceful protesters, when the United States has 1.000.000 ! criminal (murders, drugs, prostitution, robbery, theft, and so on) gang members, like the Bloods, Crips, MS13. (The last one has “kill whites” spraypaints too on walls, but I guess that’s not a hatecrime to you.)

The media and the press should be in good people’s hands. Not in the hands of hypocrite liars.

I hope my opinion is not hurting your feelings and you don’t call my opinion a “hate speech”.

While their words now may not be violent, they’re merely constructing the stage for violence later on. Social Democratic Germany, Republican Spain, and pre-fascist Italy all permitted Nazis and Nationalists to recruit openly without checking them; when these groups were significantly large, these regimes granted them concessions (even without a demand in most cases); then finally handed over the government without even so much as a threat of violence, often (especially in the case of Spain) disarming the anti-fascist militias.

They are also using “illegal immigration” as a hook issue to bring people into their front groups, where they can warm them up to Nazism. This is not something to be taken lightly, as even “free speech” is much more dangerous than is readily apparent.