Everyone is all upset about Google pole-axing the Federalist and Zero Hedge, and rightly so. Twitter is full of warnings from conservatives that if this silencing of dissenting voices isn’t stopped, the freedom of speech will be a dead letter, free society will be a thing of the past, and America will swiftly become a totalitarian state.
I’m sympathetic, but must point out that I’ve been sounding this warning for years, while establishment conservatives, the ones who are feeling the heat now, paid no heed (and the Left celebrated). What has happened now to the Federalist and Zero Hedge is nothing new at all: Google banned me and other foes of jihad violence and Sharia oppression of women several years ago. I was also banned by GoFundMe, PayPal (briefly), Patreon, MasterCard, Indiegogo, Amazon Smile, Amazon’s Associates program, and probably others I’ve forgotten. When all that happened, there was no reaction from mainstream conservatives who professed to oppose the progressive Leftist silencing of voices that oppose them.
Why was there no reaction? Because years ago, the establishment right accepted the “Islamophobia” narrative. Leftist organizations such as the Southern Poverty Law Center (SPLC) told the world that to oppose jihad violence and Sharia oppression was ipso facto “Islamophobic” and hateful. Islamic advocacy groups such as the Hamas-linked Council on American-Islamic Relations (CAIR) relentlessly insisted that all opposition to jihad was “bigotry,” while the establishment media passed on these claims uncritically, never informing the public about CAIR’s unsavory ties. Meanwhile, Dinesh D’Souza told conservatives that unnamed “conservative Muslims” were their natural allies and partners, ignoring the fact that Osama bin Laden, Abu Bakr al-Baghdadi and the like are “conservative Muslims.” George W. Bush told them that Islam was a religion of peace.
Others insisted to conservatives that the entire resistance to jihad was “racist” unless it was led by moderate Muslims who claimed that when properly understood, Islam was indeed a religion of peace as Bush said, and that it was wrong to discuss how Islamic jihadis used the texts and teachings of Islam to justify violence and make recruits among peaceful Muslims. A few years ago I sat in a meeting with some of the heads of the leading counter-terror groups in the country, and we discussed a joint initiative. Then one of those leaders pointed out that we were all white men and that our efforts would have no legitimacy unless a moderate Muslim led them. I, on the other hand, thought the truth was true no matter who stated it, but that was distinctly a minority view; everyone else agreed not only that it was prudent to play the Left’s identity politics game in order to gain more mainstream attention and avoid charges of “racism” and “bigotry,” but that it was right to do so, and somehow improper for non-Muslims to want to defend themselves against jihad violence. Those moderate Muslims meanwhile convinced many conservatives that the moderates, that is, a handful of people with tiny organizations, represented a genuine force for reform within the Islamic world, and that this reform was the only hope.
But the primary driving force, as is so often the case, was fear. Establishment conservatives, including the Republican Party, Fox News, National Review, the whole panoply, were terrified of being labeled “racist,” “bigoted,” and “Islamophobic.” To prevent that, they were willing to mute, censor, and cover with euphemisms their response to jihad violence and Sharia oppression. In doing so, they gutted their own effectiveness, because they no longer spoke (if they ever did speak) about the true nature and magnitude of the threat. Instead, they focused narrowly on one aspect of the problem — terrorist attacks — while ignoring or denying the goal of jihad, other forms of jihad, the nature of Sharia, the oppression of whole populations under Sharia, and more.
Fear and cowardice being the hallmarks of American establishment conservatism, foes of jihad were thrown to the wolves. I’ve repeatedly tried to sue the Southern Poverty Law Center for defaming me as a white supremacist, a bigot, and all the rest of it, but I only ever found one lawyer who would take the case. Most others were afraid to go up against the SPLC money machine. The one who was willing wanted $500,000, which I do not have and cannot raise since GoFundMe and the rest are closed to me. Meanwhile, establishment conservative organizations don’t dare to feature me or other foes of jihad terror, as they know what will ensue: a firestorm of protest from the establishment media and the Left, and they’re just not willing to stand up against that. Last November I spoke up in New Hampshire for a local Republican Party group. The local media ginned up hysteria, the state Democratic Party chairman, Raymond Buckley, libeled me as a “white supremacist” and refused to retract, other Democrats called for my cancellation, and several venues did cave in to the pressure. The worst aspect of the whole thing, however, was that the local Republicans obediently fell into line. They fired the local party chairman who had invited me, and replaced him with state Rep. Steven Smith, an embarrassing invertebrate who apologized for my appearance even though he hadn’t attended, hadn’t viewed the video, and had no idea what I said. He just knew that the Democrats were angry, and so he jumped to appease them. And he is, of course, not alone. He should be elected chairman of the Republican National Committee, because the whole thing is as small, weak, and spineless as he is.
