A timely post about from www.jihadwatch.org about the defense of Western or Christian values being considered "hate speech" by facebook and twitter. This follows this post about Jihad and Japan. This follows this article about American energy independence and preventing money from going to hostile countries. For more, you can read two very interesting books HERE.You can follow me here.
Henceforth only far-Left and pro-jihad views will be allowed. My latest in
FrontPage:
Could it soon be illegal to oppose jihad terror on the Internet?
AP reported
that “the European Union reached an agreement Tuesday with some of the
world’s biggest social media firms, including Facebook and Twitter, on
ways to combat the spread of hate speech online.”
Not only Facebook and Twitter, but also YouTube and Microsoft, “have
committed to ‘quickly and efficiently’ tackle illegal hate speech
directed against anyone over issues of race, color, religion, descent or
national or ethnic origin. The sites have often been used by terrorist
organizations to relay messages and entice hatred against certain
individuals or groups.”
Vera Jourova, whom AP identifies as “the EU commissioner responsible
for justice, consumers and gender equality,” explained: “The internet is
a place for free speech, not hate speech.” She added that the new rules
would “ensure that public incitement to violence to hatred has ‘no
place online.’” But incitement to violence isn’t all that the social
media giants are planning to stamp out: Karen White, Twitter’s European
head of public policy, declared: “We remain committed to letting the
Tweets flow. However, there is a clear distinction between freedom of
expression and conduct that incites violence and hate.”
The problem with both Jourova’s and White’s statements is that they
assume that “hate speech” is an entity that can be identified
objectively, when actually it is a subjective judgment based on one’s
own political preconceptions. And given the years-long insistence from
Leftists and Islamic supremacists that any honest discussion of how
Islamic jihadis use the texts and teachings of Islam to justify violence
and supremacism constitutes “hate speech,” these new rules could mean
the end of opposition to jihad terror on the Internet.
Consider, for example, what Twitter does not consider to be “hate
speech.” A Muslim named Obaid Karki, @stsheetrock on Twitter, who runs a
website headed “Obaid Karki St.Sheetrock’s Painfulpolitics Offensive Comedy Hepcat” and another called is called “Suicide Bombers Magazine” posted this
on one of them last Sunday: “Robert Spencer mustn’t [be] featured but
lynched from his scrotum along with Zionists scumbags, Pamela Geller,
Pat Condell, Daniel Pipes, Debbie Schlussel and JIHADWATCH Jackass duo
Baron Bodissey & Geert Wilders for inspiring Anders Behring Breivik
to [kill] innocent students in 2011.”
Neither Bodissey or Wilders actually run Jihad Watch – I do — and I didn’t inspire Breivik to do anything, but what is interesting about Karki’s loony message is that he posted this call for me and others to be lynched on Twitter.
Twitter supposedly has a policy against death threats. “The Twitter Rules” say: “Violent threats (direct or indirect):
You may not make threats of violence or promote violence, including
threatening or promoting terrorism.” I therefore duly reported this one –
but as of this writing, it has not been taken down (in fact, Karki
posted it along with variants of it several times). I reported Karki’s
tweet (which he republished on Twitter several times), and on Monday
received this message from Twitter: “Thank you for letting us know about
your issue. We’ve investigated the account and reported Tweets for
violent threats and abusive behavior, and have found that it’s currently
not violating the Twitter Rules (https://twitter.com/rules).”
This has happened before. On May 12, 2014, Karki tweeted this:
“Robert Spencer must be arrested and lynched along the Zionists
Dumbasses Daniel Pipes, Geert Wilders and JIHADWATCH …” And here’s another Karki tweet from September 18, 2013: “Robert Spencer must be shot head not only for comparing Alnoor 24:35 to Corinthians 11:14-15 satanically but for…”
Calling for me to be lynched and shot in the head – that’s not “hate
speech” as far as Twitter is concerned. Meanwhile, the antipathy of both
Twitter and Facebook
to conservatives is well established. It’s therefore a very real
question: will our social media masters use their new censorship
initiative to shut down foes of jihad terror, while allowing jihadis and
their sympathizers to speak freely?
It could happen. In some ways it is already happening: the free speech news site Epoch Times
reported last March that “while Twitter says it is making strong
efforts to shut down terrorist accounts, activists say that not only is
the microblogging company not taking down the accounts that matter, but
it has even been shutting down accounts of users trying to report
terrorists.”
The idea that Vera Jourova enunciated, that hate speech is not free
speech, is a dangerous one that paves the way for tyranny. One man’s
“hate speech” is another man’s lone voice crying out against oppression
and injustice. If “hate speech” is removed from the Internet and
eventually criminalized, the foremost protection against tyranny will
have been removed, and free society effectively ended. If Facebook and
Twitter continue kneecapping voices on the Right and allowing death
threats to remain online if they’re directed against people the Left
hates, Leftists will have gone a long way toward achieving what they’ve
been working toward for a long time: the death of dissent, and the
beginnings of an authoritarian society.
And if any of the naïve and unthinking among them awaken to what
they’ve done, it will be too late. Maybe as early as 24 hours from now.
Posts
No comments:
Post a Comment