Microsoft has now placed a warning label on Jihad Watch for those who use its Edge browser:
This once again raises the question I keep asking again and again: quis custodiet ipsos custodes? Who watches the watchmen? According to the BBC, NewsGuard warnings have also appeared on the Daily Mail and Sputnik. But what about NewsGuard itself? Is it fair? Unbiased? Trustworthy? No to all three; it is just another “fact-checking” organization with entrenched Leftist biases that is flagging sites that don’t hold firmly to the Leftist line as inaccurate, without acknowledging their own biases, gaps in knowledge, or inconsistency.
This is just another way to shut down sites that don’t parrot the Leftist agenda, which includes embracing of mass Muslim migration and staunch opposition to any opposition to jihad terror and Sharia oppression. The Southern Poverty Law Center (SPLC), which NewsGuard relies on extensively in its hit piece on Jihad Watch, has long designated Jihad Watch as a “hate group.” The idea that it’s “hate” to oppose jihad mass murder and Sharia oppression of women, gays and others is defamatory and absurd, but nonetheless it has resulted in donations to Jihad Watch not being accepted by MasterCard and Visa, and in my being dropped from Patreon and GoFundMe. It has also resulted in my being shadowbanned on Twitter and Facebook, and routinely vilified in the establishment media.
And now, if all that doesn’t work, and you still come to Jihad Watch via Microsoft Edge (and other browsers will almost certainly follow), you’ll get a warning label falsely claiming that our work is inaccurate.
They’re desperate to silence me and shut down Jihad Watch, and while they may well succeed, they will not thereby turn truth into falsehood and falsehood into truth. The truths we expose here will remain, and they will be dealing with them sooner or later, no matter how much they deny and ignore them.
Last summer, when John Gregory of NewsGuard contacted me, I wrote an article at FrontPage about the spurious “fact-checking” procedures of Gregory and his cohorts. It’s worth reprinting in full here now:
Steven Brill’s NewsGuard and the “Fact-Checking” Scam
Who watches the watchmen?
In their ongoing efforts to discredit, marginalize, and silence all those who dissent from their agenda, Leftists are increasingly trying to fool the public by establishing ostensibly neutral “fact-checking” organizations that purport to identify “fake news,” but which actually apply that label only to those who don’t parrot their nonsense. One of the most notorious examples of this is Snopes, which claims to be an objective arbiter of the accuracy of news reports, but which I have shown to be a deeply biased and misleading site: see here and here.
Recently I was contacted by John Gregory, an underling from a new entry in this field, NewsGuard, an initiative of the hard-Left self-appointed news arbiter Steven Brill. It was obvious that Gregory’s pen was sweating blood, and in my answers, I asked him about his own biases and those of NewsGuard. Gregory, as you’ll see below, ducked my questions, but his biases (and NewsGuard’s) are nonetheless obvious from his invocation of the Southern Poverty Law Center, his claim that it is inaccurate to say that the UN supports jihad, and more. He claims that his opinions are not relevant, but of course they couldn’t be more relevant, because they inform how he regards and evaluates Jihad Watch and other news sites. His refusal to acknowledge that, and to explain how he claims to overcome his own biases and produce an objective evaluation, is evidence of either astonishing naivete or craven dishonesty.
Here is my back-and-forth with Gregory:
1. John Gregory to Robert Spencer
My name is John Gregory, an analyst for NewsGuard, a new company researching and evaluating news sites to separate those which are performing real journalism.
In reviewing Jihad Watch, I had several questions about your editorial policies:
1) Does the site have a policy of correcting mistakes in its initial reporting? If so, could you point me to a recent example where a mistake was corrected and the original error was disclosed to readers?
2) Why is no biographical or contact information provided for writers other than Mr. Spencer?
3) How does the site disclose when articles are presenting the opinions of Mr. Spencer and other writers? Are those opinions presented as fact?
4) How does the site disclose its ownership by the Horowitz Freedom Center? The only mention I could find is the mailing address at the bottom of the homepage.
Thank you in advance for taking some time to answer these questions.
2. Robert Spencer to John Gregory
Some questions for you:
1. What is the political bias of NewsGuard?
2. Are you asking these questions of sites that minimize and/or deny the problem of jihad terror and Sharia oppression of women, gays, and other groups, or only of sites that call attention to it?
3. How do you distinguish what is “real journalism” as opposed to putative fake news?
4. Have you found any error of fact regarding Islam or jihad, or any demonstrably false news story, on Jihad Watch? Or do you simply object to the sources being cited? If so, on what grounds?
5. If you render a negative judgment on Jihad Watch, does Jihad Watch have any recourse and appeal? If so, how?
6. Who funds NewsGuard?
Thanks in advance for your answers.
Your answers:
2. I am the primary writer and editor for the site. I operated it alone for several years, and so this is not some conscious decision, it just happened that no one thought to add this info. You have a good idea, however, and I’ll add info for Hugh Fitzgerald, Christine Douglass-Williams, and Andrew Harrod asap.
3. Opinions are never presented as fact. The commentary that goes above every article is clearly the analysis of the author, and is generally backed up with references from authoritative Islamic sources and/or other relevant material.