All that being said, I am neither complaining nor asking anyone for anything. The ship has sailed; there is no one to ask. I’m merely posting these observations as a record, for as long as it lasts, of how we got here, and a signpost to what is certain to happen next. Just as I have warned many times, the Left is now coming for the establishment conservatives who thought they would be spared if they threw me and others who were targeted by the Left under the bus. That was never true, and everyone knows that now. Nonetheless, probably never-Trump conservatives and others still think they won’t be targeted. They’re wrong. But by the time they find that out, it will be far, far too late.
Frank Anderson says
It is my understanding that the Constitution applies only to government action unless a business is classed as a “public accommodation” under the Civil Rights Act. The case of Katzenbach v. McClung 379 U.S. 294 (1964) addressed the power of Congress under the Commerce Clause to prohibit discrimination in restaurants because of the impact on interstate commerce. Unless private sites like Google and others can be declared public accommodations instead of private businesses, they can censor and exclude at will. I do not like this situation.
gravenimage says
True, Frank.
Of course, I worry that if these companies were to be controlled in some manner by the government, as many even here have suggested, that it might become even worse.
Frank Anderson says
There are a few cases where federal rights are protected against individual as well as state action. United States v. Williams, 341 U.S. 70 (1951) (The right to inform federal authorities of illegal conduct is protected against individual as well as state action). With this Supreme Court, :”rotsa ruck” winning that argument against the Big Tech monopolies..
gravenimage says
Thanks for that information, Frank.
mortimer says
Frank, how can we beat Big Tech? They want to own all information as their property. It won’t be true unless Big Tech and their commercial sponsors say it is.
Inconvenient and unpopular truths will be suppressed.
Frank Anderson says
Always Respected Mortimer, The only way I see is to fight oppression with insurgency. Look for every way to deny them their goal of totalitarian control. If it is as simple as using Duckduckgo.com instead of Google, one more person resisting at a time expands the universe of resistance until it is enough to create an alternative. If I am not in error, Google is the first Trillion Dollar company. That also means there are ways to create alternatives that will eat at its wealth and power the same way ants can take down an elephant.
Don’t confuse me about elephants. The only way I would kill any elephant is for immediate defense of myself or someone I like. Otherwise I would do my hunting with a camera. Totally off subject, Before Kenya outlawed professional, guided elephant hunting, it had a herd of 70,000 elephants. After the end with the loss of fees that paid for conservation and management, poachers have reduced the national herd to 700 or less. I had a friend who went on such guided hunts for other animals who was warned of “dire consequences” by his wife if he shot an elephant. He gave the appropriate “Yes Dear!” answer. I prepared and sighted several rifles and their ammunition for him. He is no longer living. I’m still trying to decide if his good outweighed his bad-he was a very complicated friend. We did things I doubt I would have done without him. He is missed.
Tom W Harris says
Another approach would be to dust off the antitrust laws and use them to break up the tech monopolies.
Frank Anderson says
Tom, I had AT&T stock when it was broken into 7 companies. Selling the stock when I needed money was a nightmare, It has reassembled into one around Southwest Bell and is just as much of a business pain as ever. The largest effect of continuing business while fighting their abusive practices, in my opinion, is billions of dollars of free publicity. Cut them off. Create alternatives. How many seemingly indestructible business giants 50 years ago are now dust because alternatives were created?
kepha says
Who might possibly provide the backing for a conservative net platform? It is clear that Big Tech is hostile.
Joe says
Yeah but, if they want the DMCA safe harbor against copyright claims, they can’t sensor anything that is not posted in the TOS. Even then, they can only censor when the copyright holder complains.
These companies don’t have the TOS to discriminate which makes them subject to discrimination laws.
Frank Anderson says
Joe, I don’t understand what you have written. Please explain in US English.
