Posts

SCHOEN: Americans Are Sounding The Alarm Over Big Tech

Elon Musk’s Twitter acquisition — which can be summed up as the world’s wealthiest person buying one of the most powerful social media and news platforms — underscores one of the big problems with Big Tech.

In the absence of modernized anti-trust and anti-monopoly laws, Big Tech companies in the U.S. have amassed far too much economic and political control over society, and especially over the news and publishing industries.

The power at Big Tech companies  with respect to their management of sites like Facebook News and Google News – is held by a few individuals who are often times more motivated by a desire to turn profits and promote their own ideology or world view, rather than by a genuine desire to guarantee a free and diverse press.

Due to Big Tech’s market manipulation in the news and publishing industries, thousands of local and smaller news operators — including many conservative publications — have been forced to shutter their doors in recent years.

This forsakes the First Amendment to the U.S. Constitution, and thus, is a threat to our democracy.

Importantly, new survey research shows that the American public recognizes this threat, and wants their elected officials to act on it.

New polling by Schoen Cooperman Research — conducted among a representative sample of U.S. adults and commissioned by News Media Alliance — reveals widespread concern surrounding Big Tech’s power and manipulative practices, as well as strong support for reforms to rein in these monopolies.

Notably, strong majorities of Americans are concerned about the economic and political power of Big Tech companies (74%) and are supportive of increased government regulations on Big Tech companies in order to curb their economic and political power (63%).

With respect to news and publishing specifically, nearly 4-in-5 Americans are concerned that Big Tech companies have too much power over these industries (79%) and manipulate these industries for their own gain (78%).

To that end, three-in-four Americans agree that “Big Tech’s monopoly over the news and publishing industries is a threat to the free press and unfair to publishers, especially to small and local outlets.” (76%)

In addition to being broadly concerned about this problem, Americans are supportive of Congress taking action to restore fairness, balance, and freedom to the press.

Respondents were asked about a specific piece of legislation proposed in Congress known as the Journalism, Competition, and Preservation Act (JCPA). The JCPA would provide a legal basis for news publishers to negotiate fair terms for use of their content by Big Tech companies — and thus, would demonstrably curb the economic and political power of these companies.

Remarkably, 7-in-10 Americans support Congress passing the JCPA (70%) and believe it is important for Congress to pass the JCPA (64%) after reading a brief description of the bill. And by a four-to-one margin, U.S. adults would be more likely, rather than less likely, to back a candidate for Congress who supported the JCPA.

In my experience as a professional pollster who has worked in opinion research for over four decades, it is rare for an issue or piece of legislation to garner this level of public support.

Our findings present a clear call-to-action to Congress, and elected officials in both parties now have a mandate from the public to rein in Big Tech by pursuing the JCPA or similar reforms.

Moreover, the very survival of American democracy is contingent on our leaders safeguarding free speech and ensuring a fair economy.

Congress must fulfill its duty by passing legislation like the Journalism Competition and Preservation Act into law.

AUTHOR

DOUGLAS SCHOEN

Contributor. Douglas E. Schoen is a Democratic pollster and strategist. He is the author of “The Political Fix: Changing the Game of American Democracy, From the Grass Roots to the White House.” The views and opinions expressed in this commentary are those of the author and do not reflect the official position of the Daily Caller News Foundation.

RELATED ARTICLE: THAYER: We Need To Rein In Big Tech, Not The EU

EDITORS NOTE: This Daily Caller Column is republished with permission. ©All rights reserved. Content created by The Daily Caller News Foundation is available without charge to any eligible news publisher that can provide a large audience. For licensing opportunities of our original content, please contact licensing@dailycallernewsfoundation.org.

Dartmouth Bills College Republicans $3,600 For Security After Forcing Antifa Critic Andy Nog’s Event Online

There just isn’t any doubt about what is happening here. Dartmouth is trying to destroy the College Republicans and crush dissent. It’s what Leftists do, and virtually all of America’s major colleges and universities are controlled by the Left today.

Dartmouth bills College Republicans $3,600 for security after forcing live Andy Ngo event online

by Greg Piper, Just the News, April 21, 2022:

An Ivy League school is demanding after-the-fact security fees from its College Republicans chapter for an event the administration banned in person, threatening the club’s ability to continue hosting events, its president told Just the News.

Dartmouth College ordered the CRs to move the Jan. 20 event with Portland-based Antifa chronicler Andy Ngo online just hours before it was scheduled to start, citing “credible threats” the administration received from law enforcement.

Hanover Police, however, said it didn’t ask Dartmouth to shut down the Ngo event, which it was prepared to secure, and wasn’t told why Dartmouth moved it online.

Event security fees on campus have emerged as a high-profile flashpoint in recent years, usually with right-leaning student clubs accusing administrators of caving to the heckler’s veto by sticking them with unreasonable estimates and bills for speakers perceived as controversial.

Ohio approved legislation in 2020 to ban public universities from basing security fees on the anticipated reaction to a speaker. But an appeals court dismissed a lawsuit against the University of Minnesota after it revised a policy used to move conservative pundit Ben Shapiro to a smaller, less convenient venue than progressive speakers received.

Dartmouth CRs President Chloe Ezzo learned the club had been stuck with a $3,600 bill from the Ngo event, and was thus not in “good standing,” when she applied for funding for its Wednesday night event with James O’Keefe, the conservative firebrand who founded Project Veritas.

The Dartmouth Anarchists, an anonymous group that previously threatened to disrupt the Ngo event, publicly accused the CRs of announcing the O’Keefe event “at the last minute” to avoid scrutiny but didn’t directly threaten to disrupt it.

In a phone call hours before the O’Keefe event, Ezzo described a maddening bureaucratic process that involved three requests for funding from the 18-member Council on Student Organizations, whose rules are “very vague and selectively enforced.”

The council didn’t mention the outstanding security bill until the second request, and one member suggested a prohibited alumni fundraiser to pay the debt, according to Ezzo. It rejected her third request for a token $450 to cover just security, meaning the Department of Safety and Security may stick them with another bill of unknown amount.

“We might come out of this event with four grand of debt” and risk the college freezing its account, Ezzo said. “I feel like we’re set up to fail.”

AUTHOR

RELATED ARTICLES:

Fauci thinks CDC should be able to impose its will unchallenged

China: Muslim from U.S. stabs neck of ex-girlfriend, kills her in ‘premeditated revenge killing’

‘Al Qaeda is on our side’: Obama/Biden team aided jihadis in Syria

Ilhan Omar’s Foreign Policy

EDITORS NOTE: This Jihad Watch column is republished with permission. ©All rights reserved.

