Open Borders Enablers Cry "Hate" But Have Blood On Their Hands

By Brenda Walker

Washington is awash in lies these days, perhaps even more so than under the previous Administration. The new gang of thugs (D-flavor) is pumped up by electoral success and what they imagine to be a popular mandate, failing to recognize that a moral collapse of the Republicans does not mean that the American people are clamoring for more state control and open borders.

One of the symptoms of an increasingly Stalinist left is repression on the basic freedom of free expression.

A common strategy from the left is the accusation of "hate speech"—a condemnation attached to any idea with which they disagree, e.g. legal, controlled and reduced immigration.

Speak the truth that any informed person knows—that Open Borders kill—and the response will likely be a bogus accusation of the dreaded "hate speech", or the nuclear option, "racist", which will deflate many a discussion. VDARE.com writers are slammed frequently in this way. The aim is to win through intimidation, an approach which is often successful in Europe, where disgruntled Muslims go jihad if they feel insulted. (Over a hundred people were killed around the world during riots by Muslims unhappy about the Danish cartoons mocking Mohammed.)

Anti-hate is a big theme among the multicult crowd. The Southern Poverty Law Center has its Hatewatch blog; La Raza promotes We Can Stop the Hate and Latinos against Hate Speech exhorts its uncritical acolytes to complain about speech protected by the First Amendment. When MALDEF launched its talking points website in 2008, lawyer Peter Zamora declared: "Anti-immigrant hate speech has led to an increase in violent crimes against Latinos and has created tensions which divide communities."

That's an interesting theory. But the supporting evidence is often weak and anecdotal at best: a so-called “hate crimeâ€