I have experience with a supposedly patriotic charitable national fraternity where it was loudly and openly proclaimed that the Constitution and certain basic, absolutely fundamental fraternal promises do not apply. I no longer associate with that group for that reason, after seeing the total abuse of one if its members.
Like the big tech bullies we are discussing here, the only alternative I can see is to tell them they are no longer useful in our lives. We have better and more productive things to do with our time and money than to continue business with them, making them richer and more powerful in the process. That continued futile engagement to me is self-defeating and self-destructive of our interests.
Nothing we do will change our enemies except to cut as much of their wealth and power away from them as possible.
MBR says
Everything you have written here, Robert, and everything you have written over the fifteen or so years I have been following your writings here and in your books speaks truth, knowledge, compassion and a deep understanding of humanity in all its forms.
Do not give up now, especially now. There are too few of you already in this fast fragmenting world.
gravenimage says
Hear, hear, MBR!
J D S says
If the establishment, the powers that be, would read, study and put into practice the written word found between between the covers of of Robert Spencer’s many books as well as his wonderful, informing, jihad watch then…and I’ll go out on the proverbial limb here and state that our nation, any the whole would be n much better condition than it has been in the last 75 years. Oh one more thing (OFF TOPIC. well. maybe not) Keep an eye on the Supreme Court. Look for rulings that are way too far to the left.
OTTER says
Your life is a standing lesson to all those who wish to survive in public discourse that the only viable way is to be a coward and never ever tell the truth about Islam. Even Trump is silent. It is beyond frightening. The world appears to be helpless before this evil ideology.
jewdog says
The best answer to these social media giants is more competition. If there were 12 twitters , 16 facebooks and 11 googles, no one of them would have much influence, and free speech would not be an issue. Teddy Roosevelt understood that dangers of monopoly, but I don’t think social media trust busting is much of an option nowadays. Nevertheless, perhaps more can be done to encourage new players to enter the fray.
Giacomo Latta says
Precisely. Under what rock have all the anti-trust bureaucrats been hiding? Or do they now think that big government good, big everything good.
mortimer says
If Islam is a religion of peace then why is it the only one that consistently produces religiously-motivated terrorist attacks each and every day of the year?
If Islam is a religion of peace then why were there 35,000 deadly terror attacks committed explicitly in the name of Islam since 9-11?
If Islam is a religion of peace then why did Muhammad, the prophet of Islam, have people killed for insulting him or for criticizing his religion?
If Islam is a religion of peace then why are Muslims told to emulate the example of Muhammad who committed a violent act every six weeks in the last nine years of his life?
If Islam is a religion of peace then why did Mohammed say he was “ordered by Allah to fight men until they testify that there is no god but Allah and that Muhammad is his messenger”??
If Islam is a religion of peace then why after Muhammad died, did the people who lived with him and knew his religion best immediately fall into war with each other?
If Islam is a religion of peace then why did Mohammed’s whole family get murdered by Muslims?
If Islam is a religion of peace then why did three of the first four Islamic rulers get killed by Muslims?
If Islam is a religion of peace then why did Muhammad direct Muslims to wage war on other religions and bring them under submission to Islam?
If Islam is a religion of peace then why did Muslims continue their Jihad against other religions for 1400 years, checked only by the ability of non-Muslims to defend themselves?
If Islam is a religion of peace then why is Islam the only religion that has to retain its membership by formally threatening to kill anyone who leaves?
If Islam is a religion of peace then why does Islam teach that non-Muslims are less than fully human? Muhammad said that Muslims can be put to death for murder, but that a Muslim could never be put to death for killing a non-Muslim
If Islam is a religion of peace then why does the Koran never once speak of Allah’s love for non-Muslims, but it speaks of Allah’s cruelty toward and hatred of non-Muslims more than 500 times?
If Islam is a religion of peace then why do so many people fear it…including Muslims?
If Islam is a religion of peace then why are Muslim countries called Dar al Islam, while non-Muslim countries are called Dar al Harb?
If Islam is a religion of peace then why is there no punishment in Sharia law for the MURDERERS of apostates or blasphemers.
If Islam is a religion of peace then why are there 164 jihad verses in the Koran?
If Islam is a religion of peace then why are many thousand terrorists and militants acting in the name of jihad and sharia?
