July 21, 2023 - Slightly Offensive - Elijah Schaffer
19:57
Did Rumble CENSOR NJF? Here’s the FULL STORY
There is a lot of confusion on this issue, let me break it down the best I can after talking to original sources. Watch the Full LIVESTREAM / EPISODE HERE: https://rumble.com/v3121fa-reduce-the-population-elites-accidentally-leak-ultimate-plan-guest-austin-p.html
__
Don't forget that we are fully independent and you can get this episode early & support Indp media directly at https://elijahschaffer.locals.com/supportShow more __
⇩ FOLLOW AUSTIN PETERSON ⇩
rumble.com/user/AP4Liberty
https://ap4libertyshop.com/collections/founding-flavors
https://twitter.com/AP4Liberty
__
⇩ SPONSORS ⇩
MY PATRIOT SUPPLY: Listeners of Slightly Offensive will get 10% their first order of survival food that lasts 25 years right now at https://4patriots.com/ by using code OFFENSIVE
UNDERTAC: Get the best pair of boxers in America that are breathable, don't ride up, and last the test of time. Plus, they are battle forces tested. http://www.undertac.com/ for 20% off with the offer code OFFENSIVE20. Satisfaction guaranteed or your money back.
VNSH: Get the BEST holster that fits 99% of all semi-auto handguns, works without a tactical belt, lets you carry in multiple positions and carries 2 fully-loaded magazines.And best of all is that because you’re a supporter of our podcast you can get it for $50 off. Just go to www.vnsh.com/slightly to see if your gun will work with it and to activate your discount today. Normally $130, you’ll get a steal as a supporter of our show. Go to https://www.vnsh.com/slightly today to claim your $50 discount.
__
⇩ GET MERCH HERE ⇩
WEBSITE: https://slightlyoffensive.com/
__
⇩ DOWNLOAD AUDIO PODCAST & GIVE A 5 STAR RATING! ⇩
APPLE: https://podcasts.apple.com/us/podcast/slightly-offens-ve-uncut/id1450057169
SPOTIFY: https://open.spotify.com/show/7jbVobnHs7q8pSRCtPmC41?si=qnIgUqbySSGdJEngV-P5Bg
(also available Google Podcasts & wherever else podcasts are streamed)
__
➤BOOKINGS: [email protected]
➤BUSINESS INQUIRIES: [email protected]
__
⇩ SOCIAL MEDIA ⇩
➤ INSTAGRAM https://www.instagram.com/slightlyoffensive.tv
➤ TWITTER: https://twitter.com/ElijahSchaffer
➤ TELEGRAM https://t.me/SlightlyOffensive
__
The Idea Of A Free Society...For Kids!
Head to https://bit.ly/teach-freedom for a unique book series that introduces the important ideas that schools no longer teach. Show less
Is Rumble censoring, or are we misguided on this episode's What the Fuck?
All right, our story today is this feud that was going off between the America First movement, whose followers are known as Groypers.
and what happened with a Nicholas Fuentes situation.
So let's go ahead and break this down.
I saw this tweet pop up from Viva Frey, Viva Fry, I don't know, who was putting up a clip from in question from the Nicholas Fuentes Rally 2, I think it was called, took place in Florida.
And apparently this clip is what got his live stream or his restream taken down.
I'll kind of break down the story to you.
So this was a clip from the, I imagine from the original stream because the audio was kind of bunked, but there was an event.
It was live streamed on to Rumble.
And I'm going to try to get this as accurate as possible.
And if I mess up on a few things, crucify me.
I'm trying my best.
But there was a rally that was live streamed.
The audio was messed up because apparently from talking to sources, the venue made them use their own mixer and then the mixer like blew.
And so then they, but they had a backup recording of the audio.
So they were already planning to take this down, apparently.
They were planning to take down this video.
And I believe they put it on private because they were putting back up a remastered version because the audio is so important, even though the visuals were good.
Now, in the middle of the speech, a lot was said.
I'm not saying that this is in context.
This is very much could be taken out of context.
So I'll give the benefit of the doubt here.
But this quote was said during the speech on a live stream on Rumble.
And while I'm, I don't know, am I going to get taken down for playing this on Rumble?
I don't know.
That's a good question.
Hmm.
That's actually kind of funny.
Am I going to get taken down on Rumble for playing this?
All right, fuck it.
Let's go.
unidentified
We're in a holy war, and I will tell you this.
Because we're willing to die in the Holy War, we will make them die in the Holy War.
All right, so I don't know who he's talking about.
I don't know if he's about the Jews or the pagans or the Satanists or the Globalists.
I'm not entirely sure, right?
I don't know.
I was originally told based on some connections to National File that his video, this was taken down because of their policy, which they have implemented in 2022, which was to censor or to take down hate speech, which includes anti-Semitism.