4. The affiliation between Jihad Watch and the Freedom Center is no secret. The mailing address listing at the bottom of page is an obvious recognition of that fact. Jihad Watch is listed as a program of the Freedom Center in my bio page on Jihad Watch, and at the bottom of every article I write, as well as in Freedom Center publications.
3. John Gregory to Robert Spencer
Thank you for clearing that up. I’ll keep checking to see if the new writer bios are added.
In response to your questions:
Some questions for you:
1. What is the political bias of NewsGuard?
We aspire to have none.
2. Are you asking these questions of sites that minimize and/or deny the problem of jihad terror and Sharia oppression of women, gays, and other groups, or only of sites that call attention to it?
We are asking these types of questions to all types of news sites, from those run by major newspapers to small market local TV stations as well as blogs, specialty publications, everybody.
3. How do you distinguish what is “real journalism” as opposed to putative fake news?
We adhere to the same standards in dealing with all sites and our criteria are found on our site, Newsguardtechnologies.com.
4. Have you found any error of fact regarding Islam or jihad, or any demonstrably false news story, on Jihad Watch? Or do you simply object to the sources being cited? If so, on what grounds?
I can’t speak to this yet as we haven’t finished our research. In cases where we cite fact checks done by other sites to which you have responded in the past, like in the case of Snopes, your response would be included.
5. If you render a negative judgment on Jihad Watch, does Jihad Watch have any recourse and appeal? If so, how?
Yes, you can make your case that our assessment is wrong
6. Who funds NewsGuard?
A full list of our investors can be found here: https://newsguardtechnologies.com/our-investors/
4. Robert Spencer to John Gregory
The new writer bios were added several days ago. You should have seen them by now.
Steven Brill, eh? Yes, sure, you’re not biased. You’re as even-handed as the day is long. Steven Brill.
5. John Gregory to Robert Spencer
Ah, I was looking in the wrong place. Our evaluation will be updated with info about the new writer bios.
Circling back on your previous question, we have found several instances where Jihad Watch has published misleading claims, failed to correct errors in its headlines and presented opinion as fact for which I’d like to offer you a chance to respond.
1. An April 2018 story entitled “Muslima nurse practitioner beheads her 7-year-old son near Rochester, New York” seems to dismiss the quote from the county sheriff about this attack having “zero indicators of anything religious, zero indicators in anything cultural,” and presents a Qur’an verse as proof of the religious nature of the attack. Your story also says this alleged perpetrator is a Muslim, but I can’t find mention of her religion from any of the local news outlets covering the story. Did Jihad Watch independently confirm her religion? Was there some other source pointing to a religious motive?
2. A July 2015 story based on Pamela Geller’s tweet about an ISIS-linked account tweeting minutes before a shooting in Chattanooga was later found to have occurred hours after the attack. Your story was updated to acknowledge this, but the original headline and story based on the false information remain unchanged. Does your corrections policy not include changing headlines later found to be incorrect?
3. A Dec. 2015 story entitled “House Democrats Move to Criminalize Criticism of Islam.” That headline ignores how the resolution as proposed was non-binding, meaning no new criminal statutes would have been enacted as your headline said. Was this story ever corrected or retracted?
4. Among the instances where stories on Jihad Watch have presented opinion as fact is a June 23 story by Christine Douglass-Williams calling the United Nations “jihad-supporting.” What factual basis was there for attaching that description to the U.N.?
5. We will be including the Southern Poverty Law Center’s labeling of Jihad Watch as a hate group in our evaluation. I know you’ve written about this assessment before, but do you have any statement now as to why you think the SPLC’s judgment on your site is unfair or unjust?
Again, thanks in advance for taking the time to answer these inquiries.
6. Robert Spencer to John Gregory
None of these are misleading or false — except, of course, to someone who opposes efforts to oppose jihad terror and who considers such efforts to be “Islamophobia.”
Also, why were the staff bios important to you? I don’t mind having them there, but fail to see how they comport with your stated mission. The number of sites that don’t include bios of all the staff writers must be in the thousands or more. Are you making similar demands of Leftist sites? Or is this question simply designed to demonize sites that oppose jihad terror and Sharia oppression of women, gays, and others?
1. The story does not present a Qur’an verse as “proof of the religious nature of the attack.” It presents a Qur’an verse as an indication that a religious background was a possible element. There are many, many instances in which authorities have dissembled in cases involving jihad terror; see, for example, here: https://www.frontpagemag.com/fpm/262826/global-outbreak-mental-illness-robert-spencer. It was on this basis that the sheriff’s statement was regarded with suspicion. It is unlikely that he had the background or competence to determine such a question in any case. Your misrepresentation of our reporting on this is a predictable indication of the inherent unfairness of self-appointed “news guards” that are in reality only attempts to smear and defame those who do not accept the establishment Leftist perspective on important current issues.
2. Your link doesn’t work, so I cannot evaluate your claim here. I doubt it is true or accurate; we have corrected plenty of headlines that have been found to be inaccurate. If one remained uncorrected, it was an oversight. If you’re trying to make something out of an article that carries a correction, your case is exceedingly weak indeed.
3. The article notes that the resolution only “condemns” what it calls “hateful rhetoric.” It discusses no criminal penalties, as there were none. What your inquiry fails to note is that the headline says that the “House Democrats Move to Criminalize,” not that they “Criminalized,” criticism of Islam. Issuing non-binding resolutions of this kind is a step toward issuing binding ones, and outlawing categories of speech. Your enterprise itself is a step down the same road, attempting to defame honest news reporting when it disagrees with your perspective.
