The Official Blog Of Edward Cline

Censorship Over Here and Over There


A
false alarm of sorts about censorship in the U.S. introduced via a revision of
the U.S. copyright law was raised by Matt Drudge of the Drudge Report. It was reported on The Daily
Caller and Pamela Geller’s Atlas Shrugs site.
In
an October 14th Atlas Shrugs column, “Congressional
Review Of Copyright Law Threatens My Website and Every Independent News Site
,”
Geller wrote:
Congressional
review of copyright law threatens independent websites like mine — and every
other non-mainstream media news site. Congress is considering “updating” digital
copyright law affecting news sites and aggregator sites, like the Drudge Report
and Real Clear Politics.
This is the biggest threat to our freedom. For years I have urged readers, Facebook supporters, members
of our groups AFDI and
SIOA
to email, share, tweet our posts. In order to combat the war the enemedia waged
on the truth and freedom, we had to establish an alternative means of news
dissemination. It was crucial. Our websites, in concert with Facebook, twitter
and instagram, were the David against the philistine Goliath media machine.
She
also quoted Kerry Picket’s Daily Caller column of October 13th, “
Congressional
Review Of Copyright Law May Threaten Drudge Report
”:

Drudge Report site owner Matt Drudge told Alex Jones of InfoWars
last week that copyright laws could very well end his popular site.
“I had a Supreme Court
Justice tell me it’s over for me,” said Drudge. “They’ve got the votes now to
enforce copyright law, you’re out of there. They’re going to make it so you
can’t even use headlines.”
He explained, “To have a
Supreme Court Justice say to me it’s over, they’ve got the votes, which means
time is limited,” he added, noting that a day was coming when simply operating
an independent website could be outlawed. That will end [it] for me – fine –
I’ve had a hell of a run,” said Drudge, adding that web users were being pushed
into the cyber ‘ghettos’ of Twitter, Facebook and Instagram.” Drudge added,
“This is ghetto, this is corporate, they’re taking your energy and you’re
getting nothing in return – nothing!”

I think the alarm is false because Drudge doesn’t provide specifics: the name
of the Supreme Court judge, or at least a hint to who that might be; a reason
why a Supreme Court judge would confide in him about what the Court might think
of a copyright law revision that would be a blatant infringement on the freedom
of speech; who “has the votes” – SCOTUS or the Judiciary Committee; why the
Court would have a position on a copyright law revision before it is even an
issue or a case before the law is even revised.
Being
highly suspicious of the hysterical and alarmist tone of all the sites, I took
out my saltshaker and pondered the subject. I reasoned that if the worst kind
of copyright law revision came to pass, then thee would be no newspapers, no
websites like Geller’s or Jihad Watch’s or Steve Emerson’s Bare Naked
Islam’s…the honor roll is long and distinguished. The verb “may” in the
InfoWars and Daily Caller titles was troublesome.
I seem to remember
this same Drudge alarm being raised a few weeks ago, or perhaps a month ago. One
development I can imagine a copyright law revision would invoke would be if it
FORCED or required news sites like the Washington Post or the New York Times
and other MSM outlets to rig their sites so that text from articles could not
be copied for quotation purposes into websites like Geller’s or mine. Such a
revision (and it’s hypothetical) would be a violation of the freedom of speech
of even for those who advocate “limits” on First Amendment freedom of speech
guarantees. The New York Times, the Washington Post, and other anti-freedom
websites would scream bloody murder. They all want their opinions and
observations (whether or not they’re right) to be accurately quoted, or want
the freedom to quote other and rival news sources. Unless they’re irredeemably
corrupted or intellectually challenged, they would fight that and other
restrictions tooth and nail.
Geller replied to
one reader who asked what the implications were. She responded:
“If Congress passes copyright laws
prohibiting websites and aggregators from using news stories (even headlines) –
it’s over for news sites, aggregators and news-focused blogs.”
Yes, the statist
and totalitarian sky is falling, but I don’t think it will be through a
copyright law revision – not yet. The American champions of totalitarian management
and filtration of the news in America have a lot of catching up to do with
their more advanced cousins in Europe (can you imagine a Federal position
dubbed the High Director of Public Information Management?). They will have to
coordinate things on the sly with the MSM, which is already behaving as an
accomplice to censorship.
They will have to
be as brazen as this trio of unelected commissars of information administration
and thought control in the European Union. We have The Gates of Vienna, a first-class
news-focused blog, to thank for giving us a preview of the arrogance of
totalitarian wannabes, and to Fjordman‘s
October 14th, eye-opening article, “The EU Elites’ Positive View of Islam.”
These are the kinds of expunging dominatrix’s that American liberals either want
to be or see running things.
Frans Timmermans is a former Dutch Foreign Minister. He is
currently the First Vice-President of the European Commission. Here are his
thoughts on “Islamophobia.” You see, he is concerned about the resistance
across Europe against the invasion of Third World barbarians:

“We
have seen the homes of asylum seekers set on fire. And we have heard political
leaders declare that their countries would not accept refugees if they were
Muslim. Anti-Muslims [sic] incidents are multiplying across Europe. We’re
seeing a huge spike of attacks. Verbal insinuations, closed-mindedness, prejudice,
discrimination. The rise of Islamophobia is the one of the biggest challenges
in Europe. It is a challenge to our vital values, to the core of who we are.
Never has our societies’ capacity for openness, for tolerance, for inclusion
been more tested than it is today. Diversity is now in some parts of Europe
seen as a threat. Diversity comes with challenges. But diversity is humanity’s
destiny.”
“Book ‘em, Dano!” “On what charge?”
“Verbal insinuation, closed-mindedness, and making faces at a Muslim. Said the
citizen’s beard made him look like an orangutan screaming for a banana during
the Freedom of Speech Go to Hell demonstration. Really offensive and hurtful
words and anti-diversity to the max.”
Fjordman
observed:
If so-called Islamophobia is considered a threat to
the EU’s “vital values, to the core of who we are,” does that mean that Islam
is part of the EU’s core values?….
The EU considers so-called Islamophobia to be a
serious threat that must be actively combated. Yet the EU does not even have a
word for Infidelophobia, the hatred and loathing many Muslims feel for fellow
human beings who are not Muslims. This Infidelophobia is directly encouraged by
the Koran and Islamic religious teachings. Nor does the EU seem particularly
concerned about Europhobia, the hatred and loathing of native Europeans and
their culture. The organization has no plan to combat the violence and abuse
directed against Europeans by certain immigrant groups. Perhaps the EU elites
do not consider this to constitute a problem?
To
the EU elites, criticism of or negative statements about Islam is considered a
form of “hatred” that is unacceptable and should perhaps be legally prosecuted.
Criticism of or even outright hatred directed against Christianity, Europe’s
traditional majority religion, however, is considered acceptable…
Notice
that the European Commission’s Vice-President, the Socialist Frans Timmermans,
claims that “diversity is humanity’s destiny.” The EU is run by people who
believe that they know not only the future of Europe, but the fate of all
mankind. The ancient Greeks would have called this hubris, extreme pride or arrogance. Pride
goes before a fall. Multiculturalists believe they are guiding the continent
towards a new and better society on the other side of the rainbow.
Popular
resistance on the path there is considered a speed bump to be run over.
Objections are illegitimate and should be removed from public debate. This is
dangerously close to Communist ways of thinking. Years of “anti-racist” indoctrination
permeates society with an intensity that almost resembles a form of
brainwashing. To be branded a “racist” under Multiculturalism, especially if
you happen to have a white skin, is comparable to being labeled an “enemy of
the people” under Communism. It signals that you are an evil person, a kind of
weed in the ideological flowerbed that needs to be weeded out by expert
gardeners.
Vera Jourova is our second subject. She is the
EU’s Commissioner for Justice, Consumers and Gender Equality in the Juncker Commission.
She is a little more forthright in her condemnation of “Islamophobia” and other
kinds of “hate speech,” especially if it is about “migrants,” and “immigrants”
legal, illegal, or on the run, and what she would like to do to the criminals.
That is, to the “hate speakers” and “Islamophobes,” not to the Muslim rapists,
robbers, home invaders, gang members, and other Muslim predators.

“If
freedom of expression is one of the building blocks of a democratic society,
hate speech on the other hand, is a blatant violation of that freedom. It must
be severely punished. As some of you noted, over the past few weeks, we have
witnessed a lot of solidarity towards refugees. But we have seen a surge of
xenophobic hate speech. Some of you advocated enrolling the help of online
intermediaries such as Google or Facebook to take down hate speech from the
web. Other participants rather underlined promoting the use of
counter-narratives. You also highlighted the need for clearer procedures to
prosecute those who spread hate speech online….”
(Chancellor Angela Merkel’s little tete-a-tete with Facebook head Mark
Zuckerberg can be read about here.)
“I
was pleased to hear media and Internet providers’ experiences and to hear their
commitment to work with us. I fully agree with you on these lines of action. As
was said this morning, Internet knows no borders. I intend to bring together IT
companies, business, national authorities and civil society around the table in
Brussels to tackle together online hate speech. I will discuss this with EU
Justice Ministers next week. Let me now address the burning issue of hate
crimes and data collection. We clearly need better and serious recording of
hate crimes to ensure appropriate investigation, prosecution and sentencing. It
is indeed high time that Member States fully implemented EU law to combat
racism and xenophobia.”
Fjordman noted:
The
Islamic terrorist threat in Europe has never been greater. The EU elites
respond to this with more Internet censorship, even more Muslim immigration and
an intensified fight against alleged “Islamophobia”. Being friendly towards
Islam and continued Muslim mass immigration has become a part of the
institutional DNA of the EU. It is doubtful whether this can be removed within
dismantling the entire European Union.
Federica Mogherini, our third contestant for the
title of Wholesale Redactor- in-Chief for Europe is the current High
Representative of the European Union for Foreign Affairs and Security. No
mention is made by
Fjordman
of who the Low Representative might be.