Elon Musk Becomes Largest Shareholder Of Twitter

Tesla CEO Elon Musk bought a 9.2% stake in Twitter Inc., according to an SEC filing posted Monday.

Musk purchased roughly 73.5 million shares, making him the largest shareholder, The Associated Press reported Monday, citing the filing.

Musk has questioned whether Twitter “rigorously adheres to” the principle of “free speech.” Musk posted a poll on Twitter and 70.4% of respondents said Twitter does not.

“Given that Twitter serves as the de facto public town square, failing to adhere to free speech principles fundamentally undermines democracy. What should be done?” Musk then tweeted.

Musk also said he was “giving serious thought” to creating a new platform with “free speech.”

The investment is considered passive, according to the AP.

Dan Ives of Wedbush Securities said in a client note Monday that the passive stake is likely “just the start of a broader [conversation] with the Twitter board/management that could ultimately lead to an active stake and a potential more aggressive ownership role of Twitter,” according to the AP.

Twitter shares spiked more than 20% following the announcement.

AUTHOR

BRIANNA LYMAN

Reporter.

RELATED ARTICLE: ‘It’s About Silencing Dissent’: Charlie Kirk Slams Twitter For Suspension Over Rachel Levine Tweet

EDITORS NOTE: This Daily Caller column is republished with permission. ©All rights reserved.

Twitter blocks Babylon Bee for naming Rachel Levine its ‘Man of the Year’

“Truth is not hate speech,” says the Babylon Bee’s Seth Dillon. Gee, where have I heard that before? We used to say it all the time in defense of our work against jihad violence and Sharia oppression of women. The social media giants’ war against the freedom of speech today is based on actions against “Islamophobes” in years past.

Twitter suspends Babylon Bee for naming Rachel Levine ‘Man of the Year’

by Ariel Zilber, New York Post, March 21, 2022:

Twitter locked the account of a right-leaning parody site, The Babylon Bee, after it awarded Rachel Levine, the transgender Biden administration official, the title of “man of the year.”

The Babylon Bee story was a reaction to USA Today’s naming of Levine, who is US assistant secretary for health for the US Department of Health and Human Services, as one of its “women of the year” last week.

Twitter says it will restore the account, which has more than 1.3 million followers, if the Bee deletes the tweet, but Dillon says he has no intention of doing so.

“We’re not deleting anything,” Dillon tweeted from his personal account. “Truth is not hate speech. If the cost of telling the truth is the loss of our Twitter account, then so be it.”…

Twitter cited its policy on “hateful conduct,” which states: “You may not promote violence against, threaten, or harass other people on the basis of race, ethnicity, national origin, sexual orientation, gender, gender identity, religious affiliation, age, disability, or serious disease.”…

RELATED ARTICLES:

Twitter Suspends The Babylon Bee

Sweden: Muslim migrants try to force their way into Ukrainian refugee women’s accommodations

Germany: Migrant who stabbed another man turns out to be named ‘Mohammed,’ not ‘Elias’ as originally thought

Zelensky ‘Consolidates’ All Channels Into Government Propaganda, Bans 11 Political Parties

More jihad in Israel: Muslim stabs two cops in Jerusalem, Hamas applauds it as ‘heroic act’

Israel: Muslim rams his car into Israelis, then goes on stabbing spree, murders four people

EDITORS NOTE: This Jihad Watch column is republished with permission. ©All rights reserved.

MSNBC’s Mehdi Hasan, Joe Rogan, and the Left’s Cancel Culture Double Standard

My latest in PJ Media:

Everyone knows the double standard is in place. It is taken for granted so much that people barely remark upon it anymore. When someone who dissents from the Leftist agenda offends Leftist sensibilities, his or her career is ruined for good. Remember Roseanne Barr, Tim Allen, and a host of others. Now the Left has Joe Rogan in its sights for daring to dissent from COVID orthodoxy and has suddenly discovered that years ago, he used a racial slur. Spotify has removed over a hundred of his podcasts, and the end is not in sight. But if someone who is reliably Leftist says something that offends the self-appointed guardians of acceptable opinion, the punishment is slight at best, as we have just seen with Whoopi Goldberg’s two-week suspension for Holocaust denial (which doesn’t really bother the hard Left, but they have to keep up some semblance of an attachment to truth and basic decency). And if the offending speaker is a member of a group with enough victimhood privilege, he or she won’t be punished at all, as the career of Mehdi Hasan indicates.

Mehdi Hasan is a hate-filled far-Left MSNBC host who espouses fashionable Big Lies such as the claim that “white supremacy is now a key ideology of the Republican Party” and “the far-right domestic terror threat is more dangerous than even Al Qaeda after 9/11.” During the Whoopi Goldberg controversy, remarks that Hasan made in 2009 resurfaced, leading many to question why Hasan’s star has consistently risen in the Leftist media, despite his manifest hatred and contempt for non-Muslims.

Hasan, a Shi’ite, said of the early Sunni caliph Yazid: “All of these ulama unanimously agree that at the very minimum if Yazid was not a Kaffir [unbeliever] — then at the very minimum he was a fasiq, a transgressor, a breaker of Islamic laws, a corrupt individual, a tyrant, a killer, a drunkard, a dog lover, a music lover, a homosexual, a pedophile, a sexual deviant, someone who slept with his own mother.”

Now, the Left has no problem with corrupt individuals such as Hunter and Joe Biden if they’re on the right side of the political divide. Tyrannical themselves, Leftists have no problem with tyrants, either. Killers? Depends on who is being killed. Drunkard? Dog lovers? Music lovers? Come on, man! Homosexuals, pedophiles, and sexual deviants? Are we talking about the staff of CNN now?

Anyway, Hasan then broadened his targets to include atheists: “In this respect the Koran describes the atheist as cattle. As cattle of those who grow the crops and do not stop and wonder about this world.” The Qur’an does indeed say: “Already we have created many of the jinn and mankind for Gehenna, having hearts with which they do not understand, and having eyes with which they do not see, and having ears with which they do not hear. They are like cattle, no, they are worse. These are the neglectful.” (7:179)

There is more. Read the rest here.

RELATED ARTICLES:

Chicago: Man With Hitler Mustache Paints Swastikas on Synagogue

Pope Francis celebrates ‘unity in diversity’ as Muslim persecution of Christians escalates worldwide

Spain: Muslim migrant rapes 95-year-old woman, says ‘I confused her with a girlfriend of mine’

Norway: Afghan Muslim migrant rapes 92-year-old woman, blames his ‘traumatic upbringing’

EDITORS NOTE: This Jihad Watch column is republished with permission. ©All rights reserved.