4. You would think that a supposed news watchdog organization would be better informed. What Christine Douglass-Williams wrote was 100% accurate. See, for example, these articles: https://www.jpost.com/Breaking-News/Minister-Erdan-The-UN-serves-as-the-Hamas-Foreign-Office-547688 and https://www.timesofisrael.com/un-agency-no-longer-employing-gaza-staffer-accused-of-hamas-ties/ and https://www.jta.org/2017/10/29/news-opinion/israel-middle-east/hamas-terror-tunnel-discovered-under-un-school-in-gaza and https://www.unwatch.org/130-page-report-unrwa-teachers-incite-terrorism-antisemitism/
There are plenty of other stories similar to these. You’re a news watchdog organization, you say?
5. NewsGuard is clearly engaged in the same defamation and demonization that the Southern Poverty Law Center has engaged in for years in attempting to destroy foes of jihad mass murder and Sharia oppression of women, gays, and others. The SPLC includes few Leftist and jihad groups among its “hate group” listings, while defaming Jihad Watch and other groups that stand for the freedom of speech, the freedom of conscience, and the equality of rights of all people before the law because we dissent from its hard-Left agenda. NewsGuard is a new and marginally more sophisticated attempt to defame pro-freedom groups by claiming on spurious grounds that what we report is inaccurate. We have published over 50,000 posts since 2003, and NewGuard took issue with exactly five of them, none of them on any factual grounds. We can only hope that discerning readers will be able to see through NewGuard’s false claims to be an objective evaluator of the accuracy of news reported, and not fall for this latest Leftist attempt at defamation and, ultimately, censorship.
7. John Gregory to Robert Spencer
Your responses will be noted. My apologies about the non-working link in #2, this was the story I was referencing:
https://www.jihadwatch.org/2015/07/isis-tweets-chattanooga-as-gunman-begins-shooting-there-4-murdered
As for the staff bios, we are asking that question of every site we review. We have come across quite a few where stories don’t have bylines or don’t provide information about who’s creating the content beyond a name. Your site meets that standard.
8. Robert Spencer to John Gregory
There is nothing inaccurate about that headline. They did tweet Chattanooga soon after the attack. I expect you are unaware that this was a jihad attack inspired by foreign jihadis — see this AP story: https://www.breitbart.com/national-security/2015/12/16/navy-concludes-chattanooga-shooting-was-inspired-by-foreign-terrorists/
It’s noteworthy that you have nothing to say in response to my pointing out your own obvious biases. I’ll be publishing these exchanges when your hit piece on Jihad Watch appears.
Also: re your claim that “we are asking that question of every site we review,” I happen to know that that is false, as I know of at least one site that you have not asked that of.
9. Robert Spencer to John Gregory
I’m writing an article about the “fake news vetting” scam, and have the following questions for you. Thank you in advance for your answers:
1. How does NewsGuard plan to disclose its own biases and the perspectives of those who are claiming to be objective assessors of the accuracy of various news sites?
2. In vetting the accuracy of Jihad Watch’s reporting, did you take into account your own biases and perspectives on the subject matter treated at the site? If so, how? If not, why not?
3. Have you ever read the Qur’an in whole or part? The Hadith collections of Bukhari and Muslim? The tafasir of Ibn Kathir and the Jalalayn? If not, how can you judge the accuracy of Jihad Watch’s analysis of how jihadis use the texts and teachings of Islam to justify violence and oppression of women, gays, and others?
4. Which do you think is the larger problem: jihad terror or “Islamophobia”?
5. Which do you think are more severely threatened: women who wear the hijab in the U.S. or women who do not wear the hijab, chador, or other coverings in Iran and Saudi Arabia?
6. Does NewsGuard plan to assess the reliability of sites that reflect the Leftist agenda, or only sites that oppose that agenda?
7. Are you familiar with the Latin phrase “Quis custodiet ipsos custodes”? If so, what is your answer to it?
8. Your questions to me appeared to show that you consider the Southern Poverty Law Center a reliable guide to what constitutes a “hate group” and what does not. Are you aware of the widespread challenges to the SPLC’s credibility in this regard? Are you familiar with Maajid Nawaz? What do you think are the implications of the SPLC’s removal of Nawaz from its list of “anti-Muslim extremists” for those who remain on the list?
10. Robert Spencer to John Gregory
Just in case you missed these questions over the weekend, I am re-sending.
One more also: How does NewsGuard respond to charges that it is simply an attempt to defame and marginalize sites that dissent from a hard-Left agenda?
Thanks again in advance for your answers.
11. John Gregory to Robert Spencer
My apologies for getting these to you late.
Dear Mr. Gregory:
I’m writing an article about the “fake news vetting” scam, and have the following questions for you. Thank you in advance for your answers:
- How does NewsGuard plan to disclose its own biases and the perspectives of those who are claiming to be objective assessors of the accuracy of various news sites?We will be running full professional bios of all staff and contributors on our website.
- In vetting the accuracy of Jihad Watch’s reporting, did you take into account your own biases and perspectives on the subject matter treated at the site? If so, how? If not, why not?We aspire to be as fair and objective as possible, and multiple people are involved in every review. As soon as we learn we made a mistake, we will correct it publicly and transparently.
