Warning: Constant WPCF7_VALIDATE_CONFIGURATION already defined in /home2/ltg37jq5/public_html/wp-config.php on line 92 Search Results Geert Wilders censorship « Limits to Growth
The Washington Post cranks out a lot of objectionable ideas, but its Sunday front page story portraying the sharia murder of two young Scandinavian women as an opportunity for the “far right” went way too far on so many levels, beginning with accuracy and fairness.
Let’s consider. For years, persons concerned about the mass immigration of hostile muslims have pointed out that the “religion” of Islam is more correctly understood as an all-encompassing political system. Dutch political leader Geert Wilders lives under 24/7 security because jihadist thugs in Europe have decided he needs to be murdered due to his resistance to the ideology. When Wilders gave a 2015 speech in Garland, Texas, he had a SWAT team of eight well armed men guarding him.
GEERT WILDERS: Islam as an ideology does not allow freedom. Look at almost all the countries in the world where Islam is dominant — you see a total lack of civil society, of rule of law, of freedom for journalists, women, Christians, or even somebody who wants to leave Islam, an apostate.
You are allowed to leave Christianity or Judaism and become an atheist or the follower of another religion; you are not allowed to leave fascism, you are not allowed to leave Communism. And still today in Holland, in Germany, in the Arab world, the penalty is death if you want to leave Islam.
And let’s not forget the extreme violence, the murders where muslims kill nonbelievers because the koran says to do so in over 100 verses. There are so many examples — like the 9/11 attacks that killed nearly 3000.
It was so shocking that America pledged never to forget.
But the Washington Post has forgotten that Islam is a historic opponent of the West, and the paper should not condemn those of us who do remember and name the enemies of free people.
Perhaps if the press were not so politically correct in protecting the reputation of hostile Islam, the two young women would have thought twice about a hiking trip in Morocco (99 percent muslim). The media adoration of diversity uber alles does not stand up under scrutiny.
Below, Norwegian Maren Ueland (left) and Dane Louisa Vesterager Jespersen were murdered in Morocco by jihadists.
In a crime apparently intended to impress the Islamic State, two Scandinavian women were brutally slain in Morocco. The killings were seized on by the far right to attack Islam.
MARRAKESH, Morocco — Their screams must have carried for miles in the thin air of the Atlas Mountains, anguished sounds of a terrorist attack that no one was there to hear, see or stop.
Maren Ueland, 28, and Louisa Jespersen, 24, Scandinavian students who revered the outdoors, were descending North Africa’s highest peak in December when they encountered four men searching for Westerners to kill.
The men waited until after nightfall, then approached the women’s tent with knives and misplaced hopes of becoming Islamist heroes. They attacked Ueland, a Norwegian, and her Danish friend, Jespersen, in their sleeping bags, stabbed them until their bodies went limp and severed their heads in a ghastly sequence recorded on a cellphone.
The December 2018 attack, like so many in this age of mass killings and social media, was an act of senseless and performative violence. The killers, poor and uneducated, became absorbed in a violent Islamist universe they saw on the screens of their cellphones, then sought their own place in it. Their overriding aim was to impress the Islamic State, earn the status of soldiers in its apocalyptic struggle and see their own recording distributed across the group’s propaganda platforms.
Reality didn’t follow that script. The targeting of defenseless women and the abysmal quality of the recording managed to violate the standards of a terrorist group not known for having any. The Islamic State did not distribute the video, refused to acknowledge the attack and to this day has ignored the Moroccans’ pledges of loyalty.
The video went viral nonetheless. An attack that had gone unheard and unseen ended up being viewed millions of times by Islamic State supporters who didn’t share the group’s selectivity, by dark-Web bottom dwellers devoted to gore and by the morbidly curious.
The most alarming audience, however, was one that the attackers had not envisioned. Within days, the one-minute, 16-second recording spread rapidly across networks associated with the far-right and white-nationalist movements. Extremists posted gruesome scenes of the women’s deaths on Facebook, Twitter and other platforms alongside condemnations of Islam and calls for a civilizational clash.