Facebook allowed photos of beheadings from ISIS and the Taliban to be tagged as ‘insightful’ and ‘engaging’

Facebook was only interested in shutting down the speech of dissenters from the Leftist agenda, not Islamic jihadis.

Facebook allowed photos of beheadings and violent hate speech from ISIS and the Taliban to be tagged as ‘insightful’ and ‘engaging’ – despite claims to crack down on extremists, report reveals

by Jonathan Chadwick, MailOnline, December 21, 2021:

Facebook allowed photos of beheadings and violent hate speech from ISIS and the Taliban to be tagged as ‘insightful’ and ‘engaging’, a new report reveals.

Extremists have turned to the social media platform as a weapon ‘to promote their hate-filled agenda and rally supporters’ on hundreds of groups, according to the review of activity between April and December this year.

These groups have sprouted up across the platform over the last 18 months and vary in size from a few hundred to tens of thousands of members, the review found.

One pro-Taliban group created in spring this year and had grown to 107,000 members before it was deleted, the review, published by Politico, claims.

Overall, extremist content is ‘routinely getting through the net’, despite claims from Meta – the company that owns Facebook – that it’s cracking down on extremists.

‘We do not allow individuals or organisations involved in organised crime, including those designated by the US government as specially designated narcotics trafficking kingpins (SDNTKs); hate; or terrorism, including entities designated by the US government as foreign terrorist organisations (FTOs) or specially designated global terrorists (SDGTs), to have a presence on the platform. We also don’t allow other people to represent these entities.

‘We do not allow leaders or prominent members of these organisations to have a presence on the platform, symbols that represent them to be used on the platform or content that praises them or their acts. In addition, we remove any coordination of substantive support for these individuals and organisations.’

The groups were discovered by Moustafa Ayad, an executive director at the Institute for Strategic Dialogue, a think tank that tracks online extremism….

RELATED ARTICLES:

Russia: Putin says 32 terrorist attacks were foiled in 2021

France: Samuel Paty Square plaque vandalized, the word ‘Islamist’ is painted over

Switzerland: Teacher fired, fined, given suspended sentence for ‘Islamophobic’ Facebook posts

Nigeria: Muslims murder twelve Christians in jihad massacre as they were leaving worship services in church

CAIR: Love for Jesus Unites Christians and Muslims at Christmas Time

Italy: 500 illegal Muslim migrants land in 48 hours

EDITORS NOTE: This Jihad Watch column is republished with permission. ©All rights reserved.

Facebook Finally Admits It: Its ‘Fact Checks’ Are Just Opinion

Now the Left’s entire “fact check” deception is exposed. My latest in FrontPage:

For years now, Facebook and the other social media giants have been acting as the guardians of acceptable opinion, banning even the president of the United States for stating views they decided had to be forcibly suppressed. But now, facing a serious legal challenge to their massive censorship of dissidents from the Leftist agenda and ongoing infringement of the freedom of speech, Facebook has finally admitted what its foes have contended from the beginning: its “fact checks” are not really factual at all, but are simply opinion. On the basis of that opinion, innumerable truthful voices have been silenced; lovers of freedom can only hope that this startling admission is the beginning of the end of the social media giants’ hegemony.

Reclaim The Net reported Saturday that “John Stossel, a libertarian journalist and author, filed a lawsuit against Facebook, claiming the platform defamed him through a ‘fact check’ label. Facebook added a ‘misleading’ label on a video he posted.”

This labeling of Stossel had a powerful effect: he was “censored on Facebook and his work was undermined by the ‘fact check’ that he alleged was defaming his character by falsely accusing him of lying.”

Faced with a legal challenge from Stossel, Facebook’s lawyers were cornered into making the damaging admission about its “fact check” labels: “The labels themselves are neither false nor defamatory; to the contrary, they constitute protected opinion.” This is a sleazy tactic, given Facebook’s current power over the public discourse. Reclaim The Net noted that “Facebook wants the ability to allow fact checkers to accuse their users of lying and censor and ban users based on those ‘fact checks,’ but not to have any liability for accusing those users of lying.”

Facebook has done immense damage to a great many more people than just Stossel with these “opinions.” Numerous sites that report on news that the Left doesn’t want you to know have been and/or continue to be shadowbanned or have been removed from Facebook altogether.

Of course, it’s not just Facebook, either. This is by now a tried-and-true tactic of the Left. For years the obscenely wealthy and fantastically corrupt Southern Poverty Law Center (SPLC) has operated in the same way, smearing and defaming foes of the Left’s agenda as “extremists” and equating them with neo-Nazis and Ku Klux Klansmen. As a target of this myself, I have several times inquired with lawyers about whether I could sue the SPLC for defamation and am always told the same thing: it’s just their opinion, it’s protected speech, you would have to prove actual malice, and so on.

The problem with this is that the SPLC’s “opinion,” like that of Facebook, is taken as sober, objective fact by numerous organizations and institutions, many of which use the SPLC’s spurious and defamatory “hate group list” to determine whom they will do business with and whom they will shun. Amazon, for example, has a special service for 501(c)(3) charitable organizations, but those that have been smeared by the SPLC, even if they have been neither accused nor convicted of any wrongdoing and are still charities recognized by the U.S. Treasury Department, are excluded from participation. And Amazon is by no means the only corporation to operate this way.

Now that Facebook has made this admission, it has thereby cast doubt upon the Left’s entire “fact check” operation. For Leftists, “fact checking” is just another means to discredit and destroy their political opponents, not a means to get to the truth of the matter at all. But Facebook’s admission will, unfortunately, not likely change anything: the evil conglomerate will continue to infringe upon the freedom of speech and police opinions, allowing only those of the far-Left to be disseminated freely.

To solve this problem will require a president who understands the threat to the freedom of speech that Facebook and the other social media giants pose, and who has the will, the power, and the support to act decisively. If the United States is to survive as a free republic, Facebook, Twitter, Google and all the rest will have to be broken up, the way AT&T was long ago. Otherwise, these sinister oligarchies will continue to strangle and silence dissenting voices, until finally there is no one left at all to speak out as they implement their authoritarian agenda in full.