- Have you ever read the Qur’an in whole or part? The Hadith collections of Bukhari and Muslim? The tafasir of Ibn Kathir and the Jalalayn? If not, how can you judge the accuracy of Jihad Watch’s analysis of how jihadis use the texts and teachings of Islam to justify violence and oppression of women, gays, and others?
We endeavor to be fair about every site we evaluate.
- Which do you think is the larger problem: jihad terror or “Islamophobia”?
My opinion is not relevant here.
- Which do you think are more severely threatened: women who wear the hijab in the U.S. or women who do not wear the hijab, chador, or other coverings in Iran and Saudi Arabia?
Again, my opinion is not relevant here.
- Does NewsGuard plan to assess the reliability of sites that reflect the Leftist agenda, or only sites that oppose that agenda?
We are rating sites across the political spectrum under the same criteria.
- Are you familiar with the Latin phrase “Quis custodiet ipsos custodes”? If so, what is your answer to it?Our mission is to review news and information sites to give readers some guidance in assessing the sites’ credibility. Anyone is free to “guard” or review us, of course.
- Your questions to me appeared to show that you consider the Southern Poverty Law Center a reliable guide to what constitutes a “hate group” and what does not. Are you aware of the widespread challenges to the SPLC’s credibility in this regard? Are you familiar with Maajid Nawaz? What do you think are the implications of the SPLC’s removal of Nawaz from its list of “anti-Muslim extremists” for those who remain on the list?We are aware of criticisms on the SPLC’s ratings and designations. Your own responses to SPLC’s claims about Jihad Watch would be mentioned in our final evaluation.
In any case, despite the paltriness of his case against Jihad Watch (over 60,000 posts and he is quibbling over four of them, and author bios), it is certain that John Gregory and NewsGuard will claim that this site is not accurate or trustworthy. In reality, however, the inaccurate and untrustworthy one is NewsGuard itself, in its claim to be an objective arbiter of the accuracy of news reports. It is no more objective or reliable than its guide, the Southern Poverty Law Center.
And while it may fool the credulous and uninformed, those who know better will recognize it for what it is: yet another attempt to blacken the reputation of, and thereby silence, news outlets that don’t regurgitate the Left’s fantasies about how Islam is a religion of peace, Muslims are victims of widespread discrimination in the U.S., and the like. There’s another sucker who will buy this nonsense born every minute.

Ferdinand (@StFerdinandIII) says
Fascist arseholes. Don’t use Microslave products, boycott them. Witless worms.
Jon Sobieski says
So the Microsoft President is in a meeting about the Newsguard ‘feature’, and NO ONE said this is Orwellian? Nobody?
Stinkhorn says
I still use Internet Explorer, and interestingly, when I open a new tab, about a week ago, it always used to include Jihad Watch in the list of “Frequent” sites I’d visit.
No longer.
Not sure if all these recent poorly vetted Windows 10 updates released by Microsoft are the cause (I doubt it, given I can’t see any other evidence of my previous habitual behaviour being scrubbed), or if the Edge issue has been programmed into Explorer now..
Dave Catleugh says
My mobile operate, Tesco – who use O2, and the free WIFI on the buses won’t let me visit your site at all. I have to use Orbit or wait until i get home.
TrueFreeThinker says
Get a VPN now! Use that VPN at all times. I use ExpressVPN and StrongVPN – they work. The place my wife works would block jihadwatch and InfoWars amongst other sites we frequent and the VPN solved the problem instantly!
I do not work for or have any association with the previously mentioned vpn services. I use them at all times. The reasons I use VPN’s are numerous. Most if not all browsers keep all of your viewing history they keep a list of each and every site you have ever clicked on. Google keeps a historic copy of every place you have ever gone and each and every website you have ever looked at and l think one day they will use all this info against us and at the rate of things that day will be soon. I think that if Trump had not been elected we would be looking and living in a very different world.
livingengine says
“My opinion is not relevant here.” John Gregory
Wow! His opinion is entirely relevant. Jihadwatch is being judged by John Gregory. His opinion is all that matters. Theses people are incredible.
Chris says
Exactly! The world is full of “incredibly” biased people who cannot see the truth of their own biases.
ntesdorf says
Here is yet another reason not to use Microsoft Edge.
Indiana Tom says
Chrome took Jihad Watch and Truth About Guns off my favorites.
Always Duck Duck Go.
Indiana Tom says
News Guard should have a proceed with caution this site has inaccurate, biased, and unsupported information for MSN portal.
Jayke says
At this time the Newsguard setting only applies to the mobile Edge browser not the desktop version. When I installed Edge on my iPad it did not have Newsguard turned on by default so one would have to enable it manually (at least in my experience). It can be disabled in “Settings > News rating” but I’m not a big fan of Microsoft Edge so I deleted it right away. Maybe you can add a notice to this website that says something like “Proudly listed as untrustworthy by the untrustworthy Newsguard extension in Microsoft Edge … click here to disable this fake news rating extension in Edge or better yet delete Edge and use Firefox, Chrome or Safari”.
Flavius Claudius Iulianus says
Stay away from Chrome. I’ve always found Firefox the most reliable. With it, I can set any security settings I want.
