Independent journalist Laura Loomer discusses her recent Twitter ban.▶️ Donate Now: http://www.freedomainradio.com/donate▶️ Sign Up For Our Newsletter: http://www.fdrurl.com/newsletterYour support is essential to Freedomain Radio, which is 100% funded by viewers like you. Please support the show by making a one time donation or signing up for a monthly recurring donation at: http://www.freedomainradio.com/donate▶️ 1. Donate: http://www.freedomainradio.com/donate▶️ 2. Newsletter Sign-Up: http://www.fdrurl.com/newsletter▶️ 3. On YouTube: Subscribe, Click Notification Bell▶️ 4. Subscribe to the Freedomain Podcast: http://www.fdrpodcasts.com▶️ 5. Follow Freedomain on Alternative Platforms🔴 Bitchute: http://bitchute.com/stefanmolyneux🔴 Minds: http://minds.com/stefanmolyneux🔴 Steemit: http://steemit.com/@stefan.molyneux🔴 Gab: http://gab.ai/stefanmolyneux🔴 Twitter: http://www.twitter.com/stefanmolyneux🔴 Facebook: http://facebook.com/stefan.molyneux🔴 Instagram: http://instagram.com/stefanmolyneux
Hi everybody, I'm here with Laura Loomer, independent journalist and recent evictee from the realms of Twitter and Facebook.
Laura, how's your week been?
What's been going on? Well, it's been a very wild week to say the least.
I was banned from Twitter permanently and then I was banned by Facebook just hours later for 30 days for absolutely no reason whatsoever.
And then last night I decided to protest Big tech social media censorship of conservatives by handcuffing myself to the Twitter headquarter office in New York City.
And let's go back and we'll dig deep into these things as they go along.
So what were the immediate events that led, at least proximate events, that led to your suspension from Twitter?
Well, I'm an investigative journalist and a lot of the issues that I focus and report on have to do with exposing left-wing Activists, left-wing politicians, high-profile Democrats and jihadis, especially jihadis who are running for office in America and jihadis who are deeply involved with the Democrat Party and their activism efforts to sabotage President Trump.
And one of the individuals who I've been investigating over the past few months is a woman by the name of Ilhan Omar.
And Ilhan Omar is a Muslim woman.
She's a Somali immigrant and she Is now the Congresswoman-elect for Minnesota's 5th Congressional District, which is replacing Keith Ellison's seat.
It was a seat previously held by Keith Ellison, who is now the Attorney General of Minnesota.
And for those who have followed my reporting, and I know I know you do, and so you saw this.
I spent a lot of time on the ground investigating in Minnesota, where I was confronting Keith Ellison, Ilhan Omar, Rashida Tlaib, and investigating the Islamic influence in the election process in Minnesota and a lot of the nefarious aspects of Sharia, which are starting to become very visible in society.
And so, when Ilhan was elected on election day a couple weeks ago, Twitter decided to use her picture as their moment.
And everyone knows what the Twitter moment is, how it is the news story or the picture or the graphic used for the day.
And it said that, oh, it's a victory for women, gays and LGBTQ and they showed her her face.
And so I thought to myself, huh, this is interesting.
So I took a screenshot of it and then I tweeted it out and I said, isn't it ironic how the Twitter moment used today to celebrate Oh, a victory for women, minorities, and LGBTQ is a picture of Ilhan Omar.
You know, Ilhan is pro-Sharia.
Ilhan is pro-FGM. Under Sharia, homosexuals are oppressed and killed.
Under Sharia, women are forced to wear the hijab.
Ilhan is anti-Jewish, right?
That was pretty much word for word what I tweeted.
And it was on Twitter for several days.
And then the night before Thanksgiving, so one week ago exactly, I received A note when I logged into my Twitter and it said, your account has been permanently suspended.
And it was shocking to me because, you know, I've been monitoring really a lot of what I've been saying on Twitter because, you know, I'm very aware of the keywords and the buzzwords that Twitter uses to suspend people and ban them permanently.