If Islam is a religion of peace then why do different Islamic sects make war on each other?
If Islam is a religion of peace then why are there an average of 4.5 lethal jihad attacks every day of the year?
If Islam is a religion of peace then why are there an average of 50 people killed in jihad attacks every day of the year?
If Islam is a religion of peace then why is killing cartoonists and blasphemers accepted in mainstream societies in the Islamic world?
If Islam is a religion of peace then why is it that criticising an apparently militant ideology causes rioting ?
If Islam is a religion of peace then why is Islam the only ideology in which the mainstream believes that apostasy should be punished with death?
If Islam is a religion of peace then why did 81% of Arabs say they supported the victories of ISIS in Iraq and Syria?
If Islam is a religion of peace then why does Koran 48.29 ask Muslims to be ‘harsh’ or ‘violent’ against disbelievers?
If Islam is a religion of peace then why does Koran 9.73 say, “strive hard against the unbelievers and the hypocrites and be unyielding to them.”
OTTER says
It is a religion of peace because ‘they’ so. And ‘they’ know more than us.
Phil Copson says
“If Islam is a religion of peace……”
….then why the Hell is everyone so scared….?
gravenimage says
*Very* important questions, Mortimer. Few know to ask them.
James Lincoln says
Mortimer,
The islamic version of “peace” will only come after all infidels either:
1. Convert to islam
2. Pay a jizya
or
3. Be killed.
But you knew that already…
E T says
James, I would love to see billboards saying:
CONVERT TO ISLAM
OR
LIVE AS A SLAVE AND PAY THEIR TAX FOR EXISTING —THE JIZYA
OR
BE KILLED
THAT IS ISLAM
James Lincoln says
That’s just about it, E T…
Linde Barrera says
To mortimer- So well said. Thank you. I conclude that most of the world’s Muslims are brainwashed, because if a human with a normal IQ knows this about the “religion” they believe in, why would they continue to practice this “religion”?
???
commonsense says
Superb summation, Mortimer. Should go viral.
mortimer says
The control of opinion by big-business is not ‘socialism’, ‘leftism’ or ‘communism’ … it is actually FASCISM.
FASCISM is a partnership between totalitarian government and BIG BUSINESSES.
What we are seeing is called GLOBALIST FASCISM.
GreekEmpress says
I received an email from Professor Nicholas Damask this morning regarding his defense against the lawsuit filed against him by CAIR. Several people had inquired how to help him financially against the litigation jihad he is facing.
He believes he will be okay in this regard as the College District is paying for an outside firm to represent him. Further, he has the faculty association attorney as co-counsel.
If there is any change to this, which he does not expect, he will let me know in which direction he will need to go.
He wishes to thank everyone for their concern and support.
If I hear anything more, I’ll post it here on JW.
gravenimage says
Thank you so much for the update, GreekEmpress–this is good to hear.
I hope when you contact Dr. Damask next that you will let him know that he has a great deal of support here.
Keys says
+1
James Lincoln says
Great update, GreekEmpress!
gravenimage says
Robert Spencer: It Didn’t Start with The Federalist, I was Canceled Before Cancellation was Cool
……………..
Robert Spencer is always a leader–even in areas he’d prefer not to be.
But yes–this continues to get worse.
E T says
Yes, I had a hard time getting Robert today and cannot get Vladtepes.
gravenimage says
Huh–I cannot access Vladtepesblog now either, E T.
tgusa says
Google. Bringing Chinese communist style censorship to the US internet. If you want the truth, if you want to know what is really going on, if you want to make up your own mind on any issue, never use google search. Chrome breaks a lot. I generally refuse to troubleshoot chrome but if I do I tell the client that it will cost three times what I charge for the troubleshooting of other issues. With no guarantee. That right there turns them off and usually they say never-mind I will get along without it. I say to them good choice as who knows what sort of creepy stuff google is doing on their end. This is not censorship nor banning or fascism it is well deserved discrimination.
You are never allowed to criticize or have a different opinion when dealing with commies or fascists but that makes them easy to spot.
E T says
Robert Spencer is THE modern day hero. He is a Saint. He has fought the good fight for many years and he is still standing. God bless him and keep him well.