An interesting aside: I don’t let sites place cookies on my machine. You would not believe how many site now INSIST on allowing the placement of cookies as you enter their site. I just go elsewhere.
J D S says
Just another of many sites that have allowed the HARD LEFT take them.over…..The hard left is mind bending unless one investigators and investigates and investigates.
Flavius Claudius Iulianus says
Little by little they are trying to cut off the truth-telling:
“No need to install: Microsoft has controversial fake news filter NewsGuard built into mobile browser”
https://www.rt.com/news/449530-newsguard-edge-browser-media-integrated/
https://www.breitbart.com/tech/2019/01/23/microsoft-teams-with-establishment-newsguard-to-create-news-blacklist/
https://www.breitbart.com/tech/2019/01/23/bill-kristol-correctly-describes-newsguard-establishment-people-like-establishment-websites/
It is amazing that Drudge Report, which is simply a news aggregator, is deemed unreliable.
To my mind, debate is still the gold standard in determining truth from fiction and so both sides of every story should be published.
gravenimage says
+1
Flavius Claudius Iulianus says
“Teen girl seriously injured in Germany after drunk Afghan refugee drags her off bus”
https://www.rt.com/news/449540-germany-teen-refugee-afganistan/
gravenimage says
Very disturbing, Flavius.
Flavius Claudius Iulianus says
I hope the injury to her legs isn’t crippling. Poor girl; just 17.
You notice that they let the accomplice go after he sobered up?
We just can’t let that come here.
Flavius Claudius Iulianus says
BREAKING: Archdiocese of Baltimore apologizes for criticizing Covington boys
https://www.lifesitenews.com/news/breaking-archdiocese-of-baltimore-apologizes-for-criticizing-covington-boys
Flavius Claudius Iulianus says
“Rep. Ilhan Omar Spreads Fake News with Attack on Covington Students”
https://www.breitbart.com/politics/2019/01/23/ilhan-omar-slammed-social-media-attacking-covington-students/
Flavius Claudius Iulianus says
“‘Predominantly Migrant’ Gang Attack Germans at Train Station”
https://www.breitbart.com/europe/2019/01/23/gang-predominantly-migrants-randomly-attack-germans-train-station/
Colluder says
Old news from 2017.
For those with browser problems … just use Brave. Works on all platforms.
A Berean says
The clipped picture is from Mozilla’s Firefox browser with the NewsGuard add-on installed and enabled. It isn’t in the Firefox browser by default. Still bad, though.
marc says
Yes, I replicated on FireFox, but it is now enabled by default on mobile Edge Browsers, and they are rolling out to desktop soon. I don’t have a Windows Mobile, funny enough I dont have a cell phone. You can read more here https://www.thedrum.com/news/2019/01/23/microsoft-wards-web-surfers-away-daily-mail-fake-news-fight
David Grisez says
We are living in a time where the right of free speech to speak and write what is accurate and truthful about Islam and the threat it poses is under attack. There appears to be a big movement to suppress warnings about the teaching of Islam. This is an information battle. The truth about Islam needs to be made public so that our government of the United States and the government of other countries can respond to reduce the jihad threat of Islam. At least two really good books are out on this subject, The History of Jihad from Muhammad to ISIS by Robert Spencer and Jihadist Psychopath by Jamie Glazov.
gravenimage says
+1
eduardo odraude says
Tommy Robinson is seems to be starting a news network. Subscribe to it:
marc says
do you have any idea how Tommy is going to fight censorship with a WordPress blog?https://www.globalaim.co.uk/readme.html
Seems pretty neive to me. the only way to break this stranglehold of the censors, and avoid get quick rich schemes that seem to be plaguing the space right now, is some decentralised social network such as (but not limited to) https://diasporafoundation.org/, which unfortunately is still immature.
Mirren10 says
Hi marc, hope you don’t mind, but I have passed this information onto Tommy. Thanks for the info, like me, I don’t think he’s very au fait with computers and the internet.
vannboseman says
I hear that Diaspora has been around for quite a while now, but does not seemed to have gotten off the ground. I have to admit that I may not have given it a good chance when exploring it. I very much wanted to like Minds. Maybe if my friends and family followed me over there, I’d like it more. As it is, I just am not attracted to it. I have just gotten attracted to the FB interface and friends and family are there. Practically, I go to MeWe several times a day. I perceive MeWe to be wide open internet and easy to use. There is every sort of revolting and perverted idea there, but this openness leads me to think that it is very close to being totally free from censorship in a way that no other social media seems to be.
I see Tommy Robinson as a social media type of charismatic guy pursuing a following that would be best served by pursuing Minds or MeWe.
Vann Boseman says
Diaspora seems to have been around for a long time but never gotten off the ground. I have tried to like Minds.com, but I don’t like it as much as FB. All my friends and family and even extended family are on FB. If they followed me to Minds, then I might like Minds more. Practically, I check into my MeWe account several times a day. I perceive MeWe as being wide open internet containing all sorts of revolting and disgusting content, but this openness for me points to a lack of censorship that I do not find in other places. And of course you can set MeWe up to get only the content you want.
I see Tommy Robinson as a charismatic guy that would be best served by leading his followers into MeWe or Minds and seeking to grow his organization from those places.
