Announcing their legal action on behalf of Candace Owens, the Free Speech Union bizarrely referred to her ‘perspectives that some deem controversial’.
Really?
That’s the best they could come up with, the sort of mealy mouthed doublespeak politicians regularly indulge in when they ‘apologise if I offended anybody’, which is not admitting that they actually did anything wrong: instead, it’s shifting the blame to those they wronged.
Likewise, the Free Speech Union are apparently too gutless – or too much in agreement – to state that Owens’ views are not just controversial, they’re blatantly wrong and absolutely disgusting.
The FSU can’t seem to even bring themselves to trot out the old, ‘I disagree with what you say…’ saw, which begs the question of if they do, in fact, disagree with Owens at all.
Let’s just remind the FSU of what Owen’s ‘controversial-to-some’ views really are.
As Dennis Prager points out, Owens spouts a raft of bizarre anti-Semitic conspiracy theories that we’d normally expect to hear from jihadis or the Daily Stormer. Most particularly, she ‘cites and deems as credible the two modern instances of the blood libel against Jews’.
The ‘blood libel’ was the mediaeval slander that Jews butchered Christian children in order to use their blood in baking the Passover matzo bread. The blood libel was the incitement for repeated massacres of Jews in the Middle Ages, up to modern times. It was spread in the late 19th and early 20th century by the notorious Tsarist forgery, The Protocols of the Elders of Zion: a text purporting to show the Jewish conspiracy to rule the world.
There was a direct line from the Protocols to the gas chamber – and to October 7. Arab media regularly tout the Protocols, which is a best seller in much of the Muslim world. ‘Palestinian’ authorities promulgate the protocols as educational material. Palestinian Authority leader Mahmoud Abbas wrote his PhD thesis on the Protocols, arguing that the Holocaust was really a Jewish plot.
Yes, really.
Candace Owens’ contributions to this vicious nonsense is every bit as vile and stupid.
Catholics and Christians were going missing on Passover, then they would find bodies across Europe, and they were able to trace them back to Jews.
Except that Owens’ swivel-eyed lunacy doesn’t stop there. Like Abbas arguing that the Nazis were really a Jewish plot, Owens claims that the Jewish child murderers were really ‘Frankists’. That is, followers of Jacob Frank, an 18th century Polish Jew. So, Jewish-but-not-Jewish: this is the twisted, pretzel logic of gibbering anti-Semites like Owens.
And that’s just the beginning. Owens goes full Goebbels with the modern blood libel: that Israel was founded solely to provide a haven for Satanic Jewish child-murdering paedophiles.
Most people don’t know. They think that the nation of Israel was established because of World War II. No. There was a lot going on leading up to that. Learn about the Damascus Affair of 1840. Learn about what happened to Eszter Solymosi in Austria in 1880. There were Christians who kept on going missing on holidays and the entire Christian world rose up and began publicizing, trying to point to what they believed to be a satanic cult. Of course, all of that’s been erased. Most Christians don’t know this.
If you think this is just inconsequential nuttiness, consider what actually happened. As Prager states:
In 1840, in Damascus, Syrian Jews were charged with butchering Capuchin friar Thomas, an Italian monk living in Damascus. The Capuchins in Damascus spread the charge, which resulted in 63 Jewish children being abducted from their families to force the families to divulge the location of the friar’s blood. And a Jewish barber named Solomon Negrin was arbitrarily arrested and tortured until a “confession” was extorted from him. Under torture Negrin said that seven Jews killed the monk in the house of David Harari. The seven men were subsequently arrested and also tortured. Two of them died under torture.
The other blood libel you [Owens] cite as credible took place in Austria-Hungary in 1882. Jews were accused of murdering and beheading a 14-year-old Catholic girl named Eszter Solymosi. A girl’s body was found on the bank of the Tisza River, but though the body was dressed in Eszter’s clothes, it was not Eszter. And if it was, it proved the charges to be libelous – there was no injury to her neck.
Nevertheless, members of the local Jewish community were accused of having killed Eszter for ritual purposes, as it happened right before Passover.
There is more, much more, of course. Each nuttier and more hateful than the last.
Owens of course trots out the same line as the Greens: that she’s ‘anti-Zionist’, rather than anti-Jewish. This is a nonsensical argument, as an instant’s rational analysis will show.
Zionism is the name of movement to reestablish a Jewish state in the Land of Israel.
Therefore, anti-Zionism means opposition to Israel’s existence as a Jewish nation. Of the world’s more than 200 countries, the anti-Zionist regards only one as unworthy of existence – the Jewish one.
Why don’t so-called ‘anti-Zionists’ similarly attack the very existence of, say, Jordan? Or Pakistan? After all, both were created out of nothing, unilaterally, by the British in the early 20th century.
There was an Israel from 1020 BC to 586 BC and from 516 BC to 70 AD, but there was never a Pakistan until it was created in 1947–48 (the same year Israel was reestablished). Pakistan was wrenched from India to create a Muslim state.
Unlike Pakistan and Jordan, Israel was established by a UN vote.
Worse, vastly more people were killed and made refugees by the creation of Pakistan: at least a million dead and 14 million refugees. If the Muslim world had not violently rejected the UN vote to re-establish Israel, no one would have been made refugees.
In addition, according to the Indian government, at least 86,000 women were raped. Most historians believe the true number to be far higher. The number of women raped when Israel was established is close to zero. The highest estimate was 12.
So, where is the same hatred of Pakistan and Jordan? Or even Poland or the former Czechoslovakia: the creation of both resulted in mass expulsions of ethnic Germans?
The answer is obvious: Jews.
There are many, many more demented anti-Jewish ravings from Owens. Too many to detail here, so read Prager’s letter.
If the FSU doesn’t deem this stuff ‘controversial’ (to say the least), rather than cowardly attributing the possible deeming to unspecified others, then we have a serious problem.
By all means defend Owens’ right to spew hate – but don’t be too gutless to call it what it is.