But my tweet didn't really include the word Muslim or Islam.
It was just talking about Sharia.
And I thought that I was safe because I was posting all factual information.
Well, yeah, because in the reports that I saw detailing why you had gone to Twitter's headquarters in New York, they said that you had accused or said that this congresswoman was pro-Sharia.
Now, again, I'm no expert on the Islamic religion, but it seems that that's pretty foundational.
It's like saying to a Christian, you're pro-Ten Commandments or pro-turn-the-other-cheek.
I mean, that's part of the religious mindset, if I understand this correctly.
No, it's absolutely correct.
I mean, to be a Muslim, to be a practicing Muslim means that you are pro-Sharia, right?
To be a devout Muslim or to be a practicing Muslim, you have to live your life according to the ways of the Prophet Muhammad, right?
And Sharia law is what sets those guidelines.
And so for people who say, oh, I'm not pro-Sharia or Oh, I'm a moderate Muslim.
Well, then they're not really a Muslim because criticizing Islam or criticizing the ways and the life of the prophet Muhammad and going against Muhammad's lifestyle would make you an apostate, right?
And that's punishable in Islam by death.
The approach of the mainstream media seemed to be that you were criticizing a woman's faith and so on, whereas it seems to me that identifying clear characteristics of the religious perspective, as you say, based on facts and evidence, they didn't say that what you said was false.
They didn't really give you much of a reason.
And this is what is troubling to me.
I wonder if you could help people understand why you put the tweet of Louis Farrakhan next to your tweet on the Twitter steps.
Well, the reason I did that was to highlight the egregious double standard that takes place on these social media companies, whether it be Twitter or Facebook, right?
And what happens is they say that they have a term of service and that if you violate their term of service, whether you're pushing hate speech or hateful conduct or whatever they accuse you of, for me, they said I was pushing hate speech and hateful conduct, they will ban you.
So I wanted to show people how Twitter has a clear bias in enforcing their term of service because Louis Farrakhan posted an infamous tweet a few weeks ago in which he said, I'm not an anti-Semite, I'm anti-termite.
So in other words, he's calling Jews termites and everybody knows when you have termites, what do you call?
You call the exterminator.
So that was just another way of Louis Farrakhan essentially saying, I want to exterminate Jewish people, or someone exterminate the Jews, right?
And that's exactly what Hitler said.
And we know that Louis Farrakhan loves Nazism, and we know that Louis Farrakhan loves Hitler, because in his own words, Louis Farrakhan said, quote, Hitler was a great guy.
I wanted to highlight how egregious this double standard was because here you have myself, a conservative woman, but I'm also a Jew, and I'm a journalist, and I'm posting facts about a newly elected congresswoman, a Muslim congresswoman, right?
And even if I wasn't posting facts and I just wanted to share my opinion and criticize, I should be allowed to do that because we should be allowed to criticize our elected officials.
And I wanted people to see, hand in hand, How Twitter allows for Jew hatred, right?
Or if you're a Muslim or you're a left-leaning individual like Louis Farrakhan, you can say whatever you want and never get banned or never get silenced.
But if you're a pro-Trump, conservative Jewish journalist like myself, you'll get banned for posting facts.
And it's now starting to happen to other individuals who aren't even conservative.
I mean, just last week, I believe there was a progressive feminist.
I think her name is Megan Murphy, if I'm correct.
And she posted something along the lines of, if you're a man, you're not a woman, right?
So asserting the fact that there are only two genders.
And I guess she was cited with transphobia on Twitter, and then permanently suspended.
So now, if you're posting facts about science, or you're posting facts about Islam, or you're just stating truths, or if you're calling out Jew hatred or homophobia, or the mutilation of young girls clitorises, Under female genital mutilation, well, you'll be banned.
But if you're a jihadist and you are with the Muslim Brotherhood, well, you can have a verified Twitter account.
