“At this, the high priest tore his clothes and declared, “Why do we need any more witnesses? You have heard the blasphemy. What is your verdict?” And they all condemned Him as deserving of death. Then some of them began to spit on Him. They blindfolded Him, struck Him with their fists, and said to Him, “Prophesy!” And the officers received Him with slaps in His face.…” – Gospel of Mark 14:63-65
By TONY MOBILIFONITIS
THE new “antisemitism act” passed by the US Congress might well be enforced by Pharisee judges declaring “blashemy!” as evidence of the accused making an “antisemitic” statement is presented to the court by the prosecutor.
The Antisemitism Awareness Act was opposed by 91 members of Congress, white 320 dutifully voted in favour, probably knowing full well that some Jewish donors would be nodding heartily in agreement. It now goes to the US Senate.
A document outlining 11 “definitions and examples adopted by bill” show that it is nothing more than an outright attack on any speech or publication or even image that attacks or criticizes – fairly or unfairly, justifiably or unjustifiably– Jewish people and organisations including Israel. It is probably the most draconian attack on free speech since so-called “anti-hate laws” were introduced.
Judging by comments posted on Musk’s X platform, the bill has horrified Americans right across the political spectrum who respect their Constitutional First Amendment right to freedom of religion and expression: “Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof; or abridging the freedom of speech, or of the press; or the right of the people peaceably to assemble, and to petition the government for a redress of grievances.”
The so-called Antisemitism Awareness Act is a flagrant violation of this and should be struck from the law books, regardless of the fact that the Act itself states: “Nothing in this Act shall be construed to diminish or infringe upon any right protected under the First Amendment to the Constitution of the United States.”
That clause pure Orwellian doublespeak. The Act itself is clearly and openly designed to suppress speech and expression of a particular category, which is negative references to Jews and Israel. It is surely an open door for the use of tyrannical prosecutors and judges to attack anyone perceived as anti-Jewish or anti-Israel.
Already, the politicised and gross abuse of the law by Joe Biden’s administration in the series of cases launched against Donald Trump, is revealing a judiciary operating as a politicised tyranny at an unprecedented level. And we can be in no doubt that Australia’s major political parties and their e-Safety Commissar will simply follow in the US coat tails.
Already, various Americans are warning that this bill could outlaw aspects of Christianity. The gospels and Christ himself, speak disparagingly of the Jewish leaders of biblical Israel, or Palestine as it was named by the Roman Empire.
Republican Congressman Matt Gaetz says the bill’s expanded definition of antisemitism would criminalize the Gospel because its working definition of “contemporary examples of antisemitism” includes “claims of Jews killing Jesus”.
It’s a historical fact that the Jews of Palestine killed Jesus. It’s not only a claim of the gospels and epistles, it’s also recorded in the writings of Josephus and the Roman historians. We can also take it as historical fact that Jesus utterly condemned the Jewish religious leaders of Palestine – the scribes, pharisees and saducees.
“The Bible is clear. There is no myth or controversy on this. Therefore, I will not support this bill,” Gaetz posted on X Spaces. His stand along with the 90 other no-voting members of Congress is commendable and courageous in the context of US politics, that is so strongly dominated by the Jewish lobby.
But what Gaetz says next is chilling, because he relates the bill to what he and fellow congress members have uncovered in the Judiciary Committee and in the Weaponization (of government agencies) Subcommittee.
He says there is “an effort underway to try to shape the nature of truth itself by shaping what can be seen and what can be received – particularly by those in power. There’s a cabal in Washington that wants to control the access to information, both upward to decision-makers and downward to the populace. This is not a partisan issue, the way the intelligence community works around here is frightening.”
We see a parallel process happening in Canberra with Albanese and his eSafety Commissioner Julie Inman-Grant, of World Economic Forum infamy, seizing upon the opportunity of the Bondi stabbings to seek more controls on social media.
Republican congressman Mike Lawler of New York, who introduced the bill, stupidly posted on X: “I’m proud that my bill, the Antisemitism Awareness Act, just passed the House of Representatives 320 to 91. This bill has broad, bipartisan support and will begin the process of cracking down on the antisemitism we’ve seen run rampant on college campuses across America.”
When someone posted in response: “I’m a New Yorker, I’m against antisemitism but for real what the f… are you doing? Are you trying to have Christian like me jailed? Between the open borders, high inflation and crime don’t you have better things to do?”
The prize political clown from New York posted back: “No and those pushing that nonsense are truly idiotic and irrational. The bill does not criminalize Christianity — I’m Catholic. It’s gives contemporary examples of potential antisemitism. Calling all Jews Christ killers is a form of antisemitism. Believing in the gospel is not.”
Oh sure Congressman. You can believe your gospel, but just don’t quote out loud or publish those “anti-semitic” passages like John 8 where Jesus condemns a group of Jews as “of your father the devil” who want to kill him.
Did the congressman ever ask how many cases there actually are of disturbed bigots going around the streets calling Jews “Christ killers” or posting the accusation online? Most Jews and most reasonable people would probably ignore such a person, or feel pity for them.
But no, such persons are the new heretics who must be burnt at the stake of public inquisitions invoking “antisemitic hate speech”. The truth is that the more likely targets are people like academics who might mount intelligent arguments against Zionism or for the cause of Palestinians dispossessed of homes and lands.
And dare we mention the arguments questioning the historical accuracy of the holocaust? These already invoke prosecution under German and EU so-called “anti-hate speech” laws.
The Anti-Semitism Awareness Act attaches itself to the existing US Civil Rights Act 1964 to “provide for the consideration of a definition of antisemitism set forth by the International Holocaust Remembrance Alliance for the enforcement of Federal anti-discrimination laws concerning education programs or activities, and for other purposes.”
Current propaganda links the bill to recent major protests in US colleges and universities against US aid to Israel and the ongoing Israeli war on Gaza. But the bill is just another step along the way in a series of actions designed to criminalize dissent and political speech.
It is directly related to the Biden administration’s 60-page May 2023 report The US National Strategy to Counter Antisemitism, and recycles all the usual antisemitism complaints squealed perennially by the Anti-Defamation League of B’nai B’rith, the Jewish Defense League, the Southern Poverty Law Centre and others.
While Australia’s common law offence of blasphemy has been removed by “progressive” legislatures in Queensland and Western Australia they still remain on the books, ironically, in Victoria, South Australia, The Northern Territory, Tasmania and The Australian Capital Territory.
Blasphemy laws are seen as an affront to free speech by ‘small L’ liberals, libertarians of right and left leanings, leftists and others who advocate free speech, which is probably why they haven’t been prosecuted in Australia since 1871 when an elderly man was found guilty of saying the Old Testament was quite immoral and was sentenced to two years in jail. Today, this would be considered an outrage against free speech.
But the original anti-blasphemy laws are not simply a case of bigoted old Englishmen defending their church. In the case of Gathercole in 1838, Baron Charles Alderson, speaking for the court, declared that “A person may, without being liable to prosecution for it, attack Judaism, or Mahomedanism, or even any sect of the Christian religion (save the established religion of the country); and the only reason why the latter is in a different situation from the others is, because it is the form established by law, and is therefore a part of the constitution of the country”.
But now “blasphemy” is back, couched in the “respectable” terms of “international human rights” and the noble battle to eradicate racism, xenophobia, antisemitism, homophobia, transphobia, misogyny, bigotry and anything else that contradicts the ideology of the “global liberal order”.
