Hate Crime Resolution to Criminalize Some Speech Passes the Senate


Why are Republicans helping Democrats pass hate speech laws instead of eradicating the ones we already have? The Senate passed a resolution that only addresses minorities, leaving persecuted Christians without protection.

The problem with these resolutions is they single out people and make them a preferred class superior to others. It also limits free speech by criminalizing some speech.

There’s one other problem. Marco Rubio is one of the four who introduced it, along with another Republican, Susan Collins and two Democrats.

It’s likely a resolution with no substance that panders to some minorities.

This new resolution is one that was pushed by Islamists

On April 4, 2017, the US Senate passed Senate Resolution 118, “Condemning hate crime and any other form of racism, religious or ethnic bias, discrimination, incitement to violence, or animus targeting a minority in the United States”. The resolution was drafted by a Muslim organization, EmgageUSA (formerly EmergeUSA) and the Muslim Public Affairs Council (MPAC).

The unsubstantiated claim in the bill is that hate crimes against Muslims have increased by 67 percent, allegedly reaching a level of violence targeting Muslim Americans that the United States had not experienced since the aftermath of the September 11, 2001.

The bill includes some lip service to anti-Semitism.

Marco Rubio was one of four who introduced the resolution

It was introduced by Kamala Harris, the female Obama, Dianne Feinstein, Susan Collins, and Marco Rubio.

The Islamists credited them all.

“Thanks to the hard work of Senator Marco Rubio, Senator Dianne Feinstein, Senator Susan Collins and Senator Kamala Harris we have achieved the approval of Senate Resolution 118, an anti-hate crimes bill drafted by Emerge-USA.”

Emerge USA has held events at terror-links mosques.

Instead of shutting down terror-tied mosques, they’re catering to them.

The resolution seeks to criminalize hate crimes

These are some of the things they’ve called on law enforcement to do, in addition to improving their reporting of so-called hate crimes:

  • to expeditiously investigate all credible reports of hate crimes and incidents and threats against minorities in the United States;
  • to hold the perpetrators of those crimes, incidents, or threats accountable and bring the perpetrators to justice.



This one sounds like they want to go after hate thought crimes:

  • encourages the development of an interagency task force led by the Attorney General to collaborate on the development of effective strategies and efforts to detect and deter hate crime in order to protect minority communities;

Judith Bergman of The Gatestone Institute wrote: The law already prohibits violence and threats of violence, and law enforcement authorities are supposed to prosecute those — intimidation, destruction, damage, vandalism, simple and aggravated assault. What “hate crimes” are not already covered by the law?

Why did these people, including two Republicans, pass this resolution supporting terror-tied Islamists?

The reason is because Islamists have their hooks into both political parties.



  1. Rubio needs to go! He seems to take the wrong side often. I am sick of this hate crime garbage. If you kill someone, does your hating them make them more dead, than if you don’t? Dead is dead. The hate is the motive, isn’t it? You don’t need that to convict if you have physical evidence; even if you need it for circumstantial evidence does it really matter what kind of reason is used? These additional laws seem to me to be just more political correctness run amuck.

  2. what this is heading toward:

Comments are closed.