Mirren10 says
eduardo, thank you for posting this. Have signed up and subscribed.
gravenimage says
Microsoft using spurious Leftist “fact-checking” site to place warning label on Jihad Watch
4. Have you found any error of fact regarding Islam or jihad, or any demonstrably false 4. Have you found any error of fact regarding Islam or jihad, or any demonstrably false news story, on Jihad Watch? Or do you simply object to the sources being cited? If so, on what grounds?
I can’t speak to this yet as we haven’t finished our research. In cases where we cite fact checks done by other sites to which you have responded in the past, like in the case of Snopes, your response would be included.
…………………….
How can they place a warning saying that Jihad Watch is inaccurate if they “haven’t finished their research” to see if this is so and can’t cite anything? Just appalling calumny.
David Halterman says
Mr. Spencer, I have been a fan and a follower of Jihad Watch since almost the beginning, 2004. You have never written anything hateful, bigoted, or derogatory towards anyone or against any racial group. You have in the 15 years of my knowledge examined and criticized the religion of Islam only. To quote my salty mother of blessed memory: “They don’t know shit from Shinola!” And to quote you: “An Islamophobe is a non-Muslim who knows more about Islam than he’s supposed to!” Sir, I stand with you! Fight it! Resist it!
Lydia Church says
More of the same… yup.
mortimer says
I was using a public computer furnished with NET NANNY. I wanted to look at my FAMILY TREE WEB SITE, but I was BLOCKED by NET NANNY … Reason for the BLOCK???
DEATH (was all they gave me).
Of course, yes, little children, people DIE, and all my great-grandparents to the 10th generation are DEAD.
Why is that a PROBLEM? It isn’t a problem, but NET NANNY artificially made it a problem.
TRUTH IS NO DEFENSE.
Ibrahim itace muhammed says
Enter your comment here…and hate against muslims.
Mo says
@ Ibrahim itace muhammed says
“Enter your comment here…and hate against muslims.”
You again? What are you even saying? What “hate against muslims”? Don’t you even know how to capitalize a proper noun?
Why do you even waste your time (and ours) on this site? Don’t you have anything better to do with your life? Troll.
gravenimage says
I see that Ibrahim itace muhammed is back. *Ugh*.
He has said before that opposing Muslims marrying children, raping women and keeping them as sex slaves, and mass slaughtering Infidels is “hate”.
eduardo odraude says
Ibrahim Itace muhammed,
I don’t hate Muslims. I reject Islam as a doctrine destructive of the most basic human rights. I reject Islam’s totalitarian teachings and ambitions. I reject the deep hate that Islam inculcates and institutionalizes. Islam calls for killing gays, beating disobedient women, subordinating non-Muslims as debased and hated second-class citizens, violent jihad against non-Muslims who have not submitted to Islamic governance, and war against the whole non-Muslim world until the whole world submits to Islamic rule. Islam permits only Islamic opinions to be publicly expressed and seeks to crush all criticism and dissent against Islam. Muhammad said “if someone leaves his Islamic religion, then kill him.” To reject all that is not hatred. It’s love of humanity. Muhammad hated human freedom, human individuality, that which makes humans most human. The most authentic forms of love are impossible without freedom.
infidel says
Robert says and I quote
The truths we expose here will remain, and they will be dealing with them sooner or later, no matter how much they deny and ignore them.
How true and also goes to show the power of the Saudi petro dollars even on a behemoth like MS. It is actually those Muslims speaking thru these fellows called NewsGuard. Muslims are masters in playing such insidious games.
thebigW says
The most important question Robert Spencer asked was “4. Have you found any error of fact regarding Islam or jihad, or any demonstrably false news story, on Jihad Watch? Or do you simply object to the sources being cited? If so, on what grounds?”
And the NewsGuard guy’s answer was really lame:
“I can’t speak to this yet as we haven’t finished our research. ”
Robert said he asked that last summer. Maybe he should shoot him another email and say “Hey NewsGuard guy, have you finished your research yet?”
included.
Marc Govaerts says
“The day Microsoft makes something that doesn’t suck is probably the day they start making vacuum cleaners.” -Ernst Jan Plugge
Mirren10 says
“I can’t speak to this yet as we haven’t finished our research. ”
If you haven’t ‘finished your research’, then you have absolutely no right or grounds to defame Jihad Watch. But this is what passes for ‘journalism’ these days. Contemptible wankers.
gravenimage says
Spot on, Mirren.
Mirren10 says
You can contact this contemptible little equivacator at the email address below; I just did, and pointed out in an icily polite fashion, that if Newsguard ”hadn’t completed their research”, they had no business attempting to defame and discredit Jihad Watch.
john.gregory@newsguardtech.com
Not that I think rubbing their noses in their contemptible ‘journalism’ will have any chastening effect, but it is as well for these disgraceful people that many of us are not fooled or impressed with their lies and equivocations.
Mirren10 says
Bother. That should be ”it is as well for these disgraceful people to *know* … ”
gravenimage says
Thanks for that email, Mirren.
dan christensen says
NewsGuard is just another trained ‘independent’ monkeybusiness, probably a dependent of the islam lobby.
Never trust a religion that authorizes cheating and lying.
Never trust a religion that claims it is based on love and peace.