Muslim Brotherhood and Hamas are all on Twitter.
If you're Linda Sarsour and you say Jews should not be humanized, you're allowed to be on Twitter.
I brought with me thousands of pages of examples of archived tweets, which are available for all to see on my website in my statement why I was banned.
And they have all these tweets from verified liberal users on Twitter who have said things like, kill all white people, right?
F all white people. Why can't all white people just die?
Or I want to kill the president.
Or somebody please shoot Donald Trump in the head.
I mean, just like disgusting things that we've all seen, right?
Or I want to assassinate President Trump.
Can someone please assassinate President Trump?
But that's still allowed on Twitter.
And we've seen countless examples of this where liberals with blue check marks can say these things.
These are actual crimes.
It's a crime in America to incite violence or suggest that you want to carry out an assassination attempt against the president of the United States.
But Twitter allows for that on their platform.
But meanwhile, I've seen conservatives who get suspended permanently because they call somebody retarded, right?
For using the word retarded or using The f-word or even just something so basic as quoting the tweet of Sarah Jung, this infamous Asian woman who now works for the New York Times, who, you know, had all these tweets talking about how she loves watching white people suffer.
She wants white people to die.
But, you know, if you were to reproduce her tweet and put in another group instead of white people, you'll get banned.
But she doesn't get banned, right?
So there's this clear-cut bias.
I had to do something about it because it's not just about me.
I'm one individual who has been banned by Twitter and banned by Facebook in silence, but this is happening to millions of people all around the world, right?
And I wanted to—the reason I also chose Louis Farrakhan and his tweet as an example is to emphasize the fact that Silicon Valley is being influenced by Sharia law.
What people don't seem to understand is that it's not just as simple as saying, oh, Well, this place is full of Democrats and they don't like Republicans, so obviously they're censoring us.
The big elephant in the room that nobody wants to talk about is the fact that big tech is funded largely by Muslim money.
So you have companies like Twitter, for example, where Prince Al-Walid bin Talal of Saudi Arabia, who was recently jailed and People have argued that he is one of the global financiers of terrorism.
He's a Wahibist.
He's an individual from a Wahibist Islamic regime where it's very brutal and they carry out some of the worst human rights violations in the world.
And he owns more Twitter stock than Jack Dorsey, right?
So what does that then mean for people like myself or Tommy Robinson or yourself or Others who have been suspended or censored on social media when we speak out against Islam or Sharia or the Islamification of the West, right?
You see, the really important thing to do is to look for imaginary Trump-Russia collusion because that's the real problem these days, apparently.
Okay, so let's take some of the arguments against there being a problem with this.
So, of course, you've seen this as I'm sure, I've certainly seen it, I'm sure you have too.
And the argument is something like this.
Hey, man, they're a private company.
They can associate with whoever they want.
They can choose to do business with you.
They can choose to give you a platform or not.
It's up to them. And you shouldn't really have a problem with it because freedom of association.
Well, I think that's a BS argument because, again, that's just going back to this double standard.
There seems to be two sets of rules.
According to whether or not you're a Democrat or you're a Republican or if you're conservative or if you're just left-leaning regardless of where you are in the world.
And I can use this piece of evidence as an example.
Earlier this year, a federal judge in New York ruled that President Donald Trump was not allowed to block users on his Twitter account.
Because this judge ruled that Twitter was a public square.
That was the word that she used.
It's a public square online.
And by blocking and banning people from his account, the president was infringing on their First Amendment rights.
And it was a violation of their constitutional right.
That's what the judge, this federal judge in New York ruled, right?
But then if you are a If you're conservative and you use that argument against Twitter or Facebook shutting you down, then you get mocked and you're harassed and people say things like, oh, well, you're conservative.
Why are you calling for the government to get involved in this?
It's a private company.
You don't have free speech.
Well, then I would also argue when these liberals complain that President Donald Trump is banning them, well, then why are they saying, oh, well, then Donald Trump can't ban us because this federal judge said that it's a violation of our free speech rules.
