[anotherarray]

Your statement is completely ideological and blank of any actual argumentation.

Answer the question:

Is it bad to "suppress speech" that is a threat to "free speech" itself?

[WalterBright]

Yes, it is.

[anotherarray]

It's an example of ideological self-destructive universal.

Take freedom of speech, social justice, progress,... as an universal and it's ultimately destructive (to believers and itself).

[noblethrasher]

The concern is about an epistemic gap: We proabaly can’t know how to identify speech that is harmful to free-speech, and the cost of getting it wrong is likely to be tremendous in almost all cases.

[rvern]

It isn't. Speech that advocates the removal of free speech rights is unlikely to be successful and actually lead to the removal of free speech.

Speech is only speech. It cannot do anything by itself. The only way speech can affect the world is by urging people to do things that they would not have done otherwise.