“Look at this video of the one girl being decapitated alive,” wrote a far-right figure in Norway as he posted a link to his Twitter account. “It’s God awakening us Germanic men to action. It’s enough now. It’s enough.”
When officials in Norway and Denmark pleaded with the public to stop sharing the video, that effort was denounced by far-right groups as a betrayal of religion and race — censorship of content that revealed the true nature of Islam.
For families of the victims, the aftermath compounded the pain. Their mothers were inundated with messages on Facebook. Many were expressions of condolences, but some were gestures of astonishing cruelty, saying their daughters deserved to die and attaching links to the video of their slaughter.
The attack in Morocco was not of the same magnitude as the mass shooting that killed 51 people at mosques in New Zealand three months later, or the Easter bombings in Sri Lanka five weeks after that, when more than 200 people attending church services were killed. But all are part of a pattern of violence and viral incitement in which the extremes of intolerance react to and further radicalize one another online.
In the Moroccan case, a video that was created to strike a blow for Islamism was almost immediately repurposed and weaponized by those who consider the religion an existential threat to the ethnic and cultural identity of Northern Europe.
The victims were caught between warring ideologies that they had rejected in life. In the days after the attack, far-right activists scoured the women’s social media accounts and mocked them for their tolerant views.
“It is obvious to point out the naivete of the two deceased, but they are, as all, a product of their upbringing,” said an entry on Uriasposten, a Danish, anti-Islamic website. “Perhaps the eternal struggle against ‘prejudice’ has unpleasant side effects.”
This account of the attack in Morocco and its aftermath online is based on Moroccan court records including statements from the suspects; interviews with officials in Morocco, Norway, Denmark and the United States; and friends and relatives of the victims and of the suspects in their deaths. (Continues)
The left’s censorship is a worsening problem these days, since the liberal overlords of Silicon Valley and beyond demand that the little people to conform to their globalist open-borders worldview. Liberal censors insist, for one thing, that their foolishly idealized view of diversity be obeyed as gospel, even when the facts clearly indicate otherwise.
As a result of the harassment, critics of sharia and its parent ideology political islam have gotten a lot of trouble. Not only are their lives in danger because of murderous jihadists — Dutch freedom fight Geert Wilders has required 24/7 security for years — but critics who cite chapter and verse of the koran’s commands for violence against infidels often have their sources of financial support shut down.
Arguably top on that list is author Robert Spencer who has been informing the free world about the threat of aggressive sharia for years through his many books and website JihadWatch.org.
Lurking in the background and pulling strings is the fake hate spotter the Southern Poverty Law Center (SPLC) that has parlayed bogus accusations against honorable people into a multi-million-dollar empire. These days, the left is working to impoverish conservatives by cutting off normal means of making donations such as Paypal.
Robert Spencer described his struggles in a recent video that was derived from an article in PJ Media:
First Alex Jones was banned by nearly all the social media giants. Then Twitter banned Gavin McInnes. Then Facebook blocked Dennis Prager’s Prager University videos, although it later backtracked and apologized. Then Patreon and GoFundMe banned me, and make no mistake: you may dislike Jones, McInnes, Prager, and me, but this isn’t over. The Left is moving quickly now to silence all dissent, and there is no telling who could be next. It could be you.
Patreon started the ball rolling when they deleted the account I had started to raise funds to renovate an old TV studio, which I had hoped to use for Jihad Watch videos. Patreon gave me no explanation for banning me other than that MasterCard had demanded that they do so, and the only explanation from MasterCard was published in Breitbart News:
A Mastercard spokesperson responded to a Breitbart News request for comment with the following statement. “As part of our normal process, we share information about websites that may have illegal content with the acquirer — or merchant’s bank — that connects them to our network to accept card payments. The acquirer would then review the site for compliance with legal requirements and our standards. They would then determine what action to take. In this case, the acquirer advised us that they decided to terminate acceptance.”
What “illegal content”?
Which website — Patreon or Jihad Watch? All I had at Patreon was a video stating my hopes to rebuild the studio, and a notice about an upcoming livestream. At Jihad Watch, all we have are news articles, almost all from mainstream news sources, with commentary. To what “illegal content” is MasterCard referring?