It just seems like it's a form of political warfare, right?
And that's what I was emphasizing with my protest yesterday when I handcuffed myself, because it truly is political warfare.
They're switching the rules and they're switching the guidelines.
They're attacking people and they're censoring people and targeting people based off of their political ideology.
And they're wanting to pick and choose, you know, aspects of our constitution to uphold Well, yeah, and the left has no problem violating freedom of association when it comes to things like affirmative action laws, equal pay for work of equal value, and this poor baker, whose life was virtually destroyed, certainly economically, because he had some doubts about baking a wedding cake for a gay couple.
So the idea that the left has all of a sudden discovered the absolute virtues of freedom of association seems a little specious to me.
Yeah, and also too, if you recall during the social media hearings in Congress on September 5th, when Jack Dorsey, Mark Zuckerberg and Sheryl Sandberg and a Google exec, they were supposed to testify in front of Congress, and I believe Google didn't even show up, they were supposed to talk about these issues, right? They were called during the Kavanaugh hearings, so of course it didn't even receive The attention it deserved.
And this is another reason why I decided to handcuff myself, is because somebody, and I don't know who it was, decided to schedule the social media hearings that were going to address this issue of censorship during the same time as the Kavanaugh hearing.
Everybody was talking about the Kavanaugh hearing.
Nobody was talking about the social media hearing.
And then when I confronted Jack Dorsey on September 5th during the congressional hearing and called him out for basically committing perjury, he lied to members of Congress and said that They weren't censoring and shadow banning conservatives, even though they were literally caught on camera by Project Veritas admitting that they shadow ban and censor conservatives, especially Trump supporters.
I was mocked and people act like it wasn't a big deal.
People let Jack Dorsey get away.
Our representatives didn't really press him hard.
But one thing that Ted Cruz did say When he was talking about these social media companies is the fact that the only reason they're currently immune from litigation based off of, you know, suspending people apparently is because they view themselves as open platforms.
So if you're an open platform, I guess there's some clause that protects some of these companies, but that only applies if you are not biased.
And Ted Cruz Reiterated this to Zuckerberg and Dorsey when he said, you know, you only get to enjoy that privilege of immunity if you guys truly are not biased, right?
But they are clearly biased and there is a lot of evidence that shows that these are no longer open platforms, but they are instead acting and serving as publishers, which then makes them liable for, you know, for Practicing discrimination if they suspend or ban people and it makes them liable for hosting violent,
genocidal content that is calling for groups of people to be wiped out or groups of conservatives and the president to be assassinated simply based off of their political ideology.
So I think that there needs to be something done at the congressional level to strip these companies of their immunity Because that immunity has allowed them to become tyrannical, monopolistic entities and now they're literally destroying people's lives, they're destroying people's careers, they're shutting down businesses because they have too much power.
They have so much power that they are now operating in this kind of big brother way where they're monitoring your offline behavior, determining whether you're allowed to use social media and Participate in the digital public square based off your associations and who you hang out with and what your political ideology is.
And we saw this this year when Twitter redid their terms of service and they said, oh, well, we're going to determine whether people get verified or not based off of their off-platform behavior.
And we're going to start suspending people for off-platform behavior.
So in other words, we're going to spy on you somehow One way or another, and then we're going to determine whether or not you get to have a voice, whether or not we agree with your behavior.
I mean, this is a Or while I'm in the state.
Yeah, it is one of these challenges, and just to sort of bring people up to speed on what Laurel was talking about, so my understanding is that if you're like a newspaper and you publish an article that is libelous, say, well then you're liable because you have editorial control over the content of your newspaper,
your magazine, or whatever. But if you just run, you know, anyone can post whatever and you are not If you're editorializing as they go along, then you're not liable because no one can scan and review everything.
And because you don't touch it, you don't end up liable.
And it's untold billions of dollars of shareholder value that's tied up into this fundamental question.