GOLDMANN says
E.T. Amen!!! ??✝
Seth says
The left sets the agenda. The right, feebly, just reacts.
infidel says
One of Robert’s best ones… without a doubt… and I loved it with a fraction of sadness when he says and I quote
“All that being said, I am neither complaining nor asking anyone for anything. The ship has sailed; there is no one to ask. I’m merely posting these observations as a record, for as long as it lasts, of how we got here, and a signpost to what is certain to happen next. Just as I have warned many times, the Left is now coming for the establishment conservatives who thought they would be spared if they threw me and others who were targeted by the Left under the bus. That was never true, and everyone knows that now. Nonetheless, probably never-Trump conservatives and others still think they won’t be targeted. They’re wrong. But by the time they find that out, it will be far, far too late.”
I’ve said this b4 here and will repeat.. Robert will get his due recognition for the work he has done but alas! that could unfortunately very well happen after his natural lifespan (which I hope will be very long.. but even that length may not be enough)
This, IMHO, is the tragedy of our times.
infidel says
Let me also add that it is not the LEFT that is coming for the conservatives… It is ISLAM who is manipulating the strings from behind… Their target of course to get rid of courageous truth speakers first — the ones that could do them the most damage – and then go for the rest of the RIGHT and then GO FOR THE LEFT THEMSELVES…
James Lincoln says
Infidel,
Essentially what Robert Spencer is doing here at Jihad Watch is creating a sort of diary.
A diary of a slow moving train wreck – red/green alliance – slowly destroying Western civilization.
It still, in at least some Western countries, can be stopped – or even reversed, if there is the political understanding and willpower to change course…
gravenimage says
+1
Ratko Mladic says
This is not exclusive to america it’s occuring in many areas in Western civilization. The UK is undergoing an horrendous freedom of speech debacle with the UK government and police cracking down on freedom of speech for those of us who are against antifa and black lies matter. If you’re an English male then you’re fascist and rascist when you protest and speak out but if your black your protest is considered peaceful by the UK government dispite 57 police officers being injured during their ‘peacful’ riot….work that out… if you can!
Linde Barrera says
To Ratko Mladic- Do you think Queen Elizabeth and her cohorts have anything to do with this terrible transformation against free speech?
I think she does play a part. And why? Guilt for the colonial policies of the past. Yet why should any individual feel guilty for a thing they did not do? But change is good when one realizes there is a difference between doctrine and human behavior reaction to that doctrine based on prejudices and preferences.
gravenimage says
The Queen *should* be speaking out for her people.
Frank Anderson says
GI, considering Charles’ affinity for all things islam, can we hope the Queen sees differently? Are we delusional to hope she remembers Winston Churchill’s comments? Do I remember correctly that one of them is that islam in a man is like rabies in a dog?
Daniel Triplett says
Agreed. The Queen has tremendous power and influence. She rarely uses it, which makes many people falsely believe she has no power and influence. But she does:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=wiDCwqpupj8
She’s silently squandering this opportunity, and she has nothing to lose, except her entire kingdom. She can say anything she wants, she can’t be voted out of office, and outside of a total revolt of the entire British military, or the UK Ummah’s defeat of the UK military, she can never lose power.
gravenimage says
I think the Queen does see things a bit differently than does the appalling Prince Charles, Frank. She has said vague things against Jihad over the years, most notably here:
“Queen’s Christmas message includes horrors of jihad terror attacks in London and Manchester”
https://www.jihadwatch.org/2017/12/queens-christmas-message-includes-horrors-of-jihad-terror-attacks-in-london-and-manchester
But if I hoped that this would have been a turning point for her, it was in vain–this was pretty much a one-off.
Daniel Triplett says
Frank
Charles is a dhimmi, the kind of guy who dresses up in Muslim garb and chums up to Muslim leaders. Plenty of such news stories and video.
Here’s some of what Churchill and Jefferson said on Islam:
https://thefederalistpapers.org/us/winston-churchills-brutal-takedown-of-islam-means-more-today-than-ever
Frank Anderson says
Daniel, I have seen Charles dressed for the “occasion” and dancing to the joy of islam. I hope the Queen lives a lot longer to keep this menace off the throne. Thank you for the link. I am printing the story and saving it where I can find it again. The UK has nuclear submarines armed with US made Trident missiles carrying UK made Hydrogen bombs. Something worth remembering.
gravenimage says
Charles is an ugly piece of work. I hope he *never* takes the throne.
sidney penny says
“Those moderate Muslims meanwhile convinced many conservatives that the moderates, that is, a handful of people with tiny organizations, represented a genuine force for reform within the Islamic world, and that this reform was the only hope.”