It is not (yet) illegal in the United States to criticize Islam and to oppose jihad mass murder and the Sharia oppression of women, gays, and others. It is, however, illegal to do so under Sharia. Is MasterCard operating according to Sharia blasphemy laws now?
Shortly after that, I started a GoFundMe page to make up for the loss of Patreon. But after a few days, GoFundMe canceled my account and refunded all the donations. GoFundMe sent me this explanation:
It seems you’re using WePay [GoFundMe’s service to pay those who receive donations] for one or more of the activities prohibited by our Terms of Service …
WePay is unable to process payments related to Hate, violence, racial intolerance, terrorism, the financial exploitation of a crime, or items or activities that encourage, promote, facilitate, or instruct others regarding the same.
There was, of course, no further explanation.
It’s very clear what’s going on. The Southern Poverty Law Center (SPLC) claims that I am a “hate group leader,” and that’s that: when the SPLC says “jump,” Patreon and MasterCard say “how high?”
Indeed, the SPLC’s infallibility in such matters is taken for granted by all the social media giants as well. This is despite the SPLC’s massive admission of error in the Maajid Nawaz case, in which they paid a $3.3 million settlement to a Muslim reformer they accused of being an “anti-Muslim extremist” (which is what they call me). The SPLC’s far-Left political agenda, in lumping legitimate groups in with the likes of the KKK and neo-Nazis in order to discredit and destroy them, is also obvious.
But GoFundMe, like Patreon and MasterCard, allowed me no appeal, no discussion, no questioning of the SPLC’s fiat.
And of course, it isn’t just the SPLC. It is now taken for granted by large segments of the American population, and by innumerable people elsewhere, that to oppose jihad mass murder of innocent civilians and Sharia oppression of women, gays, and others is “hate” — or as GoFundMe puts it, “Hate” with a capital “H.”
I remember how flabbergasted I was in 2003 when I was on MSNBC with Keith Olbermann and Ibrahim Hooper of Hamas-linked CAIR, and Hooper called me a “hatemonger.” I thought, “It’s ‘hate’ to oppose jihad terror? That will never fly.”
But it has. And the outcome will be that more and more people will be afraid to oppose jihad terror and Sharia oppression for fear of incurring these charges, and this discrimination and libel.
I’m going to be doing what I can to challenge GoFundMe’s uncritical acceptance of the SPLC’s smear of me, and the likely same uncritical acceptance by MasterCard/Patreon. But the SPLC has hundreds of millions of dollars and I don’t. And many who don’t realize how vulnerable they are will applaud what is happening to me because they don’t realize or believe how easily the same tactics can and will be turned on them. But they will be.
This is getting very serious. It won’t stop with me. After my adventures with Patreon and GoFundMe, MasterCard and Visa stopped processing donations for the David Horowitz Freedom Center, with which I am affiliated, although they backtracked after an outcry.
Despite this small victory, it is clear that the Left is moving quickly to silence all dissenting voices in the run-up to the 2018 elections. The freedom of speech is the foundation of a free society, and it is rapidly being destroyed in the United States. Not only are Horowitz, and me, and Jones, and Prager, and McInnes being silenced — the pressure on the credit card companies shows that the Left is now trying to make sure that we cannot make a living, and will be quite literally destroyed, personally as well as professionally.
There will be more victims. This totalitarian action needs to be stopped quickly, or it will destroy all who are not doctrinaire Leftists — and, without any doubt, the United States as a free society.
Britain’s recent arrest of freedom fighter Tommy Robinson was a reminder of President Reagan’s warning that “Freedom is never more than one generation away from extinction.”
Robinson was acting as a citizen journalist to cover a muslim gang-rape trial when police arrested him for “breach of the peace”, but clearly the aim of the government was to shut down the speech of anyone who disagrees with Britain’s slavish cowering to Islam. He was quickly whisked away to a 13-month jail sentence which could be dangerous since Britain’s jails have no shortage of jihadist muslims. Furthermore, the government slapped a gag order on the press about the case — an example of how every nation that imagines itself to be a home of freedom needs a First Amendment.
