On Monday evening (March 31) Fox News Channel’s Megyn Kelly had a segment on her nightly television program that dealt with disturbing news. Kelly exposed the recent successful efforts of the Center for American Islamic Relations (CAIR) to stifle the free speech rights of a documentary film-maker and the participants in the film.

According to Kelly’s report, last Thursday, March 27, CAIR succeeded in shutting down the movie’s screening at the University of Michigan in Dearborn. The film, titled Honor Diaries, depicts women of various religious backgrounds who have dealth with “honor violence” at the hands of male relatives. “Honor is something that is carried and contained in women and is there to be guarded by men,” explains one woman in the film. “It’s systematic, institutionalized misogyny,” declares another woman.

The movie’s initial debut was actually held on March 8, so it has already been seen by thousands. Still, last week the film’s airing in Dearborn was censored from public viewing by the university at the behest of CAIR, which claimed that it is “Islamophobic.” Other universities have also been hit with protests from CAIR and have refused to allow the film to be shown on campus. In addition, CAIR tried to stop Kelly and Fox News from airing her segment on  Monday night reporting on the censorship of the film in Dearborn. Kelly and Fox bravely refused to be scared into caving to the censorship demand. A video of Monday’s segment by Megyn Kelly is available here.

It is critical to note that in their attacks against the film and Megyn Kelly, CAIR did not claim that the events described in the movie are untrue. That’s because the women whose “diaries” are profiled in the movie are telling the truth. There is no argument from CAIR on that point. Rather, CAIR simply argues that the content will make people fear Muslims and/or their religion. And that also may be true. But since when did free speech under the First Amendment get restricted in its application only to speech that will not elicit fear? If that were the criteria,  no liberal should ever be allowed to open his or her mouth! They scare the bejeebers out of me when I think about the damage they are doing with their hair-brained, dangerous ideas and actions across this country.

CAIR is using the same tactic that liberals use incessantly. CAIR cries “Islamophobic” when something unflattering threatens to expose the brutality of many Muslim men. Similarly, liberals toss around labels like “racist” or “homophobe” or “war on women” when telling the truth gets too close to exposing their dark underbelly. For the past six years any negative comment levied at Barack Obama has earned the speaker or writer (or thinker) the “racist” moniker. Some liberals even invent racism so they can feel better about themselves. When liberals encounter devout citizens who follow their religious beliefs and defend the sanctity of marriage as between one man and one marriage, they deem us to be “homophobes.” The urge to divide and conquer is so ingrained in liberal mentality that that it would require decapitation to separate the two.

Not to be outdone by CAIR and the University of Michigan in the censorship department this week, liberal New York Senator Chuck Schumer reintroduced a bill — at the behest of the White House — that on its surface purports to support and protect free speech and free press. In reality, however, the bill squelches the rights of those who are least protected by the law already — independent journalists and bloggers like your Victory Girls. Having failed so far with passing the so-called “Fairness Doctrine,” which attempted to silence conservative talk radio, liberals have repackaged the proverbial wolf in sheep’s clothing to try and make the liberal beast look like a harmless cuddly lamb. They have temporarily changed their focus from stifling the spoken word to eradicating the written word of those who disagree with them.

Schumer’s censorship bill, called the “Freeflow of Information Act,” but more aptly named the “Freedom FROM Information Act,” would purportedly exempt a ‘covered journalist’ from “subpoenas and other legal requirements to expose their confidential sources in leak investigations and other areas.” That sounds all peachy and freedom-loving, until you realize that is is coming form a liberal, in which case “liberal” and “freedom-loving” are mutually exclusive. In this case, liberals would get to define who is a “covered journalist,” and you can bet that definition will not include anyone with an opinion that differs from Chuckie, Barry O, King Harry, Nanny P, and all the other reigning liberals of the Regime. Naturally, that means anyone outside of the mainstream mMedia will be verboten from bearing the title of “covered journalist.”

Texas Senator John Cornyn has vowed to not let the freedom suppressing law move ahead, however. He is on record saying:

“[Liberals] want to pick and choose which journalists are covered,” the Texan Republican told Breitbart News. “In other words, if you’re a blogger they might not cover you, but if you work for the New York Times they might. Given the changes in the way we get information and the way we consume news, that really smacks to me in essence of government licensing who’s an official ‘journalist’ for the purposes of a shield law and who’s not. If there is one thing I can glean from the First Amendment, it is that government should not be in the business of licensing the news media.” […]

Talk radio, I think, the left feels as a threat. Now, you know, you start to put the dots together and … you begin to see that this administration wants to control the information that people get and particularly any information that might be critical of them – which is […] the function of a free press: to give people unbiased and factual information they can use to make their own decisions, not to collaborate with government in squashing speech that people find unfavorable,” he adds.

Cornyn says he will “absolutely” be whipping against the bill and doubts the Republican-controlled House would pass it anyway.

If anything should be censored, it is the lies ad the spin that emanate 24/7 from the Obama machine. Even CBS’ liberal reporter Bob Schieffer, host of Face the Nation, has intimated publicly that the Obama regime is addicted to spin.

When government officials insult us with spin they’re doing it on our dime, which is supposed to be used to operate the government, not to hold news conferences to tell us what a fine job people on the public payroll are doing. […S]elf-serving spin at the first sign of crisis does not help the situation. It makes it worse. Because it makes it harder to believe anything the government says. Real security is built on trust in the government. That requires truth, which should be the beginning of government presentations, not the fallback position.

“The problem for Obama and his Regime,” says journalist Joseph Carducci, commenting on Schieffer’s surprisingly candid remarks, “is that the truth simply does not help them.” Carducci goes on to say:

In fact, it makes them look even more like the radicals that they truly are. Obama does not want us to know or see how truly radical he is really is. So, he hides the truth in every way possible. Only when it is obviously discovered as a lie, will he ever ‘fall back’ on the truth!

As a recent prime example, just yesterday Obama took to the airwaves to tout his signature achievement, Obamacare, a day after the initial open enrollment period came to a close. Besides the fact that he inexplicably censored out the name of Kathleen Sebelius from his remarks, he spewed forth misleading statistics about how many people have enrolled in Obamacare; but like others who follow his talking points, he was unable or unwilling to break down those statistics to get to the the truth of the matter. Most notably, less than a million of the reported 7.5 million who have signed up for Obamacare have actually made the first premium payment for their coverage, and therefore are not legally covered by the insurance that they may have selected online on the exchanges. It takes more than going online and inputting information to be covered. It requires a payment to be made. But Obama intentionally censors that kernel of truth. And the Mainstream Media promotes his lies.

Censorship is not limited to the top echelons either. This morning it is being reported that a teacher in a Florida school told a 5-year-old student that she could not pray and, when challenged by the student, that it was not good to pray. The girl’s father posted on You Tube a video of the little girl relating what happened. The question arises: Should pressure be applied to force the school to apologize and force the teacher to resign? Frankly, someone should be reprimanded, but when it comes to forcing apologies or firings, to be honest, we shouldn’t CAIR.