RELATED ARTICLES:

Ilhan Omar’s ‘Islamophobia’ Bill Passes Over Objections That It Will Inhibit Opposition to Terrorism

US State Department admits jihad terrorism ‘still a pervasive threat worldwide’

Azerbaijan: National Assembly member says victory over Armenia ‘is the triumph of the Islamic world’

UK: Police find no evidence for BBC’s claim that Jewish youths on bus attacked by Muslims made ‘anti-Muslim slur’

Iranian newspaper reveals map of hundreds of Iranian targets in Israel

EDITORS NOTE: This Jihad Watch column is republished with permission. All rights reserved.

Hamas-linked CAIR accuses College Democrats of America of ‘Islamophobia’

Democrats supporting Israel’s self-defense against the “Palestinian” jihad? That isn’t allowed. Hamas-linked CAIR is ensuring that the miscreants get back in line, and pronto. Independent thought? Pshaw! That’s only for “right-wingers.”

Muslim advocacy group accuses College Democrats of ‘Islamophobia

by Sean Salai, Washington Times, November 12, 2021:

A Muslim advocacy group is accusing the College Democrats of America of “Islamophobia” for harassing one of their officers on social media over pro-Palestinian comments she made online as a child.

The Council on American-Islamic Relations (CAIR) this week called in a letter for the Democratic Party-affiliated group to open an “independent investigation” with the intent of disciplining or expelling the unnamed members who “repeatedly harassed” Rollins College senior Nourhan Mesbah on social media when she ran successfully for national vice president in August.

The harassment includes the members’ “liking” a social media comment that read in part: “Boot this jihadist out, no room for racist totalitarianism,” CAIR says.

In the letter sent this week to College Democrats President Jalen Miller, CAIR’s national deputy director Edward Mitchell also accuses the CDA members of “weaponizing” an “anti-Muslim” political ad against Ms. Mesbah over the pro-Palestinian comment she said she regretted making online as a 13-year-old.

“Anti-Muslim bigotry is not unique to any particular party, and no party is immune to it,” Mr. Mitchell told The Washington Times on Friday.

“The perception is that only the Republicans have a problem with Muslims, but the truth is that you find Islamaphobia [sic] on the Democratic side, too,” he added.

Ms. Mesbah declined to discuss the incident, which erupted after the ad featuring her childhood comment prompted fellow College Democrats to accuse her of antisemitism and push for her censure.

The letter includes testimony from several Muslim members of the organization, including College Democrats Muslim Caucus Chair Tyrese Rice, who complained on Ms. Mesbah’s behalf about the “bigoted and imbalanced implications of the organization” at both the state and national levels.

“There was a lack of Muslim representation and an underlying stigma against discussion [of] related topics and concepts,” Mr. Rice said about the College Democrats when he first joined them.

Another comment in the letter from an anonymous student says CDA perpetuates a culture of hostility toward “Palestinian liberation” and silences Muslim students who speak up about it.

“By creating a space to allow Muslim members to be called ‘jihadist[s]’ among other names, we have abandoned our progressive ideals,” the student writes.

The College Democrats have not responded to Mr. Mitchell’s letter, and their spokesman did not respond Friday to telephone and email requests for comment.

Reached Friday afternoon, a spokesperson for the Democratic National Committee declined to comment on the dispute….

RELATED ARTICLES:

Germany: Police conceal face of Muslim migrant rapist of 15-year-old girl in asking people to watch for him

Bangladesh: Hindu population steadily declining in the face of Muslim persecution

Burkina Faso: Muslims murder at least 19 people in jihad raid on military police post

UK taxpayers to back solar project in Turkey up to $291,000,000

Turkey: No Budget from Government for Schools Run by Armenians, Jews and Greeks

EDITORS NOTE: This Jihad Watch column is republished with permission. ©All rights reserved.

National School Boards Association Asks President Biden to Label Its Critics ‘Domestic Terrorists’

Note that “a person yelling ‘a Nazi salute in protest to masking requirements’ is not a Nazi, as the NSBA is trying to imply. He is calling the school board Nazis. Meanwhile, the fascist clowns of the NSBA would almost certainly object most strenuously to any honest exposition of the motivating ideology behind an actual form of terrorism, that is, Islamic jihad terrorism.

School boards group asks Biden to consider labeling opponents ‘domestic terrorists

by Dave Huber, College Fix, September 30, 2021 (thanks to Henry):

The National School Boards Association has asked President Biden to look into slapping a “domestic terrorist” label on “angry” parents and community members who speak their minds at board meetings.

“America’s public schools and its education leaders are under an immediate threat,” the group says in its letter to the president. “[As] acts of malice, violence, and threats against public school officials have increased, the classification of these heinous actions could be the equivalent to a form of domestic terrorism and hate crimes.”

The NSBA wants the Gun-Free School Zones Act, the USA PATRIOT Act, the Matthew Shepard and James Byrd Jr. Hate Crimes Prevention Act, the Violent Interference with Federally Protected Rights statute, and the Conspiracy Against Rights statute all invoked to help prevent alleged threats, Education Week reports.

The Departments of Education, Homeland Security, and Justice are requested to participate in a review, along with the FBI.

On Sept. 22, the NSBA, along with AASA, the School Superintendents Association, issued a joint statement condemning “online and in-person threats, abuse and harassment.” AASA President Daniel Domenech said that while his group respected the right of free speech, “We cannot—and will not—tolerate aggression, intimidation, threats and violence toward superintendents, board members and educators.”

But some of the instances cited by the NSBA in its letter appear to be free speech, to say nothing of “terrorism.” For example, the group cites a person yelling “a Nazi salute in protest to masking requirements,” while another’s actions “prompted [a] board to call a recess because of opposition to critical race theory.”…

RELATED ARTICLES:

Hungarian PM Viktor Orban: Mass migration part of ‘global plan’ to create a ‘new proletariat’

UK: London’s Muslim mayor says he needs 24/7 protection because of ‘racists and Islamophobes’

UK: Illegal boat migrants who obtain legitimate visas and remain in UK estimated at 64,000 a year

Israeli Prime Minister Bennett’s Three No’s To Joe Biden

EDITORS NOTE: This Jihad Watch column is republished with permission. ©All rights reserved.

Arlington, Virginia GOP slammed as ‘racist’ for calling out anti-Americanism of AOC and Ilhan Omar

The two Congresswomen are above criticism, because any and all negative words directed to them will be categorized in the establishment media as “racist,” and condemned as leading to death threats. In this way, the Left is moving to stigmatize and silence all opposition to its agenda.

