Sargon of Akkad - Carl Benjamin - This Is How They Will Erase You

All Episodes

Previous Next

April 4, 2019 - Sargon of Akkad - Carl Benjamin

12:38

This Is How They Will Erase You

Large

Audio Only |

Scroll

Time	Text
	In the last year, activist Tommy Robinson has been systematically erased from social media, mostly under false pretenses, for the sake of simply being rid of someone who is observing and presenting the problems inherent with Islamic immigration to the West.
	On the 28th of March 2018, Tommy Robinson was banned from Twitter for pointing out that grooming gangs in the United Kingdom are overwhelmingly Muslim.
	Twitter didn't comment on why the permanent ban from their platform occurred, but said that he had breached their hateful conduct policy after previously suspending him for saying things like, 90% of grooming gang convictions are Muslims.
	This is a statement of fact.
	It is true, at least according to Quilliam, which I consider to be a reliable source on the matter, that grooming gang convictions are apparently 84% Asian.
	In the British press, Asian is used as a euphemism to mean Muslim.
	That means that 84% of grooming gang convictions are Muslims.
	I imagine that Twitter banned him for being mildly inaccurate with his figure.
	He said 90%, it's actually 84%.
	That's suspension worthy.
	By November 2018, PayPal had decided that they were going to suspend him as well.
	They say that their services cannot be used to promote hate, violence, or other forms of intolerance.
	Apparently, they do not take decisions like this lightly, and we work hard to be rigorous and fair-minded when reviewing PayPal accounts.
	Tommy rightfully branded this as fascism.
	They just don't like my opinion and want to silence me.
	The government and establishment can see I have public support, and they see I have the ability to fight back.
	Well, PayPal couldn't have been more clear about that.
	They don't like his opinion, and they want to get rid of him.
	And apparently, there is nothing stopping them from doing so.
	They didn't even give an example of something that he had said or done that had drawn their ire.
	It was just, this is Tommy Robinson.
	He represents everything that is evil, and so we're going to get rid of him.
	And so the rolling public campaign against Tommy Robinson as an individual, as a man who is speaking what he believes to be the truth, continued until January 2019, when YouTube decided that they would simply demonetize his entire channel for the sake of it.
	Tommy Robinson's account apparently breached the site's advertising guidelines, and so YouTube have decided to prevent him making any money off of his videos.
	Tommy's reply to this was of course that this is continued censorship, which it is.
	How else would you describe this?
	How else could you describe a consistent pattern from a very closely knit group to silence a particular individual who is an activist about a certain set of issues that have been proven time and time and again to be true?
	And then on the 26th of February 2019, Facebook and Instagram decided to remove Tommy Robinson's pages.
	This is particularly significant because Facebook was his largest platform with over a million followers on his page, which made Tommy Robinson's Facebook presence larger than every major political party in the United Kingdom combined.
	But the thing about Facebook's removal of Tommy from their platform is that he doesn't appear to have actually done anything to break their rules.
	I mean, at least with Twitter, they had a statement from him that they could cite, even if that statement was actually not hate speech and a reasonably accurate description of events as they've occurred.
	But at least there, there was something that they could cite to say, well, this is something we consider to be inappropriate.
	With Facebook, it appears that the charges have just been made up.
	According to Facebook, a written warning had been sent to Mr. Robinson last month about a number of posts on his page that had violated its community standards, including a post calling Muslims filthy scumbags, a post urging people to terrorise and behead those who follow the Quran, a post urging people to make war on Muslims, and multiple videos depicting individuals being bullied.
	This is obviously a lie.
	There is absolutely no evidence to suggest that Tommy Robinson posted any of these things, and most of the things that he is accused of posting would be illegal to post from within the United Kingdom.
	So if this was true, where is the evidence?
	Where are the screenshots?
	Why would it take over a month for the left-wing activists who watched his profiles like a hawk to raise the alarm about the illegal content that he would have been posting to his accounts?
	What I'm saying is, where is the proof of this?
	If he had posted something to urge people to terrorise and behead followers of the Quran, that would have been international news.
	That would have been everywhere, and he would have been removed within the same day.
	There is no evidence that he have done any of these things, and so it seems that this is fictional.
	It seems that Facebook have made up a reason to take him off, regardless of the truth of the matter or not.
	But still, that was not enough for the British political establishment.
	It was not enough that Tommy Robinson would be removed from Twitter, from Facebook, and from Instagram, to have his YouTube account demonetised.
	Still, they complained.
	How is he allowed to have a YouTube account?
	And so on the 2nd of March 2019, Labour MP Tom Watson decided to petition YouTube to have his channel removed.
	In his letter to Google CEO Sundar Pichai, MP Tom Watson requested that they simply censor his account.
	Tom Watson called for the removal of all of his accounts from the site under the guise that YouTube's policy on hate speech prohibits content which promotes violence or hatred against individuals or groups based on attributes including religion, race, immigration, status or nationality.
	Many of his videos are clearly in breach of this policy, except they're not.
	And if they were, he could have surely provided examples.
