The Left is trying to destroy free-speech social media platform Gab following Pittsburgh synagogue shootings

The American Left, always ready to exploit a tragedy for its own political gain, has ‘identified’ a new villain following the tragic shootings at a Pittsburgh synagogue over the weekend by a raging anti-Semitic Trump hater: Gab, a social media platform that truly embraces free speech, even that which can be offensive to some people.

On Saturday, police and federal agents arrested Robert Bowers, 46, who is accused of killing at least 11 people and wounding four police officers. Reports said that Bowers launched his attack when the building was full of congregants.

Since the attack, the Left has seized on the fact that Bowers had a confirmed account on Gab, which they are calling a “far-right alternative” to Facebook, Twitter, and other Left-wing platforms.

To be sure, a lot of what he posted online is disgusting and hurtful – and definitely fits the definition of anti-Semitic. But in America, such speech is not only allowed, it’s constitutionally protected.

And while we’re on the subject, the high-and-mighty Left routinely has no problem whatsoever with users on Twitter and Facebook who write some of the vilest, most disgusting things about conservatives, Republicans, and especially POTUS Donald Trump and his family.

Here’s a sampling of the Left-wing media’s biased narrative of Gab. Business Insider reports:

The man who allegedly opened fire in a Pittsburgh synagogue Saturday morning, killing 11 people and injuring six, was reportedly a frequent poster on Gab, a relatively new social network that has attracted many from the far-right fringe.

Gab, which bills itself as the free-speech alternative to Facebook and Twitter, has become a haven for far-right extremists. The site does not police hate speech, instead encouraging users to take advantage of its tools to filter out posts they find offensive.

You get the idea.

No speech can be criminalized in America

If you’ve ever visited Gab, no doubt you’ve seen people post things you would consider offensive and certainly not something you would agree with. But the same thing happens on every other social media site every day. Someone is always saying something that is offensive.

That was the point of the First Amendment. As long as you’re not slandering someone or making false accusations and claims, then the Constitution protects your speech. Or at least it was designed to – before the Left began policing and criminalizing it. (Related: NYT says First Amendment must be outlawed because “words can be like rape” … HUH?)

Take the notion of “hate speech.” What is ‘hate speech’ but speech that the Left has deemed unallowable? The fact is, no matter what someone says, someone else is always going to disagree with it. So, if no speech is universally unacceptable, no can be banned or criminalized. And yet, we have “hate speech” ‘rules’ imposed on us from on high.

But wait. How come only the Left gets to decide what is and isn’t “hate” speech, what is and isn’t “acceptable” speech? A simple read of the First Amendment reveals nothing about one political ideology deciding what all other political ideologies can say or, for that matter, think.

While a majority of people may find what Bowers wrote on Gab disgusting and not points of view they share, the Left has used vile language against Jews as well and without repercussion, from the same speech Nazis because they align with the ‘right’ political party. The “Rev.” Jesse Jackson – who once referred to New York City as “Hymietown”– comes to mind. So does that blatant anti-Semite National of Islam leader Louis Farrakhan, who just referred to Jews as “termites”on Twitter.

No, he hasn’t been banned from the platform. He wasn’t called out by the disgustingly dishonest Left-wing media and blamed for the Pittsburgh synagogue shootings. He hasn’t been disowned by Democrats for his “hate speech.”

The American Left wants to blame Gab for Bowers’ speech. The Left also wants to criminalize some speech but only if the ‘wrong person’ uses it.

Read more about freedom of speech at

Sources include:

comments powered by Disqus