In Racist Attack, Virginia County GOP Suggests Reps. Ocasio-Cortez, Omar Go Work For Taliban

by Ryan Grenoble, HuffPost US, September 14, 2021 (thanks to Henry):

In a racist tweet Monday that was promptly ratioed into the shame museum, the Arlington County Republican Committee in Virginia suggested that two Democratic congresswomen of color should retire and go work as lobbyists for the Taliban.

The remark, directed at Reps. Ilhan Omar (D-Minn.) and Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez (D-N.Y.), came in response to a BBC report on the Taliban’s dire financial situation ― resulting in an apparent desire to hire a lobbyist in Washington, D.C.

The Arlington GOP responded by tweeting: “Well, if @AOC or @Ilhan retire from Congress, there’s a revolving door opportunity for them.”

The tweet drew immediate criticism, prompting the Arlington GOP to defend itself by pointing to an opinion piece in The Washington Post about Omar not being sufficiently supportive of Israel. That article was written by Marc Thiessen, a fellow at the American Enterprise Institute, a conservative think tank.

“This tweet isn’t about race ― it’s about the Squad’s constant support for anti-American sentiment abroad,” the Arlington GOP tweeted…

Ocasio-Cortez told Vanity Fair last summer she receives all manner of threats, often seeing a swell after far-right lies and attacks are amplified by conservative media.

“I used to wake up in the morning and literally get a stack of pictures that were forwarded by Capitol police or FBI,” she told the magazine. “Like, ‘These are the people who want to kill you today.’ ”

RELATED ARTICLES:

Oklahoma GOP versus CAIR Final Score: OKGOP 6, CAIR 1 (Participation Point)

Afghanistan: Taliban to remove subjects contradicting Sharia from university curriculum

Minnesota high court tosses murder conviction of Muslim migrant cop who killed unarmed woman

UK ISIS bride Shamima Begum apologizes for saying Manchester jihad massacre was ‘justified’

Danny Lewin, the First Hero, and Victim, on 9/11

EDITORS NOTE: This Jihad Watch column is republished with permission. ©All rights reserved.

Muslim Student at Washington University Removes 2,977 American Flags Commemorating 9/11 Victims

My latest at PJ Media:

Fadel Alkilani, a student at Washington University in St. Louis, is an enterprising young man who clearly has a bright future ahead. On Saturday, as people all over the world mourned the deaths of 2,977 people in jihad attacks in New York City and Washington, D.C., Alkilani busied himself with pulling up 2,977 flags that had been placed on campus in honor of the victims and throwing them away. Among Leftists today, that’s the kind of behavior that leads to rapid career advancement– clearly, Fadel Alkilani is an up-and-coming young man.

The flags were part of the Young America’s Foundation’s “9/11: Never Forget Project”: “YAF activists at high schools and colleges across the country are keeping alive the memory of those lost to radical Islamist terrorists in the world-changing events of September 11, 2001.  The iconic displays made up of 2,977 American flags—one for each innocent life taken—bring schools, communities, and individuals together to pay tribute and continue our promise to ‘never forget.’”

YAF members at Washington University duly placed the 2,977 flags, only to have Alkilani, wearing a mask and his hair in a bun, come pluck the flags up and fill trash bags with them. In a video YAF posted on Twitter, Nathaniel Hope of Washington University’s hearty band of College Republicans confronts Alikani, who justified his action by claiming (falsely) that the flag display was a “violation of school rules.” He maintained that he, on the other hand, had not violated any university rules, telling Hope: “I did not violate any university or legal policy. Now go away.”

Later, Alkilani posted online a “Formal Statement on the Flag Relocation Incident,” in which he sanctimoniously employed that tried-and-true strategy of Leftists everywhere: He claimed victimhood. Instead of apologizing for his callous, thuggish, and fascist act, Alkilani wrote: “Currently, there is a massive harassment campaign propagated primarily by Washington University College Republicans, as well as the national Young American’s Foundation [YAF] regarding an incident that occurred at approximately 6 am on Saturday, September 11, 2021. There is a large amount of misinformation circulating, and I seek to explain both what occurred and why it happened.”

The “misinformation” that he proceeds to clear up is the claim that he was “‘stealing’ the flags. This is due to a WashU College Republicans member, taking a video of me collecting flags in plastic bags. However, I had no intention of removing the flags from the Mudd Field area, and my full protest did not have the chance to be actualized. My planned protest was to place the bags of flags on Mudd field, along with various statistics [including those below] explaining the human cost of 9/11 in the past 20 years. On the sides of the bags, some writing may be visible, but the full statement was not outlined at the time of the video. I did not deface, destroy, damage, nor steal any flags, nor did I interfere with any registered event time. I assert that I did not violate any University Code of Conduct policy, though the conduct process is undergoing. Additionally, I was verbally and physically harassed by numerous WashU students and WUPD officers, whom I plan to report through official channels.”

There is more. Read the rest here.

RELATED ARTICLES:

WU condemns removal of 9/11 commemorative flags as SU vice president Alkilani defends actions amid calls for disciplinary measures

To His Everlasting Shame, ADL Chief Apologizes for the Organization’s Opposition to Ground Zero Mosque

Americans Turned Away from Virginia Hospitals Because of Influx of Afghan Evacuees

EDITORS NOTE: This Jihad Watch column is republished with permission. ©All rights reserved.

Big Tech is Censoring Americans Using United Nations Law

The UN and Big Tech are running a secret “No Fly List” for the internet.

Daniel Greenfield, a Shillman Journalism Fellow at the Freedom Center, is an investigative journalist and writer focusing on the radical Left and Islamic terrorism.

White House spokeswoman Jen Psaki warned that her administration was “flagging problematic posts for Facebook” and urged, “you shouldn’t be banned from one platform and not others.”

Psaki was not just advocating a theoretical approach, but discussing the shared infrastructure built by Big Tech monopolies, the United Nations and assorted governments for doing just that.

In his PJ Media article, Tyler O’Neil dug into the Global Internet Forum to Counter Terrorism (GIFCT) which is funded by Google, Facebook, Microsoft and currently chaired by Twitter. Its advisory committee members include the United Nations, the European Union, and the British, French, and Canadian governments as well as the National Security Council in the U.S.

GIFCT had been set up by the industry in response to pressure from governments to remove Jihadist propaganda, but its Hash Sharing Consortium, a secret database of terrorism content to be immediately removed when its 13 dot com companies come across it, is secret, and so there’s no way for anyone to know if they’ve been targeted and no appeal from the secret list.