	But here we have a clear-cut example of a Labour MP just calling for the censorship of an activist because he does not like what he has to say, even if what he has to say reflects reality.
	And don't think that you can go to the Conservative Party for anyone to support free speech either.
	Because only a few days earlier, Conservative MP Damien Collins had also requested that YouTube censor Tommy Robinson for saying things that were not politically correct.
	I believe YouTube should also ban Tommy Robinson from their platform.
	His YouTube channel has hundreds of thousands of followers and includes films viewed by millions of people.
	Far-right groups are exploiting social media to spread their messages of hate.
	And the YouTube next up feature helps them by directing viewers to even more of his content once as soon as they start to engage with it.
	No evidence given, no examples of what Tommy has done that might actually violate YouTube's policies.
	Just remove him because he has become a problem for us.
	He is a thorn in our side.
	He is ruining our narratives.
	A few days later, Amazon decided to ban one of Tommy Robinson's co-written books, Muhammad's Quran, on the grounds that it was co-written by Tommy Robinson.
	Not because of the content of the book, at least to my knowledge.
	The co-author Peter McLaughlin said that they refused to reinstate the book and refuse to explain why it has been banned.
	So they have banned the number one best-selling exegesis of the Quran.
	I can't get my head around it.
	Every few weeks for the past 18 months, they had emailed me asking to put it in special sales programs as it was selling so well.
	For 18 months, they sought to profit even more from the sales.
	As dark as my vision is, I thought we were 10 to 20 years away from dissenting books being banned.
	No, we are in exactly that position now.
	Notice how they are not engaging with any of the arguments Tommy Robinson is making.
	They don't even mention them.
	As far as they are concerned, all Tommy Robinson does is preach hate.
	It doesn't matter if he's citing accurate statistics.
	It doesn't matter if he has a reasoned argument.
	It doesn't matter if the things that he predicted would happen have happened.
	It's irrelevant.
	As far as they are concerned, Tommy Robinson is only a hate preacher, and so it is completely justified for both Labour and conservative MPs to demand his censorship on precisely the same grounds.
	Not one of them is concerned with his human right to freedom of speech.
	Not one of them is concerned that maybe Tommy Robinson is the symptom of a problem that has been suppressed for decades and has finally bubbled to the surface because people can no longer remain silent about it.
	YouTube naturally had to defend their decision to keep Tommy Robinson on the site, mostly because they couldn't really find any evidence of this supposed hate speech.
	YouTube's policies also ban content promoting violence or hatred against individuals or groups based on religion, but in the videos Robinson has posted to the site, he does not break that rule.
	YouTube has said the content available on site differed from the material that led him being banned on other platforms.
	Not really.
	It's just that the material that allegedly was posted to Facebook seems to not exist.
	But on the 2nd of April, they decided that they would clamp down on him anyway.
	It doesn't seem like Tommy has done anything on YouTube to deserve this treatment, but there have been enough complaints from people in high places and enough pressure put on them publicly by activists for them to say, okay, we will just unperson this man if you will just leave us alone.
	They had previously demonetized his channel despite the fact that there was no particular reason for that and disabled his super chat account so he couldn't actually get donations from the audience.
	But now they have placed restrictions on his entire channel for reasons that have never been adequately explained.
	YouTube have placed restrictions on his accounts to mean that his videos cannot be found in search results.
	He can no longer live stream to the platform.
	His videos will no longer have view counts, suggested videos, likes or comments.
	And they will also come with a warning slate before the clips saying the following content has been identified by the YouTube community as inappropriate or offensive to some audiences.
	Not one community strike, not one copyright strike, his account is in good standing and yet he is being treated this way despite from YouTube's own admission, they do not have the grounds to do this.
	This is part of a politically motivated campaign of censorship to erase Tommy Robinson from social media altogether.
	They are doing this because they do not want to engage with him on the merits of his arguments.
	If they were to engage with him fairly on the issues, they would have to admit that there is a very dark underbelly to Islamic immigration into the West, and they are actively trying to cover it up.
	So you might be thinking, well, how is all of this possible?
	Why do all of these companies agree that this is something that should be done?
	Why is no one standing up?
	And apart from alt tech, no one is.
	But I can tell you why this is happening.
	This is a map of the United States.
	The locations marked in green are the tech giants of Silicon Valley.
	That's Twitter, that's Patreon, that's YouTube, that's Facebook, that's Google, that's Apple, and that's PayPal.
	All of these companies are within about 20 miles of one another in San Francisco.
	They all share a very similar culture.
	People who work within these companies move from company to company with frequency.
	These are the people who control the internet.
	The tech CEOs of Silicon Valley are not against the idea of deplatforming someone because they have an unpalatable message.
	They are only worried about the backlash.
	And they have found that if they simply destroy someone's online presence over the course of a year, then that's it.
	Nothing will happen to them.
	There will be no repercussions.
	There's nothing legally anyone can do.
	And they can easily unperson any of those troublesome elements who might ruin their utopia.

▲