That if the tech giants are editorializing along ideological lines...
Then they could conceivably, in a court case, lose their status as neutral, as hosts, and then they could become determined as publishers, in which case, boy, you know, something bad gets published and you can drill all the way up, I guess, to the board level in terms of liability.
That's a huge, huge issue.
And, you know, I'm a little bit more surprised, I guess I'm a little surprised, Laura, that the shareholders of these companies aren't up in arms about what may be done to the value of their investment.
Should it come to light, even more so than what Project Veritas showed, should it come to light that they are editorializing along party lines or along left-right lines?
Because if they do end up being classified as publishers, their entire business model, as far as I can see, becomes completely unsustainable.
Well, everybody can just join a class action lawsuit and they'll go bankrupt.
Because there's countless examples of discrimination and countless examples of these threats, calls for genocide, discrimination, defamation.
I mean, for crying out loud, I mean, when they took away my verification, they put a picture of me On their moment, and then they said, Twitter removes verification of prominent white supremacists.
I mean, I'm Jewish, and I'm not a white supremacist, and if I was a white supremacist, well, I obviously didn't get the memo that Jews aren't allowed, right?
So they're trying to create this image of me, which has actually cost me a lot of money.
It's damaged professional relationships for me.
It's killed business opportunities for me.
It's isolated me.
It's marginalized me.
And if you go on my Wikipedia or if you go on any type of news article and just type in information about me, it's just led people to think that I'm some white supremacist Nazi that goes to KKK rallies because of the way this multi-billion dollar corporation portrayed me and they decided to recklessly use my picture for their headline when they said that they were removing verification from white supremacists,
right? It's also, you know, that's a form of editorializing, and I think that they need to be held accountable.
And Donald Trump has recently tweeted about this.
In the last few months I saw, he was talking about how in this country, you know, the defamation laws and the libel laws need to be stronger because these corporations, and not just social media companies, but even these media companies are so out of control, and they just seem to get away with using these terms So loosely,
like alt-right, far-right, Nazi, you know, white supremacist, whatever it may be, and with big tech and the way that they're able to send a message that then reaches the airwaves and reaches the internet so fast that millions of people will see a message in the course of, you know, seconds, especially if Twitter decides to amplify it, they're ruining people's lives.
They are now in violation, in my opinion, of A public accommodation laws, right?
Because certain individuals, mostly conservatives, are now not being able to utilize services.
They're not able to gain employment.
They're not able to use services equally.
They're not able to be accommodated equally as their leftist colleagues or leftist fellow citizens because of this weaponization of social media.
And it goes back to what I was saying at Twitter.
This is a form of political warfare.
And that's why I used the handcuffs to demonstrate that.
And that's why I also used the Jewish star that the Nazis made the Jews wear during the time of the Holocaust.
Because what they're doing They're weaponizing their platform to commit acts of political warfare against conservatives.
It's techno-fascism.
Now, there was criticism, and I kind of get it, kind of don't, but I wanted to get your thoughts on it, Laura.
The criticism saying, you know, trivializing the Holocaust, wearing the yellow star that was imposed upon the Jewish population by the Nazis and other regimes.
You know, hey, you just lost your Twitter account.
What are you bringing the Holocaust in for that seems like overkill?
What are your thoughts about that? I don't really think it's overkill because I use the star to remind people of what happens when we stand by and we don't speak out about injustice, when we don't speak out about fascism, when we don't speak out about Jew hatred and hatred and this marginalization and discrimination of people just because of who they are politically,
right? And I wanted to use the star next to Farrakhan's tweet As a kind of drastic example to show people that, you know, Twitter is now trying to normalize actual hateful speech.
Twitter is now trying to normalize and make Jew hatred and hatred towards white people, hatred towards conservatives mainstream.
And when you allow for these irrational If you have viewpoints to become mainstream and part of the political discussion, while you censor another group of people and you completely de-platform them and turn them into the enemy, which is what social media companies are doing, well then you have these political atrocities and human rights violations that take place, right?