The creation of a secret “No Fly List” for the internet by the biggest monopolies which control over 80% of social media content and much of the self-created video content on the internet would be troubling enough, but by 2019, Facebook, Twitter, Google, Microsoft, and Amazon had joined the Christchurch Call which advocates not just banning terrorist material, but fighting its root causes by strengthening “inclusiveness” and fighting “violent extremism”.

To that end, the Dynamic Matrix of Extremisms and Terrorism (DMET) was deployed which goes through 4 different levels beginning with “partisanship” and ending with terrorism. DMET defines the initial levels of violent extremism as using “dehumanizing language” which can be described as nearly any criticism of a group.

Big Tech has built its own matrix. And we’re all in it.

As O’Neil documented the resulting “matrix” is a dangerous and bizarre list which classifies Sinn Fein and the Scottish National Party, alongside NARAL and “Anti-Vaxxers” as partisans on the first level of DMET. It’s unclear what a top anti-abortion group, the ruling leftist party of Scotland, the political face for the IRA, and opponents of vaccination have in common, but out of such confusingly disparate material, Big Tech has built its censorship matrix.

At the second level, alongside Neo-Nazi groups like Combat 18, the Bundy Family (a family, not an organization) and the Animal Liberation Front, which actually is a terrorist organization, is Jihad Watch.

The respected counterterrorism blog by historian and researcher Robert Spencer and his associates (I have been among them) has been an invaluable resource for chronicling Islamic terrorism and colonialism and represents the opposite of violent extremism.

As Robert Spencer wrote on Jihad Watch, “This is pure libel. We have never advocated or approved of any violence or any illegal activity of any kind.”

The DMET is just a more sophisticated pseudoscientific database of the kind that the Southern Poverty Law Center, whose materials have contributed to it, has deployed over the years.

One such database listed my blog, Sultan Knish, as a hate group, alongside a brand of gun oil, and a bar sign in Pennsylvania. These databases may have a Kafkaesque absurdity, but the consequences to lives, livelihoods, and careers are all too real with my blog showing up on the Color of Change list pressuring Big Tech monopolies to cut off funding and access to my site, as well as Jihad Watch, the David Horowitz Freedom Center, and many other conservative groups.

Big Tech companies have begun building their own databases in coordination with governments. And these secret databases determine who has access to the public square of the internet, who can earn a living, and who ends up being deplatformed and unpersoned.

“If we are ‘extremist,’ so is the U.S. Constitution, for we are trying to defend the freedom of speech, the freedom of conscience, and the equality of rights of all people before the law,” Robert Spencer wrote. But DMET, GFICT, and other interfaces between governments and tech monopolies aren’t using the Constitution. They’re censoring based on United Nations law.

When Facebook’s Oversight Board issued its verdict on censoring President Trump, it did not list a single item of United States law, including the First Amendment, but cited the Rabat Plan of Action, and articles of the UN’s International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights (ICCPR).

GFICT’s DMET matrix cites the Rome Statue of the International Criminal Court to declare that preventing “dehumanization” is an  “imperative under international law”. Like Facebook’s decision to censor the former president, there’s no mention of the Constitution, but international law is repeatedly cited. Most disturbingly, a GFICT attempt to define terrorism collates a variety of definitions including attacks “against social cohesion” which the UN itself has noted is used to censor speech and political opponents as well as efforts to suppress Mohammed cartoons.

Tier 4 of the Content Taxonomy for what gets censored by Big Tech includes only one example targeting a group: “fear of Muslims is rational” thereby essentially banning most counterrorism, advocacy against unlimited immigration as well the Trump political campaign.

While Americans slept, Big Tech adopted UN standards to eliminate the Constitution.

Big Tech monopolies are no longer just enforcing local laws, moderating content in America or in the European Union based on the different standards in each country, instead all speech on the major platforms is being policed in line with the United Nations and its “international law”.

No black helicopters or blue helmets were needed. United Nations law came to the United States through the Big Tech monopolies that we turned over our speech and economy too.

Facebook now censors a former president in line with UN regulations. And censors all of us too.

GFICT is another example of UN regulations controlling our speech. We’re all drones living in the UN’s “Matrix” now as companies more powerful than governments impose international law.

Big Tech’s censorship matrix targets Robert Spencer and critics of Islam because censorship of dissenting religious views has been a longtime project of Islamic groups within the UN.

“They have all the power, and they mean to shut down dissent, and that means our days here are numbered,” Robert Spencer wrote. How long will it be until Did Muhammad Exist? Did An Inquiry into Islam’s Obscure Origins, the newly revised and expanded version of Spencer’s classic work, is censored the way that Amazon, which dominates the ebook market, suppressed Ryan T. Anderson’s When Harry Became Sally: Responding to the Transgender Moment.

Libertarians and some establishment conservatives keep protesting that private companies have the right to censor whom they please. But the UN is the opposite of a private company.

When massive monopolies act in concert with governments and multinational alliances, like the EU and the UN, to eliminate free speech in line with UN international law, that’s not private action. If we don’t have the courage to confront the ‘matrix’ of big governments and Big Tech, of Google and the UN, or Amazon and the EU, we will lose our rights, our identity, and our nation.

COLUMN BY

RELATED ARTICLES:

State Department Spokesman: Nothing Iran Does Will Stop Us From Negotiating With It

Germany detains Muslim migrant for grenade attack on civilians near Damascus

UK: CEO of group that picks up illegal Muslim migrants says he’s doing ‘humanitarian work of the highest order’

UK: Muslim rape gang police whistleblower says rape gang activity ‘is going on everywhere in the UK’

Bangladesh: ‘Will slaughter and sacrifice Hindus,’ say Muslims during clashes on Eid-al-Adha

EDITORS NOTE: This Jihad Watch column is republished with permission. ©All rights reserved.

The Social Media Giants Find A Violent Extremist: Me

So since I watch terrorists, I’ve been watching myself. My latest in FrontPage:

As the director of Jihad Watch, I have an ongoing interest in the activities of violent extremists, and have been tracking those activities daily for eighteen years now. But now, in their benevolence, Facebook, Microsoft, Twitter, and YouTube have made it easier than ever with their Global Internet Forum to Counter Terrorism (GIFCT): all I have to do is look in the mirror.

The GIFCT means to wipe out the groups it targets. Tyler O’Neil explains at PJ Media that GIFCT “shares terrorism data among Big Tech companies, enabling them to flag and remove terrorist content,” and is stepping up these operations: “On Monday, GIFCT announced that it significantly expanded the types of extremist content in its database, aiming to crack down on material from white supremacists and far-right militias.”