In fact never trust a religion that offers only liturgy, in the shape of gymnastic exercises on a carpeted floor.
infidel says
Not at all independent dear… U may like to check their Saudi donations….. Most of these so called left libby independent orgs are in bed with these fellows…
Tom S. says
Beyond sending an email through Twitter to the developers of Edge, that I will no longer be using any of Microsoft’s browsers, I am embarking on my Linux migration – for all activities except work-related ones that require Microsoft Office and VBA, At home, I will be booting from a USB flash drive with Ubuntu, using the Onion Browser, and numerous other outstanding Linux apps. Microsoft has exposed themselves fully now and they will have to do without me as a customer.
https://luegenpresse2.wordpress.com/ says
Thats a way.
But for many to complex.
Try also firefox and UBLOCK ORIGIN.Dont forget to enable the adblocker Lists.
You can find infos how UBlock O. work. at the internet.
Also important because i read today that chrome will change the browser so that the adblockers dont work anymore…
Dave Sharp says
Time for outrage do what they do.
eduardo odraude says
But only within the law. Otherwise we destroy the very thing we are fighting for. (I’m assuming you live within a liberal democratic nation. But if you live in a genuine dictatorship, then obeying the “law” is more open to question, since a true dictatorship is not ruled by law properly so called, but by the dictator or the Party.)
Felix Quigley says
Sections of the left are in league with Islam, certainly also political correctness, and also big sections of the capitalist class also.
The critical example of the left was the Stalinist Tudeh Party welcoming of Khomeini in 1978 leading to the 1979 critical disaster. But it was also the French bourgeoisie which harboured Khomeini for years and sent him on their Air France jet to make the counter revolution.
The Irish PM is hardly a socialist and he represents indeed the ultra right capitalist defending Fine Gael party. But balanced by the lefty Sinn Fein and the bourgeois nationalist Fianna Fail.
George Bush was hardly a lefty but look at the damage he did on 9/11 as he praised Islam as a religion of peace and never changed, so not seeing Saddam brutal as he was as a bulwark against Islam. Blair was a traitor to socialism, and the Spanish PM from the Spanish Francoist bourgeoisie called the Peoples party or PP.
It shows more thought has to be given to this issue.
And it cannot be said that Karl Marx was friendly to Islam. His thoughts on Islam were the most severe possible. he said that Islam divides mankind into two forces, the believer and the infidel. A definition of Islam as extreme fascist. Those who hate Marx therefore often try to throw him into the mix but it is untrue. Fake news if you like. So whoever sanders is following it is not Karl Marx.
Of course if people hate Marx they will not point this out. Now that is treachery too.
gravenimage says
Felix Quigley wrote:
But it was also the French bourgeoisie which harboured Khomeini for years and sent him on their Air France jet to make the counter revolution.
………………………
Khomeini may have taken an Air France plane to Iran; this does *not* mean that France sent the Ayatollah to Iran. What rot.
More:
And it cannot be said that Karl Marx was friendly to Islam. His thoughts on Islam were the most severe possible. he said that Islam divides mankind into two forces, the believer and the infidel. A definition of Islam as extreme fascist.
………………………
Marx hated all religions–and he no doubt considered Islam to be a totalitarian creed that presented a rival to his own.
More:
Those who hate Marx therefore often try to throw him into the mix but it is untrue. Fake news if you like. So whoever sanders is following it is not Karl Marx.
………………………
Fascism, Communism, and Islam are all totalitarian. That they sometimes considered each other rivals does not mean than any of these horrors is a good thing.
More:
Of course if people hate Marx they will not point this out. Now that is treachery too.
………………………
What claptrap–I just pointed it out, above. The idea that we are forced to embrace *any* of these horrors is appalling and false.
I much prefer freedom.
eduardo odraude says
Bernard Lewis once argued that there is some truth in the old joke that highlights how Marxism has some uncomfortable resemblances to Islam: “There is no God and Karl Marx is his Prophet!”
Bernard Lewis on Islam’s inherent totalitarianism
From the essay “Communism and Islam” in International Affairs, Vol. 30, No. 1 (Jan., 1954), pp. 1-12:
gravenimage says
Thanks, Eduardo.
Angry Aussie says
John Gregory, while you are taking a break from reading and assessing Jihad Watch, grab yourself a book called ‘Windows into the Qur’an’ by Daniel Scot, or ‘The Story of Mohammed Islam Unveiled’ by Harry Richardson.
John Gregory, in my opinion
anybody supporting the rights of terrorists over the rights of law abiding citizens should not be allowed to influence the masses with their ignorance. Ever. It appears you are in a position where an apparently limited understanding of Islam and internet access is all that is required to attempt to label any site opposed to Islamic terrorism as inappropriately referenced, sourced etc.
I suggest you concentrate your efforts on finding a few ex Muslims, ex Imams as well, and seek out Imam Tawhidi, a Muslim scholar, if you are chasing confirmation of accuracy of content in Jihad Watch articles.
How is it that you can be confused in any way? Robert Spencer has always been transparent and provided sources, references and links to content that can be easily verified.
I have questions – Do you receive any funding from Soros, or any Middle Eastern country? Do you rely on the word of any Muslim attached to any Islamic organisation that is registered as a charity, as your advisor on Islamic matters? Do you believe the UN serves a purpose?
