Please take your time and watch this one with focus. This is not a very long video. But like a lot of the old material we repost here from time to time, it has layers of extra meaning and value in hindsight.
First, the blunt question is asked by Henrik Clausen: “Can truth ever constitute hate speech?”
There is a lot of analysis in here by Stephen Coughlin. The whole video is only 19 minutes. But it is a major foreshadowing of the state of freedom of speech in the West today, and identifies some of the actors who crushed it, not the least of which appears to be certain Russian agencies.
Excellent. And that’s where we are at now.
More recently consider that Judiciary courts will also figure that is Truth can be Hate Speech.
28 May 2026 ….. Truth is now criminal hate speech if used to “incite hatred,” according to a Belgian court.
The ruling came in the case of anti-migration activist Dries Van Langenhove, who said in a post on X that, “it is only due to a technicality that I could not immediately be sent to jail —to the judge’s frustration.” …..
https://cbn.com/news/world/belgian-court-rules-factually-correct-remarks-can-be-hate-speech#:~
That stand has cost a fortune in legal fees.
https://nitter.net/DVanLangenhove/status/2059275296050741666?s=20
Many good comments on ^”who said in a post on X that”^
Understand why & how they systemically want to apply the narrative as per the Rumble link.
Then intention of killing the truth, kills even the ones who were supposedly advantaged.
Then is it self sacrificing useful idiots?
Blind useful idiots?
Suicidal Empathy?