It’s about time, right? Those white supremacists and far-right militias have been rioting with impunity in Portland, and Seattle, and – oh, wait, that was the noble ideological heirs of the heroes of World War II. But we don’t have to guess who they have in mind: the GIFCT offers a helpful list of the dangerous groups from which it is going to save us.

At the highest level, Level 3, are the groups GIFCT classifies as actual bloodthirsty, grade-A certified dangerous terrorists: Boogaloo Boys, Ku Klux Klan, the National Socialist Network, Al-Qaeda, the Islamic State, even the Irish Republican Army. But that’s not all that the intrepid warriors of the GIFCT are going after. Once you’ve reached Level 3, the problem has advanced way too far, anyway. The GIFCT aims to nip terrorism in the bud by also targeting Level 2, “Violent Extremism,” which includes groups that are just below terrorist group status, but moving up the charts with a bullet: Blood & Honour, Oath Keepers, Proud Boys, and…Jihad Watch.

Perhaps even more surprising than the inclusion of Jihad Watch on this list is the fact that Antifa is also listed at Level 2. The likelihood of the social media giants moving in on Antifa is about as likely as Nancy Pelosi being Trump’s running mate in 2024, but it does help put things in perspective. Antifa has been openly calling for and applauding violence in cities all over the country, and as far as the counter-terror “experts” at the GIFCT are concerned, they’re on par with an organization that is dedicated to tracking jihad terror activity and elucidating its motivating ideology. Unlike Antifa, neither I nor Jihad Watch has ever called for or approved of any violence or illegal activity of any kind. But another way we differ from Antifa is that establishment media stooges aren’t falling all over themselves likening us to the men (you may remember what those were) who stormed the Normandy beaches on June 6, 1944. The likelihood that Jihad Watch will be targeted for being on the GIFCT’s list, and Antifa given another pass, is about 100%.

On the morning I found out that I was a violent extremist, I discovered that violent extremists sometimes enjoy a bit of yogurt for breakfast, try to fit in a good long walk, and spend a lot of the day typing. It was a bit more sedentary, and definitely filled with less death-defying adventure, than I expected for an official “violent extremist.” With all the time I sit here facing this infernal machine, the GIFCT may think I’m at work on my “manifesto,” for they say they’re going to make sure that “Manifestos from terrorist and violent extremist attackers” are removed from the Internet, but that doesn’t mean that they won’t be intensely scrutinized, for “a wide range of experts on expanding the reach and impact of our hash-sharing database’s taxonomy in order to respond to terrorist content online across the ideological spectrum.”

Hey, great. Let me start you folks off on the right foot. Here’s my Manifesto, GIFCT, straight from one of your designated “violent extremists.” Get your experts on this, and make sure they study it carefully. Ready? Here it is:

You. People. Are. Nuts.

That’s it. You like it? It took me months to get the precise formulation of my “violent extremist” ideas. And just because I have so much respect for your violent extremist-hunting prowess, GIFCT wonks, here’s a bonus. Here’s what I want for America and the world: the freedom of speech. The freedom of conscience. The equality of rights of all people before the law.

Yeah, I know that messes with you Communists’ sugar-plum visions of racial strife, civil war, and the dissolution of America as a unitary nation-state. And that may be the clue to all of this madness. Violent extremists and their enablers want to make sure they have a free hand, and one strategy to get it was delineated in the Marxists’ tested-and-true playbook: accuse your enemy of that which you’re guilty of doing. Could it be that my organization been designated a violent extremist group because some people have a bit of violent extremism planned and want to make sure that anyone who might speak out against them is silenced and cleared away?

Stranger things have happened. Meanwhile, if I disappear from the net, and from the streets, someday soon, you’ll know that the good folks at the GIFCT have done their job. One less violent extremist will be menacing the rest of us. And we will all be able to breathe a sigh of relief over that. Won’t we?

RELATED ARTICLES:

Pro-Palestinian Demonstrators in Brooklyn Call for Worldwide Violence Against Jews

Egypt’s Sisi: Islamic scholars must counter ‘erroneous thoughts that spread with aim of distorting image of Islam’

Australia: Convicted jihadi claims to have renounced ‘extremism,’ but still won’t stand for judge

Albania brings back Islamic State women and children, prime minister calls it ‘a very positive event’

Nigeria: Terrorism charges filed against Muslim cleric

Australian Broadcasting Corp.: a ‘man’ has ‘maintained a religiously motivated, violent extremist ideology’

Pakistan’s president urges Islamic countries to counter ‘Islamophobia’ and change world’s perceptions about Muslims

EDITORS NOTE: This Jihad Watch column is republished with permission. ©All rights reserved.

‘Batman’ cartoonist Frank Miller dropped from comic convention over accusation of ‘anti-Muslim hate’

Frank Miller himself is not defending “Holy Terror,” so I’m certainly not going to defend it on his behalf, and I don’t endorse torture or killing of innocent people, as his hero seems to in the illustration. But that is not what the controversy is about here. It’s over the claim that “Holy Terror” is “anti-Muslim.” I myself am frequently accused of being anti-Muslim, but the claim is false, baseless, and defamatory. It is no more anti-Muslim to oppose jihad violence than it was anti-German to oppose Nazism. It is worth nothing that “Holy Terror” is described below as “a graphic novel in which an original character known as The Fixer sets out to battle Al-Qaeda.” Meanwhile, “many believed the story depicted the religion of Islam, rather than the specific terrorist group of Al-Qaeda, as the book’s villain,” but no evidence is offered to substantiate that claim. Nor does Miller state this in his disavowal of his work. Maybe it’s true. I don’t know; I’ve never read “Holy Terror.” However, it is also true that it is routine for Islamic supremacist groups in the West to claim that opposition to jihad violence and Sharia oppression of women is opposition to Islam itself. They also routinely conflate criticism of Islam with hatred of Muslims, and numerous people fall for this, although they have no trouble whatsoever seeing the distinction between criticism of Christianity and hatred of Christians. If Frank Miller had written a comic book about fighting against Christian “right-wing extremists,” and some people accused him of attacking Christianity itself, would this convention had dropped him? Of course not. It would be celebrating him as a hero.

Frank Miller Removed From Thought Bubble Comic Convention Guest List After Being Accused Of Propagating ‘Abhorrent Anti-Muslim Hate

by Spencer Baculi, The Mix, July 29, 2021 (thanks to The Religion of Peace):

Legendary comic book industry veteran Frank Miller, whose bibliography includes Batman: The Dark Knight Returns, Daredevil, and 300, has been removed from the guest list for the upcoming Though Bubble UK Comic Convention after a number of attendees threatened to boycott the event based on their belief that the creator “is responsible for propagation of abhorrent anti-Muslim hate”.