Like the Holocaust.
Like the Holocaust. It's like modern day book burning.
It's like modern day book burning.
My argument, by bringing Sharia into this, and by contrasting my tweet, which I was trying to protect individuals, protect gays, protect Jews, protect women, as opposed to Louis Farrakhan's tweet, which he wasn't banned for,
in which he was calling Jews termites, basically dog whistling for the extermination of Jews, I felt that the Jewish star was actually necessary to emphasize that, because just like the Holocaust was a form of political warfare, Well, social media companies are signaling people all around the world with the use of their Sharia money To incite political warfare against different groups of people.
And it's dangerous. It has negative consequences.
Well, a point that I made was that the yellow stars occurred years before the Holocaust.
I mean, the whole point is you want to try and stop this momentum early on.
Because once it starts to build, and we can see countless examples in history of when the left gains a significant amount of power...
Well, their enemies tend to do rather badly, either in terms of economic opportunities or professional opportunities or licensure or, you know, freedom, basic freedoms, like the freedom to publish, the freedom to speak.
And it goes as far as we've seen in the French Revolution and in the Russian Revolution and under Khmer Rouge and in the Chinese Revolution of 1949-1950, we can see that when the left gains a lot of power, people tend to end up in gulags.
But it never starts with gulags.
It starts with smaller things.
And it's so frustrating to me, Laura, when people sort of point out and fight the smaller things by saying this is where they lead.
They say, well, it's just a little thing.
And it's like, okay, but is it easier to stop an avalanche or to stop a snowball at the top of the mountain?
Yeah, and luckily you're smart enough to understand why I use the Nazi imagery of this.
And it was also to kind of dispel this idea that we are being banned because we are Nazis, right?
Like I said, this is techno-fascism and they like to accuse us of being the Nazis.
Meanwhile, I'm a Jewish woman and you saw the way that the media still portrayed me while I was doing this protest.
They refer to me as a far-right activist.
They were still trying to Basically label me as some type of Nazi and even though they're not even smart enough to know that Nazism isn't a right-leaning ideology, right?
So it starts small and that's what I was talking about in my statement too.
It never starts with bloodshed, right?
It starts with silence and complicity just like in the Holocaust, right?
People were silent and they were complicit.
They were silent and when people stood by and they started sending these signals and starting to normalize Jew hatred and history tends to repeat itself and Right?
And another aspect of this, it's kind of historical, a lot of people don't have this historical knowledge, but, you know, there were Muslim units in the Holocaust that were responsible for murdering Jews.
I mean, it was called the Husseini Brigade.
And this Husseini Brigade with the Grand Mufti, the Grand Mufti was pictured with Hitler numerous times, right?
And so, Just going back to that time, Sharia has always been a very dangerous force behind all of this Jew hatred.
It's the reason why you're seeing waves of anti-Semitism in Europe right now that haven't been seen since the time of the Second World War, because they're having This big influx of Islamic immigration and the Islamification of their society and Sharia.
And it's no coincidence that while this Islamic immigration is taking place in Europe, you're seeing that people like Tommy Robinson and others are being shut down and jailed and silenced by social media companies while they're in Germany, while they're in the UK, while they're in France. Because again, like I said, it's the influence of the Sharia in Silicon Valley.
Well, I know that because when this issue comes up on my show—actually, that sounds kind of passive—when I bring up the issue on my show, there is a lot of frustration because there's this perception out there, oh, the Jews are voting for the left, and the left wants to open the borders, and the left are for mass immigration and so on, and so there's a lot of frustration.
And I think you're viewed as a little bit of an exception to the rule as far as this goes?
Yeah, I mean, I'm obviously the exception to the rule, but look, I'm Jewish and I'm going to criticize a lot of these left-leaning Jewish organizations because they have decided to basically signal to the Islamic organizations and they've decided to be open borders and pro-immigration.