Do you agree with the UN’s Compact on Migration? Finally, do you have such a low opinion of the intelligence level of contributors and readers of Jihad Watch that you think it is your role to advise us and set us on the path you deem correct?
In my opinion, this is nothing short of the actions of interferring try-hard thought police.
Until today I had never heard of John Gregory. By tomorrow I will have forgotten about him. I won’t forget about jihad, or Jihad Watch though.
Graeme Howarth says
Just wondering when Newsguard will attach their warning to CNN because of things like their atrocious “Fake News” coverage of the Covington Catholic School boys???
I know, I won’t hold my breath.
Giacomo Latta says
The ”our investors” page is not accessible. No surprise there.
bluedubs says
Mr Spencer, no matter what they say about you – the truly awakened know that you are right regarding islam.
May islam burn to the ground. Amen.
Nic says
Hmmm.. Microsoft seem to have relented. I don’t get any kind of warning label when I browse to Jihadwatch using my Edge ?
TrueFreeThinker says
Apparently their are plans being set to have this same feature talked about here to be hard coded into your phone tablet and computer. So what that means is that when you go to a site like http://WWW.JIHADWATCH.ORG and click on a story your phone will tell you that this is not a trusted site and that THIS is fake news and it will be on your phone hard coded into it. This will be put onto your phone through an update. Will there be a way to shut this setting off – I don’t know.
Use a VPN at all times. Do research about what they are and why their good things to use at all times. Just because your old or young or female or whatever doesn’t mean that you can’t use anVPN.
marc says
Thank you @TrueFreeThinker I strongly support this message, personally I use https://airvpn.org/, but recommend https://www.f-secure.com/en/web/home_global/freedome for the less technically competant as they have commercial support, where as airvpn is more for techies. I have no financial interest in either, although I have contributed code to airvpn.
Richard Courtemanche says
Political correctness in our society nowadays allows for unacceptable individuals to be put in sensitive positions of trust. Ridiculous!
Jess Sain (@Red_Ruffansore) says
What a spectacular exchange, if this were a boxing match it would have been Mike Tyson in his prime against Pee Wee Herman…whenever. Clearly the Guards were caught off guard and tried to dance on the head of a pin with their answers.
Endlesspath says
Don’t worry about it, only NPC/SJW’s need to be spoon fed groupthink. After all, as members of the party of extremist hypocrisy and fraud, they are incapable of independent thought and research.
To help justify groupthink mantra’s, they need pseudo-factual entities (such as the SPLC/Snopes/etc.) created by other members of the party of extremist hypocrisy and fraud to “fact-check”.
Yes, the party of extremist hypocrisy and fraud is none other then the DNC~
brane pilot says
They will continue repeating lies, the same lies, the exposed lies, over and over.
Until the lies become the new normal and are accepted as the norm.
Everywhere the truth is revealed, it will be hammered down.
You are fighting the people who control the medium you work in.
Because the medium is the Narrative that you cannot be permitted to contradict.
You are a farmer in a desert fighting those who control the flow of water.
Yours is a good fight, a correct fight and a courageous fight.
It is also doomed.
Look to China for the future. Soon, if you are on a ‘list’, you will not even be able to buy food.
Much less to express off-narrative opinions on the Internet.
Blather says
Proof Microsoft, Amazon, Twitter, etc., all work for the New World Odor.
John Weininger says
This may be a related problem. I purchased Norton Security for my pc. I no longer can use the Contact Form. I get this message about an “SQL injection” (?) when I try to use the JW Contact Form. Or I can use it only after disconnecting its extensions, firewall, and operations. Also Norton Security doesnt provide an UNINSTALL option — or at least i have yet to locate the uninstall function.
>>Access Denied – Sucuri Website Firewall
If you are the site owner (or you manage this site), please whitelist your IP or if you think this block is an error please open a support ticket and make sure to include the block details (displayed in the box below), so we can assist you in troubleshooting the issue.
Block details:
Your IP:
URL: http://www.jihadwatch.org/contact-us
Your Browser: Mozilla/5.0 (Windows NT 10.0; Win64; x64) AppleWebKit/537.36 (KHTML, like Gecko) Chrome/73.0.3683.86 Safari/537.36
Block ID: SQLi71
Block reason: SQL injection was detected and blocked.
<<
marc says
I told you (when you just contacted me using the contact form????)
That’s actually a message from our firewall mot yours, specifically:
Block reason: SQL injection was detected and blocked.
There is something off in what you were trying to send, maybe an odd combination of unusual characters, often happens when foreign characters are encoded
https://stackoverflow.com/questions/14370670/which-characters-are-actually-capable-of-causing-sql-injection-in-mysql
gravenimage says
John, try using the “Contact Us” box at the right hand side of the page. The second form is about technical issues. Marc Louis should be able to help whatever the issue.
gravenimage says
I was writing my reply to John before Marc’s comments posted.
marc says
@gravenimage he already did, which is odd
phi lemon says
Microsoft just as blind and stupid as nations like Holland and US that invite these Islamonazis to come slaughter them.
robyt says
There is also BRAINWASHING into the SIDEBAR, made by REVCONTENT, with Ads by RevContent. Some of the images (for example the UGLY WOMAN pic) are to meant to EXPOSE unconscious people to brainwashing technique. BEWARE and filter out by FIREWALL all RevContent.