The key paragraph above.
Yes moderates, that is, a handful of ( very nice) people with tiny organizations…..
David says
Islam is like a very old car. It has got to the point of not worth trying to repair. It needs to be scrapped immediately.
Alarmed Pig Farmer says
Moderate compared to what? If they’re really Moslem, then they’re self-deluded outliers and you can’t blame the true Moslems for dealing with them harshly, in an Islamic way.
David Darman says
Mr Spencer, do not be discouraged. Being an iconoclast is not easy. Keep up your scholarly work. It will live on after you.
I am a regular reader and have been for many years. I abhor the supremacist, masochistic, oppressive ideology of Islam (or any theocracy). However, I regard myself as a liberal or progressive on the political spectrum, i.e. more to the left than most readers here seem to be.
Among the issues which I believe define one’s position on that spectrum include a progressive income tax, support for social security, unemployment ins, and a helping hand to the less able or sick, mindful conservation of the planet, equal pay for equal work, and a broad interpretation of the individual’s rights set forth in the U.S. Constitution.
I commiserate with RS’s angst with the undeserved and ill-founded criticism that he has frequently suffered from much of the MSM and other politically correct talking heads and know-nothings, many of which tend to be liberal (or so-called “leftist”). Nevertheless, I do not believe RS or his adherents do his goals any good by lumping all liberals/leftists together as being soft on Islam or opposed to the goals of Jihad Watch. That approach only serves to alienate many who would otherwise give RS a larger audience and greater influence. Moreover, I have not here ever read a clear definition of “leftist” or how it might be distinguished from liberal/progressive if such distinction is even thought to exist.
E T says
David, Have you had many discussions with friends, family or coworkers regarding Islam? I have been speaking with people about Islam, CAIR and the Muslim brotherhood for many many years. I believe an awful lot of people have made a mistake by calling me a racist, Islamophobic hate monger for talking about Shari’ah law.
Rather than discuss Islam most people go a little crazy and start yelling at me. One man told me ISIS are the good guys, older women have told me to ….off,….off, shut my filthy mouth, go to hell where you belong………When I ask people to read jihadwatch, I am told to ….off, and many more kind words seem to flow from their mouths.
I believe we are way past the “playing footsie” stage with Islam. People need to read the Muslim Brotherhoods Hoods Strategic Plan NOW.
Follow the Imams and learn what the final goal is for all the dirty kafirs. Qur’an 8:12 and 8:39
David Darman says
I agree we are past playing games with those who seek to impose sharia on us or our friends (or anyone for that matter). My point is that we should not alienate liberals/leftists/ progressives who share that view.
Alarmed Pig Farmer says
When this came up a couple of days ago and there was mention that The Federalist and Zero Hedge were first I thought, “didn’t they already do this to JihadWatch?”
With all respect to the other two, both of which I read regularly, JW is far more important and newsworthy. But oh I forgot, we can’t acknowledge the facts of Islam. That would be…. racist religious bigotry hate speech.
Lorensacho says
The question should be asked if deliberately concocted news is free speech.
gravenimage says
As long as it is not calling for violence, then yes, it is.
But I’m also not sure what your point is here–Jihad Watch has not made anything up–news here is all sourced from reliable sources.
I may not agree with the Federalist on every editorial point, but I have not run across anything there that is not factually accurate.
E T says
Robert Spencer is just like Joe Friday, “Just the facts Mam, just the facts”. The truth shall set you free.
gravenimage says
+1
James Lincoln says
The feature article, written by Robert Spencer, may be his very best.
All Jihad Watch readers – and Western leaders – should review it thoroughly – several times.
If our Western leaders do not understand what is going on – and work to counteract the threat – islam will take over…
infidel says
James I heartily second and third and fourth that… mate!!
Lorem Ipsum says
Robert, I remember when you were disinvited from speaking at the American Library Association’s annual convention. I was recently sacked from my local library; I guess freedom of inquiry and intellectual integrity will only go so far with American Librarians.