Now, what's interesting is I end up reaching out both to Nick and to Rumble directly.
And so here's basically what I have an understanding of what happened based on my original research, right?
So here's, I wrote a thread on this, and I'm going to read it to you guys because I did a poll the other day that asked you guys if you thought anti-Semitism was protected free speech under the First Amendment.
And there was 20,000 votes casted.
113,000 people saw it.
So about a 17.5% interaction rate.
About three quarters of people overwhelmingly said yes.
Only a minority said no.
And a few people disagreed or said it was annoying, but it was legal.
So I don't think the argument here is whether or not you should be allowed to talk about a holy war or to, you know, or even, I'm not even claiming Nick was doing this, right?
I'm not even claiming Nick was talking about the Jews.
But I'm not, I don't think anti-Semitism should be illegal.
And I don't think, I think the phrase anti-Semitism is already kind of like a ploy to catch people, right?
Because it's supposed to like separate Jews as being criticism of Jews is more harmful than criticism of any other group.
I know that, right?
I'm very aware of the sensitivities of these people.
I grew up in LA.
I grew up around a lot of Jewish people.
And I'm aware that if you even just question the flavorfulness of Matzo Ball soup, you're just as bad as Heinlich, you know, as Himmler or whatever his name was.
I don't know.
I don't know how to pronounce it.
I got the Heimlich maneuver and Himmler mixed up, maybe.
But essentially what ended up happening is I talked to Rumble.
So I called Rumble directly.
I do have contacts there.
I talked to Nick directly.
I'm supposed to have a call with him after the show as well to kind of find out what happened because this stuff's important to me, right?
There's our friend there.
No, I'm just kidding.
So he's frozen.
He's off.
So here's what happened.
So the claim was out that Rumble censored Nick Fuentes.
And I don't think that censored is going to be the correct term here, but they did take action and they did restrict him.
And I use the phrase restricted because you'll see what happens.
So what my timeline says is that Rumble had always had clear terms of service, which was no porn and no incitement to violence.
Okay.
And whether or not Nick was inciting violence by saying that they're going to die in a holy war, that's kind of subjective.
Because do I personally think he was calling for violence?
No, I don't.
I don't think so.
Like, I know Nick.
He's not calling for violence.
He's just not, right?
Is there a time for violence?
Yeah, I mean, there are just wars, right?
There are times where violence can be called.
For instance, self-defense is violence, right?
So if you're calling for self-defense, you're technically calling for violence in terms of if someone shoots you, you should shoot them back if you have the chance to protect yourself.
That could be considered incitement to violence, but I think there are legally protected versions of that.
So I think this is probably focusing on illegal versions and people that just want me to like take a side.
I'm trying to understand the truth here, which is fucking crazy.
I know.
I know it's wild to like try to have an accurate understanding of what's going on rather than just like be sensational, but I do want to know what's going on because I'm on Rumble.
It affects my income, my well-being.
It directly affects the success of my own life.
So maybe I'm a little bit selfish, but I want to know what's going on here because I say things that could get me in trouble on YouTube and I want to know what their policies are.
Also, I like Nick.
He's a friend of mine.
I think he does great work.
I think we disagree on a few things here and there.
And we have different methods and whatnot.
But I have lots of friends who have lots of different viewpoints.
And I don't want him getting censored for saying things that are true or if we came to a different conclusion.
I don't want him being censored.
I'm going to fight for his right to speak the truth or to speak what he believes is the truth.
I'll die on that hill.
I'll die on that hill to fight for the Groipers and those people to be able to say what they think, right?
I mean, that's just the truth.
And I also, like I said, with Rumble, I mean, I don't want to be promoting a platform that is hypocritical.
So I want to know what's going on.
So that's why I did this research.
And people are mad at me for doing my own research.
Fuck you.
I don't care if you're mad at me.
I don't give a shit.
I'm just trying to say what I know is to be true from the situation.
You can kill the messenger if you want, or you can just listen to what I, my, my, these are from phone calls, right?
These are direct scripts from phone calls and text messages with people.
So I, free speech is, is, is their priority, right?
It's in their terms.
It's what they want.
They even removed France as a market.
It's a huge financial loss to preserve their company's commitment to this principle.
Somebody was a smart ass and was like, that was only 1% of their market.
Yeah, at the time, but growing.
But 1% revenue loss is millions of dollars.
So, I mean, yeah, they gave up millions of dollars, at least at this point, in order to maintain free speech.
If you don't know about this, they were trying to attack a creator of Macron's government, and Rumble essentially removed Rumble from their market because they wouldn't capitulate.
So that was a positive, right?
That was definitely a positive.
But apparently, this is what we didn't know.
And I think Nick said he didn't know this either.