Miller was first announced as a guest for the North Yorkshire, England-based comic convention on June 2nd, with his name being emphasized to the same degree as fellow special guests Joëlle Jones (Wonder Girl) and Christian Ward (New Mutants) on a promotional poster for the event released that same day.

Though Miller’s initial invitation announcement seemed to come and go without any incident, on July 27th, award-winning cartoonist and small press publisher ShortBox founder Zainab Akhtar revealed that they would “no longer be attending Thought Bubble festival this November” in protest of Miller’s attendance.

In a statement announcing her protest of the convention, Akhtar asserted, “As a proud Muslim woman, I cannot in good conscience attend a festival that deems it appropriate to invite and platform Frank Miller, a person who is responsible for the propagation of abhorrent anti-Muslim hate, particularly via his work.”

“Anti-Muslim bigotry is repugnant and condemnable yet has become so deeply rooted, so widely accepted in society that it is not even given a cursory consideration, as evidenced once again in this situation,” Akhtar continued. “I cannot comprehend how time and time again, festivals and communities within comics espouse values regarding inclusivity, diversity, ‘comics being for everyone’, zero tolerance on hate, but all that lip-service evaporates when they are asked to enact those same values.”

In a follow-up tweet, Akhtar stated that though she had “first contacted Thought Bubble about this privately, 8 weeks ago” and had been “assured action would be taken”, Miller’s continued invitation made her feel as if “it’s been communicated to me that I am the acceptable loss: repercussions to my career/income over repercussions to theirs.”

Though Akhtar does not cite any specific instances of anti-Muslim bigotry from Miller, it is assumed that she is referring to his creation of Holy Terror, a graphic novel in which an original character known as The Fixer sets out to battle Al-Qaeda.

Originally developed for DC as a Batman story, Holy Terror would release to widespread criticism, as many believed the story depicted the religion of Islam, rather than the specific terrorist group of Al-Qaeda, as the book’s villain.

However, while Miller stood by his work upon its publication in 2006, he has since changed his opinion of the self-admitted “propaganda” story.

“When I look at Holy Terror, which I really don’t do all that often, I can really feel the anger ripple out of the pages. There are places where it is bloodthirsty beyond belief,” Miller told The Guardian’s Sam Thielman in 2018. “I don’t want to go back and start erasing books I did,” he replies. “I don’t want to wipe out chapters of my own biography. But I’m not capable of that book again.”

As Akhtar’s tweet soon sparked calls to boycott the entire convention amongst her supporters, Though Bubble ultimately announced on July 28th that “Frank Miller will not be attending Thought Bubble.”

“Over the last fourteen years Thought Bubble has grown into an amazing community of comic creators and fans who we love, trust and respect. We have let you down, and in our commitment to maintaining Thought Bubble as a safe space for all, we have fallen short,” read the convention organizer’s statement. “We exist to share the art form and its worlds with people. If any individual, group or community feels uncomfortable or excluded from our show then we’ve failed.”

“We know that many of you are disappointed in us, and have been expecting a comment on this before now,” they continued. “We are sorry for our silence while we’ve been trying to fix this. Frank Miller will not be attending Thought Bubble.”

Continuing their statement, the organizers further affirmed that they were “deeply sorry, particularly to those who we should be standing up for the most,” and hoped “that you can give us the opportunity to make this better and we thank you for holding us accountable.”

“We know there is still more to discuss and we will be replying to those who have been in touch, we hope you can bear with us while we do this,” the statement concluded. “We won’t let you down again.”…

RELATED ARTICLES:

Al-Qaeda calls for vehicular jihad attacks in U.S., calls truck ‘the ultimate mowing machine’

Qatar: Indian woman abused and tortured, ‘they told me I was a slave they had bought’

UK: Man converts to Islam, travels to the Islamic State, shares jihad beheading videos

Germany: Muslim migrant stabs man, then beheads him

Muslim migrant suspected of raping and murdering 13-year-old flees to London despite international arrest warrant

EDITORS NOTE: This Jihad Watch column is republished with permission. ©All rights reserved.

Are Biden’s Handlers Making Room for Right-Wing ‘Terrorists’ at Guantanamo?

My latest in PJ Media:

The establishment media agrees that Biden’s handlers’ freeing of Taliban jihadi Abdul Latif Nasser from Guantanamo, where he had been held for nineteen years, was the first step toward taking care of more unfinished business from the Obama administration and finally closing the notorious prison camp. But is that really the plan? Or might Guantanamo be filled up with a new group of terrorists?

The signs aren’t hard to find. CNN reported Wednesday that “the Justice Department repeatedly has documented the emergence of what could be called small, right-wing extremist groups.” One of the examples offered in the report is that of Robert Morss, a Pennsylvania resident who was arrested in connection with the January 6 Reichstag Fire. According to CNN, when Morss was arrested, police “found in his car a notebook with a page titled, ‘Step by Step to Create Hometown Militia.’ Beneath it Morss allegedly scribbled bullet point reminders, fleshing out the idea of forming a violent cell – ‘bring assault rifle’ and ‘set up your kit’ — and notes on ‘formation.’”

Then there were Ian Rogers and Jarrod Copeland, who were “so devoted to former President Donald Trump and so angry about the 2020 election result, that they allegedly plotted to blow up the Democratic headquarters building in Sacramento. One commented over an encrypted messaging thread, where the two discussed planning, that he realized they would be perceived as domestic terrorists, and the second man had previously joined an anti-government militia group.”

Whether these three men actually did anything criminal, or planned to do so, is a matter for the courts to decide. But ominously, a prosecutor wrote about the Rogers/Copeland case that “all of the political and social conditions that motivated them to plan what they themselves described as a terrorist attack remain.”

What are those conditions? Raw Story gave a clue to the answer to that in a risibly hysterical piece Monday that began:

A very particular, cultish and dangerous brand of domestic terrorism has been honed, and we should call it what it is: Trumpist terrorism.

 We’ve rarely if ever experienced domestic terrorism organized not only in the service of an ideology — white supremacy — but in the name of one person, a cult figure for whom people will kill and die, devoted to his cause and taking perceived orders from him.

 But that is what is happening now.

There is more. Read the rest here.

EDITORS NOTE: This Jihad Watch column is republished with permission. ©All rights reserved.