Soros Group: Calling People “Illegal” is “Hate Crime”

scottfactor.com ^ | 05/01/12 | Gina Miller

[VanDeKoik]

“The i-word derails real conversation about immigration and human rights.””

Will trespasser work better for you? How about criminal?

[from occupied ga]

Soros Group: Calling People “Illegal” is “Hate Crime”

Actually it's called "freedom of speech" and as such is a constitutionally protected right.

[Biggirl]

Sign of desperation, knowing that the truth “hurts”.

[yank in the UK]

Don’t none of y’all redneck, honkey, cracker Lilly white a** white boys go and use the I word, it’s offensive ya know.

[bmwcyle]

When the left gets its way, we will be reeducated again in camps or killed.

[Delta 21]

Soros and his group are illegal, illegal, ILLEGAL ! ! !

[John123]

The i-word derails real conversation about immigration and human rights.

I have an i-word for you... idiot.

[Doogle]

...somebody shoot the SOB....there fixed

[Le Chien Rouge]

Soros Group: Soon to come “Hate Crimes”:

1) Calling people obese people ‘fat’
2) Calling the Democrat Party members ‘Communist’
3) Calling Black males who commit crimes ‘Criminals’
4) Calling an Abortion ‘Killing a baby’
5) Calling people who look like Helen Thomas ‘Ugly’
6) Calling a gay man a ‘Pickle chugger’

Soros Group: Exemptions to “Hate Crimes”

1) One can correctly call a person who wishes to cut federal spending a Bully
2) One can correctly call a person who disagrees with Obama a Racist
3) One can correctly call a person who disagrees with Homosexuality a Homophobe
4) One can correctly call Christians as Close minded Neanderthals.
5) One can correctly use ethnic slang at high achieving Asians.
6) One can correctly label Sarah Palin as a slut

[liberalh8ter]

Once again, they want to control the debate. At some point, conservatives will grow tired of these shenanigans and just pinch these people in the face.

[SECURE AMERICA]

(She says, “Calling a person ‘illegal’ takes away their humanity.)
No it does not. Your being silly and saying it does changes nothing.
We must stop allowing the use of accurate descriptive words being labeled hate speech.
If you have broken laws, if you have stolen into our Country and are committing fraud by living as a citizen and reaping the benefits of such when you have not taking the legal steps to have that privilege........YOU ARE AN ILLEGAL!

[Flintlock]

The term “hate crime” simply means TRUTH WE WANT TO CONCEAL when used by the left.

It’s total BS, and when used simply means that these people are not to be reasoned with.

They shoot you—or you shoot them. Your choice.

[lula]

Apparently the first amendment is a “hate crime”...who knew?

[King Moonracer]

We’re not allowed to hate criminals? Does that mean we have to become like those fatties who marry death row murderers? Blech!!

A “hate” crime is really a “thought” crime, and “1984” was not meant to be a project plan after reading “Rules for Radicals”. Evil Libtards.

[Lazamataz]

I hate ILLEGAL ALIENS

O, BTW: FUGS

[bigbob]

they’d really hate what I call Soros...

[ThunderSleeps]

You're right. We are not the criminals here. Typical liberal reality inversion. The ILLEGALS are the criminals here. That happens to be how they got the moniker - they are in this Country ILLEGALLY. As you and others have pointed out, we are merely exercising a Constitutionally protected right. Calling it like we see it.

Announcer, “It’s racially charged, legally inaccurate and morally wrong.”

Wow, three falsehoods in one statement. Racially charged? Not by me, not in my book. When I refer to an ILLEGAL all I'm referring to is his or her legal residency status. That's it. Legally inaccurate? So, they have immigration papers? Current visas? Anything? Social Security numbers? Taxpayer IDs? Do they pay taxes? Visas? No? Then they are here illegally. That earns them the moniker ILLEGALS. Morally wrong? Ha, a lib lecturing anyone about morals. Tell me, since when has speaking the truth been morally wrong? However, were I to lie - to myself or anyone else - by not calling them what they are... Lying is morally wrong.

[Fresh Wind]

I prefer the term “criminal”.

[ThunderSleeps]

I believe the whole notion of a "hate crime" is prejudicial anyway. If two people are assaulted, how does the race/creed/color/religion/gender/sexual orientation etc. of the victims play into it? Assault is assault, period. Beating up a person with demographic X instead of Y makes very little difference to the victim. I'd bet they wouldn't really care why they were beat up, just that they didn't want to get beat up. Saying "Well, assault is a crime, but assault against someone who is X is worse." That just introduced an inequity into the law. Hmm, seems I heard somewhere we're all supposed to be equal in the eyes of the law, not discriminated against. Well, that sure sounds like if I'm not X, I'm being discriminated against.

Ironically funny isn't it, that the very people who preach equality and acceptance, etc. etc. are the very ones laying the foundation for permanent inequality. In some cases I believe that is intentional, in others just ineptitude. I believe political and "social" leaders that promote this are doing so intentionally. I think the vast majority of the liberals that go along with it do so only 'cause it sounds good, they've never bothered to consider the consequences, and something in their personality makes them more susceptible to the manipulations of the so-called leaders.