So I don't think anyone was aware of this at the time, is that Nick's restream of his rally was removed for violating terms of service, calling for people to die in, like, or it's in that they could or would die, which is what separated his speech from Steve Bannon, who made similar comments, because Steve Bannon did say he did call for a holy war.
And it's important to know, right?
Is Rumble biased towards Nick?
That's, because if they're allowing the same rhetoric from Steve Bannon and from Turning Point, then that would be considered total hypocrisy.
So I did watch the clip from Bannon and I did listen to even some interviews.
I would say that Bannon was, you know, saying pretty fiery rhetoric.
I don't think there's anything wrong with calling for a holy war because you could be calling for a spiritual holy war.
Like, I don't know, right?
I don't fucking know what that means.
So I don't, like, my personal opinion is irrelevant here.
Do I think Nick Fuentes was calling for violence?
No, that's retarded as fuck.
I don't think he was.
I know Nick.
He's not violent.
He's not a violent guy.
And if he had had reasons to call for violence, I mean, when he got robbed, right, and got his money taken out of his account, he could have called for violence.
Most men would.
When he was, you know, you know, unduly restricted from flying or, you know, treated as a terrorist, when he's been smeared.
Those are all logical reasons any aggressive man would call for violence.
And he didn't.
So I don't think he's randomly just going to like wake up one day at a speech and be like, let's go kill Jewish people.
Like I don't, that's not even what his MO is.
So I don't think that's what was happening here.
And I think that some people that hate him mischaracterized him.
But let's find out if that phrase is legally is legal, right?
That's what I want to know.
Is that phrase legal?
And is that an incitement to violence legally?
Well, we'll find out, right?
So what separated his speech from Bannon was the holy war statement?
No, it was the die.
If you missed what that was, if you missed the statement earlier on and you didn't hear what was said, I'll just replay it for you so you can hear it.
You can judge for yourself.
Was this an incitement to violence?
Did this violate the terms of service?
Could it have been misinterpreted?
What do you think?
unidentified
We're in a holy war.
And I will tell you this.
Because we're willing to die in the holy war, we will make them die in the holy war.
I mean, I don't know if you, if you, uh, if you think that, I mean, I don't, I don't, I don't really know what my opinion is on that.
I mean, I, I do think it's really fiery rhetoric.
I think that's really writing close to the sun.
But I think even Nick knows that, and I think he's clarified a bit on his on his telegram.
But to clarify the timeline even more, this is where I think a lot of the confusion was initially.
This was the second time that the stream was removed as the first video with bad sound was deleted by Rumble for the same violation.
But Nick claims he was unaware that the first stream was deleted by Rumble before uploading his restream.
So one of the main issues here was that the original stream was deleted for the same reason.
But I think Nick's team is claiming that because they already had the video on private, they didn't know it got deleted by Rumble.
Okay, so that is, so when they re-uploaded this and got a hard strike, just remember, Rumble deleted the first video from my understanding because they were live streaming.
So the first time Rumble deleted this stream, they didn't restrict his live streaming capabilities at all, from my understanding.
And I might have gotten that wrong.
Now, people are mad saying Rumble didn't clarify that.
Rumble didn't alert them.
Rumble, from my understanding from talking to them, they did give an alert.
Nick says he didn't get it.
Look, if I have that part wrong, then again, crucify me.
But from my understanding, Rumble did alert them, and they're claiming they didn't get the alert.
This is a he said, she said.
I don't know.
Okay?
I don't know.
But apparently they were alerted.
And then they restreamed the same speech.
And that's when they got a hard strike.
Okay.
They got a hard strike.
Now, the initial reports, five, were that the video was taken down for anti-Semitism, which would be really gay.
Because I don't like, what is anti-Semitism?
I don't even know.
I mean, there is real hatred of Jews.
And there's a lot of people who hate Jews, right?
There's a lot of people who hate a lot of people.
There's a lot of people who hate the color pink.
Anti-pinketism.
It's very dangerous.
The Barbie movie, people are very threatened, right?
Everyone was really mad at Matt Gates for wearing a pink suit.
But six, Nick wrote on Telegram that his phrase was not calling for violence, but indirectly suggested it could be seen that way on a stream with Leafy.
I'm not trying to misquote Nick here.
I just think he was like, like explaining that it got taken out of context.
I watched like a 20-minute clip.
You can watch that.
It's on the internet.
He was humble about it and understanding the complex nature of the situation.
He seemed to be understanding.
Now, if I'm wrong on that, then maybe I am.
But I think he was understanding where the issue came up.
And it seemed to be an issue of miscommunication.
Now, people are mad at me for some reason for tweeting on this and have been really forgiving like the internet is, which I don't fucking care, but it does make me laugh.
You get these kind of tweets, like Elijah got the call.
I mean, he got a good amount of likes, right?
Like 100 likes, right?
In this thread.
And I clarified I did, actually.
I did get the call.