And unfortunately, they've decided to take this very suicidal approach where they've aligned themselves with people who literally want them dead.
And that's why groups like the ADL and Other left-leaning Jewish organizations have spoken out against me and have said things like, oh, Laura Loomer is a disgrace to the Jewish people.
She's just an anti-Muslim bigot.
Well, sorry, I don't want to align myself with people who want to kill me.
You know, I don't want to align myself with people who practice an ideology and embrace Sharia law, which calls for the killing of Jews and Christians.
And, you know, I hope someday, I hope that someday these Jewish organizations come to their senses because I noticed that a lot of people Actually, you know, they really liked my protests and they liked the use of the star, but the critics who are calling me out are these left-leaning Jews,
right? Because they don't seem to understand or they're like unwilling to understand that the reason why there's such rising waves of anti-Semitism around the world is because of the policies that they're supporting, right?
And I'm not saying that these Jews are responsible for anti-Semitism, but like In a way, you know, when they're supporting these policies of open borders and immigration and they're allowing for dangerous individuals who practice an ideology that is inherently anti-Jewish and anti-Christian, well, they're helping spread anti-Semitism.
They're helping spread Jew hatred.
So, you know, I'm not going to apologize to people who were offended by my use of the star because, in fact, I think it was quite necessary to remind people of the horrors that can take place when you allow When you're silenced and you're complicit and you just stand by and you make excuses for people being banned and censored on social media, because it starts with that, but the reason why they're banning people like myself and others is because we're effective and we're raising awareness about these issues.
I just want to slice and dice just a little bit of what you said there, because this is my perspective.
I'll make a case for it. Let me know what you think.
When it comes to individuals and the ideology, I always want to separate the two to some degree, because there's nasty stuff in the Old Testament that has sort of flowed through to all of the great three religions.
There are people who are...
Positive people who focus on the positive aspects of their belief systems, and then there are people who are negative people who focus on the negative or hostile aspects.
So, for me at least, when I criticize, say, Islam or Judaism or Christianity, I want to make sure that I'm not, I don't think you are too, putting everyone in that category who follows those belief systems, because there are good things in some of those belief systems, there are bad things, and I much prefer focusing on the ideology rather than The individuals, which is not to say they're completely separate, but I just really wanted to make that point and get your thoughts on that.
Yeah, I mean, look, I like people say this.
Oh, they always say, oh, you hate Muslims.
No, I don't hate Muslims.
I hate Islam, like the ideology itself.
I don't think that there's anything good about the ideology of Islam.
I mean, it's completely incompatible with Western civilization.
Sharia law is completely incompatible with our United States Constitution.
And quite frankly, I don't really think that it's possible to truly be a Muslim American.
Because when you say that you are a Muslim American, you have dual loyalties.
And you can't have dual loyalties.
Like, you either believe that the United States Constitution is the supreme law of the land, or you believe that Sharia law is the supreme law of the land.
And in order to be a Muslim, according to Islamic law, right, devout Muslims believe that Sharia law is Supreme law.
Islamic law is supreme to all other laws.
And you can't have that.
So when we have these people like Ilhan Omar, Keith Ellison, Rashida Tlaib, people who I have now been banned for speaking out against, being elected to our Congress, well, we have a dilemma.
We have a dilemma because now we have this force, right?
We have this political system Islam itself doesn't even view itself as a religion.
It's a political system, a way of life, that is now working to sabotage and undermine the values of our country.
And that's why Sharia is such an essential aspect to the protests I had yesterday and my statements and why I was banned.
Because, you know, we're getting all of A lot of this funding from the Saudis, which is starting to influence the tech industry and influence social media and influence different things like Uber and Lyft, right?
People wouldn't even believe if they knew where a lot of this funding was coming from.
They'd probably be shocked.
I don't think a lot of people really know how much the Saudis control in this country, right?
But that's what happens then, is then Little things start to happen.
And like you said, people tend to just kind of brush off the little things, but it's the little things, right?