“The
very idea of a clash of civilizations is at odds with the most basic values of
our European Union — let alone with reality. Throughout our European history,
many have tried to unify our continent by imposing their own power, their own
ideology, their own identity against the identity of someone else. With the
European project, after World War II, not only we accepted diversity: we
expressed a desire for diversity to be a core feature of our Union. We defined
our civilization through openness and plurality: a mind-set based on blocs does
not belong to us.
“Some
people are now trying to convince us that a Muslim cannot be a good European
citizen, that more Muslims in Europe will be the end of Europe. These people
are not just mistaken about Muslims: these people are mistaken about Europe —
that is my core message — they have no clue what Europe and the European
identity are. This is our common fight: to make this concept accepted both in
Europe and beyond Europe. For Europe and Islam face some common challenges in
today’s world. The so-called Islamic State is putting forward an unprecedented
attempt to pervert Islam for justifying a wicked political and strategic
project.”
There’s that “Islam’s been hijacked
by extremist” line again. Never mind that ISIS and other Islamic organizations
quote Koranic chapter and verse every time they behead a dozen or so Christians
or other infidels or put up Yazidi women for sale or blow up pagan temples or
go on car- or knife-jihad in Israel.
News Flash for Miss
Mogherini:
Muslims are not “perverting” Islam. They are practicing it in its purist form,
which is the only form ISIS and other jihadis
recognize and accept. If there are any “hijacking” accusations to be made, they
are made by Sunnis against Shi’ites and by Shi’ites against Sunnis. I think there
is another branch of impure Islam at large, but they don’t much make the news. Maybe
it’s the wild-eyed Salafists arse-whippng the Slovenly and Laggard Muslims.
Fjordman prefaced Mogherini’s cravenly dhimmi remarks with this note:
Mogherini made the following remarks at the Call to
Europe V: Islam in Europe FEPS conference on June 24, 2015. She dismissed any
notion of a clash between Islam and the West, stating that “Islam holds a place
in our Western societies. Islam belongs in Europe. It holds a place in Europe’s
history, in our culture, in our food and — what matters most — in Europe’s
present and future.” According to her, Europeans should celebrate their
“diversity.” She further stated that “I am not afraid to say that political
Islam should be part of the picture.”
Islam is certainly part of the picture now, Miss
Mogherini, and it’s mixing as well into European culture as Strychnine will add
a piquant zest to a fettuccine sauce.
On the
contrary, it is Miss Mogherini and her ilk who are clueless about Europe’s
identity. Whatever that identity is, is clashing violently with Islam’s
“civilization.”  It’s doubtful that she
or Vera Jourova or Frans Timmermans have even heard of Mohamed Akram’s 1991
Explanatory Memorandum
to the Shura Council of the Muslim Brotherhood about
how to infest and invest the U.S. by demographical jihad – what Europe is undergoing as we write – one of whose points
is:

The process of settlement is a
“Civilization-Jihadist Process” with all the word means. The Ikhwan
must understand that their work in America is a kind of grand Jihad in
eliminating and destroying the Western civilization from within and
“sabotaging” its miserable house by their hands and the hands of the
believers so that it is eliminated and God’s religion is made victorious over
all other religions.

 And
Europe’s house is certainly being sabotaged from within by a clique of moral
and cultural relativists, by what are called over here “limousine liberals.”
The same
thing is happening in the U.S.

Previous

Islamic Economics: An Oxymoron

Next

Altruist Economics: An Oxymoron

4 Comments

  1. Edward Cline

    One question I've been surprised has never been asked by anyone who is anti-Islam or anti-jihad: Why are non-Muslims called "infidels" (aside from other derogatory names)? It's because Islam asserts that Jews, Christians and followers of other religions were also "born" Muslims, but they wandered to other faiths, thus demonstrating their "infidelity." Thought I'd pass that on to anyone who was curious.

  2. Michael Neibel

    What the leaders you mentioned do not understand is that if Islam ever gains control of their countries, theirs will be among the first throats to be cut by the Jihadists. Muslims do not admire cowardice.

  3. Edward Cline

    True enough. The Islam-friendly morons over here, especially those on the left, refuse to believe it, as well.

  4. Edward Cline

    The Leftist allies of Islam in Europe and in the U.S. have not really learned the lesson of allying themselves with a "radical" movement like Islam. When the Communists came to power in Russia, soon enough the socialists, the moderate communists, and others were either liquidated, imprisoned, or exiled. Leon Trotsky was exiled, wound up in Mexico, and was assassinated there by one of Stalin's agents. Trotsky's complaint against Stalin was that he was during the Communist regime into an enormous bureaucracy, clueless to the fact that that's all a collectivist regime could become. The same thing happened with Morsi and the Muslim Brotherhood in Egypt; when they got the power these "radicals" became an enormous, intolerant bureaucracy and anyone who tried to buck "the system" was eliminated. It's the same in Pakistan and Indonesia and Malaysia and any other Islamic "paradise."

Leave a Reply

Powered by WordPress & Theme by Anders Norén