I just want to clarify that I said, yes, Netanyahu called me and said, quick, talk to both parties directly to get a clear picture of what happened and publish the facts on Twitter.
Since the left wants to destroy Rumble and Nick Jay Fuentes try to preserve the peace and seek truth, that is your number one Tel Aviv directive.
So it is true.
Tel Aviv made me write this.
But no, I don't make any money from Rumble, man.
I honestly don't.
I make like a couple hundred bucks a month on monetization.
I have no deals with them at this time.
I would love a deal with Rumble.
That's not why I'm doing this.
And I make no money from Nick, and I'm not a part of the America First movement, that side of I'm America First, but I'm not a Groiber.
But I, so I have no, you know, I have no reason.
Why would I be against either of these parties?
I think Rumble's a great platform.
I think Nick's doing great work.
So I'm not going to like, you know, try to do anything but try to, you know, clarify here what's going on.
And people who just don't understand that these things are complex, that haven't dealt in business, that don't know, it's easy to judge, but this stuff is crazy, right?
And I want to figure out the truth.
Now, I did also want to clarify here that Nick is not banned from Rumbles.
People are saying he's banned.
No, he's restricted from live streaming for two weeks because he re-uploaded content that was taken down.
He was actually not restricted from live streaming, from my understanding, for his incitement to violence.
He was restricted for a hard strike for re-uploading the same content that was taken down.
So he was given like a warning, and then he re-uploaded it.
And I guess the issue is he didn't know that he was given a warning.
But, so yeah, so he got, but he's allowed to upload.
So he's not banned.
So with YouTube, when you get banned or when you get banned for a strike, you can't upload or live stream, right?
You can't upload content or onto any of your channels if you have multiple channels.
You can't upload content.
So he's not banned.
And all of his videos are still up.
And I did look at some of his videos.
And there is stuff in there that YouTube would be considered anti-Semitic or racist or whatever.
I mean, this show has stuff that would be considered that, right?
On YouTube for some people at times because they're very sensitive.
And like any criticism of any group is racist now.
It's like fucking bullshit.
But the whole clarification here is that he's not banned.
He can upload videos, but he's restricted from streaming for two weeks for not obeying the warning.
Whether or not he really got the warning, I don't know if there's any way I can prove that.
I could ask for a copy of that.
I think that would be disclosing personal information, but I think I could ask Rumble.
If that would help people, let me know in the comments.
I can ask for a clarification if he did get warned.
This isn't the end of the world, this whole situation, but I do like to hyper-autistically focus on these topics because they do matter.
And I consider these like ruling Supreme Court cases.
Like they're very important to know what's going on.
Rumble also told me they are not censoring people that they say things they disagree with or even find abhorrent, but they'll continue to enforce their terms of service, especially in line with local and federal laws preventing threats of violence or comments that can be perceived as such in the court of law.
So I guess that was what was determined here is that this comment, if they left it up, would cause them to be accused of facilitating violence and become a target for federal probe or something to that extent.
I'm not even going to get into nine because nine, I don't even feel like talking about it anymore, but I think people, like, I think, I thought this was really weird, right?
Because I know, like, Ian Miles Chong put this up, right?
Presented without comment.
So I called Rumble to ask them about this and get into their SEO and their financial markings.
Was saying here that, like, oh, Rumble's a video platform that builds itself in neutral and immune to cancel culture back in 2022.
And then a recent financial stockholder share thing where it shows that the Vanguard group and BlackRock own a portion of Rumble.
So I did want to know about this because I was like, huh, I wonder if they're influencing decision making.
It's this little thing called Curiosity.
And what happened was, is I actually spoke to some of the investors and people.
Like I actually got a real inside look onto how I got to look into the inside structure of what the company looks like and how decision making takes place.
You don't have to believe me, but 85% of the voting power and the structural power comes from a few people who it doesn't matter, but they're not Jewish, right?
So I guess some people say that some of the board is Jewish, but they don't have the decision-making process on the actual website.
They're not Jewish people.
So there's not that.
But also 85% of the power and voting power comes from these like, you know, like Dan Bongino and the CEO and a couple investors.
So, and then it's a public company.
So like some of these hedge funds just buy floating stock, which you can't really avoid legally.
So like, like I could go buy Rumble stock, right?
Like my friend Aldo owns Rumble stock.
My buddy Sal owns Rumble stock.
Like anyone can buy Rumble stock, but they don't have decision making.
They've never, they don't have power over the company.
And they're not, they're not a part of any decision making.
Like I'm not a part of decision making, right?
I can go buy Rumble stock tomorrow, but I don't get to vote somebody off.
Thanks so much for watching.
Don't forget these clips are from a longer live stream that takes place every Monday, Wednesday, Friday at 10 p.m. Eastern at rumble.com slash slightly offensive.
You can click the link in the bio or in the pinned comment to subscribe.