Like censoring people.
That's the form of upholding Islamic blasphemy laws.
But now we're getting to the bigger part.
Now these people are in Congress and they're starting to change our rules about headgear, right?
And they're trying to impose the hijab.
And people think, oh, that's just another little thing.
But, you know, you have a bunch of little things together, and then you have massive change, and it won't be too long before we have, you know, full-blown Sharia implementation or Sharia enforcement in other aspects of our society.
Right now we're seeing it on social media, and now we're seeing it in the halls of Congress, and it's very concerning.
And if you're a conservative journalist like myself and you call it out, you can now be banned.
Well, and this is the...
For those who haven't been around for a while, I mean, I know that social media use kind of exploded in the run-up to the 2016 election, but I mean, I've been doing this on YouTube since late 2005, 2006.
And there was a time back in the original heyday of the medium when it, I wouldn't say it was the Wild West, but you didn't have to be cross-checking and looking over your shoulder and seeing what was allowable and so on.
I mean, as long as you weren't, and I never had any impulse or desire to do so, but as long as you weren't advocating any criminal actions or anything like that, it was like, yeah, you're good to go.
And it's a shame for the people who are newer to the medium to not have a memory of what it was like back in the early days when it really was the quality of your arguments and the quality of your presentation that counted, not whether it complied with some murky rules that were really hard to parse out.
Yeah, no, I completely agree.
And this is why a lot of people don't really understand why they're being banned, because we are Americans and people who live in the civilized West, well, you know, thank God, like they don't live under Sharia.
And so Sharia as a concept and Sharia as a legal system is totally Uh, foreign and complex to those who don't live under it.
And so when people say like, oh, I don't know why I was banned or I was banned for no reason.
Well, that's the reason why it really is a Silicon Valley Sharia and someone who wrote an amazing article about this in the past week explaining this and really broke down my, uh, social media ban.
Um, you know, as an example, um, of the Sharia in Silicon Valley is Michelle Malkin.
But, of course, this has been going on for a long time.
Pamela Geller has been talking about this.
John Guamdolo, he's another individual who was permanently banned from Twitter.
And whenever you try to expose this or talk about this, it's called the Red-Green Alliance, this alliance between these jihadis and the leftist organizations, and the use of Wahibist funds to Influence American media and social media institutions and now even our own educational institutions.
It's no wonder why we're having such a decay in our society here, right?
Everywhere you insert Islam into society, you're going to have massive societal decay.
No, and there has been, up here in Canada, there has been questions around criticizing religions.
And the example was that, well, the Catholic Church benefited from criticism regarding its handling of pedophilia issues and so on, and that it is important that all belief systems are put forward under the scrutiny of reason and evidence.
And I remain committed to that.
I'm sure that you do as well.
And so I guess we'll see you back on Facebook in a couple of weeks and on Twitter.
Not at all, it would seem, unless something miraculous happens.
So if people do want to find out what you're doing online, Laura, where should they go to get your information?
Right, well, people can follow me on my website.
You can subscribe. It's free.
There's no paywall. It's lauralumer.us and I send out weekly updates and I still have my YouTube channel for now, but I'm also exploring other alternative media platforms like Gab and Minds.com and BitChute.
But for now, the best place is to follow me on YouTube.
On my website, but I'm not going to be giving up this fight.
I still plan to, you know, expose these people in Silicon Valley.
And for those of you who know my work and know what I do, I'm notorious for confronting individuals on camera and asking them the questions that nobody else really wants to ask.
And you can guarantee that I'm going to be holding people accountable.
I'm not going to let them get away with this because this isn't just about me.
Like I said during my protest yesterday, this is about All of us.
It's about the millions of conservatives who are being censored and silenced all around the world, and they need to be held accountable, right?
And I know recently that Jack Dorsey as well is going to be investigated now for possibly committing perjury during the congressional hearing, which is what I had said, of course, when I called him out.