Geert Wilders — who has had his own struggles against censorship in the Netherlands — made a statement calling for free speech to be restored:
The Drudge Report had an unusually large headline spread about the case on May 28:
There are a number of court cases taking place in Britain which are subject to reporting restrictions. A good percentage of these — and we really don’t know how many, which I think is rather the idea — relate to Muslim gang-rape trials. Tommy was under a 13-month suspended sentence for previously reporting on a gang-rape trial subject to reporting restrictions. In other words, if he broke the law again he would then serve the jail time as per the initial sentence.
I’m not sure if the trial he was reporting on when he was arrested was yet another “reporting restriction” case, but if it was (which I think it was) the police have a duty to issue a warning before taking action if the warning was ignored. Again, I am unsure as to what happened here.
But the police made no mention of reporting restrictions or contempt of court; they arrested him for “breaching the peace” which would seem to be a total fabrication and therefore unlawful. His immediate hearing and sentencing suggests this was a planned action by the police (and our lovely government) in order to shut him down.
To further reinforce the actions of a totalitarian state, a reporting restriction has now been put into operation with regard to his arrest. Tommy has been “disappeared” in much the same manner as countless others were airbrushed out of existence in genuine totalitarian regimes abroad, but I think this is the first time in England that a citizen has been “disappeared” in such a blatant way.
Even more horrifying is the supine manner in which this grotesque act of totalitarianism has been received by our media and purported civil-liberties merchants, none of whom have raised a murmur of disapproval at the time of this writing.
Couple this with the video of the woman arrested a few days ago by the police who threatened to break her down if she refused to open it — “DO NOT RESIST US! DO NOT RESIST US!” and I think it is very clear that the government, given the choice of crushing Islam or crushing those who question Islam, have chosen to crush the latter.
So the decent, democratic Britain I was born into has now gone. I warned some years ago of the direction the British police were taking (“Multiculturalism Has Destroyed the British Police”), and it is time to realise Britain is now a genuine Police State.
As the Islamic threat grows via demographics and violence, so the grip of the Police State will increase over the dissidents. Britain has three progressive routes now open to it: First, submit to the State. Second, submit to Islam after the State submits to Islam. Third, engage in revolution within the next decade in order to head off the two former routes.
I don’t think we will, though. I think Britain is finished as a country, culture and people. Our only hope of achieving revolutionary thought is via total economic collapse. When we are hungry and cold we might, just might, become angry enough to revolt. At the moment, however, we can fly abroad to the sun-kissed beaches of Ibiza and get completely trolleyed even as our country and all that is stands for is incrementally stolen from us by 7th century savages in alliance with our home-grown Traitor Class.
Tommy was a threat to the Traitor Class, so they have removed him. He won’t be the last.
Pamela Geller returned to Garland Texas on Sunday to respond to January’s “Stand with the Prophet” jihad conclave that condemned America’s First Amendment because it allows us to tell the unpleasant truth about Islam and Mohammed. She chose the same venue in the same town to emphasize that Americans will not give up our treasured free speech because of hostile Muslims.
Unfortunately, because of Muslim immigration and other negative influences like Islam prison ministries, free speech about Islam is now a dangerous activity in America.
Below, guest speaker Geert Wilders looked happy with the well armed SWAT team that protected the Garland celebration of American free speech.
I watched the entire event live on the internet (love those tubes!). If you are patient enough to watch three hours of speeches and whatnot, check it out (spare link). The shooting started after the speeches were finished: an armed man in camo came into the room and advised that shots had been fired outside. It was later reported that the two men, armed with assault weapons, opened fire on the police and were shot dead by an officer with a service revolver. Good shooting!
The free speech event itself went fine. Geert Wilders gave a strong talk and quoted a Texas founder in his remarks:
Dear friends,
Thank you all for being here. It’s great to be in Texas, the Lone Star State. The one star in the Texan flag represents all the free Western world needs today: defiance, pride and independence.
It is no coincidence that we are in Garland, Texas, tonight. It is here that, three months ago, shortly after the Charlie Hebdo massacre, Islamic activists convened to demand that free speech be curtailed. They want to prohibit cartoons, books and films which they find insulting.
Our answer is clear: Don’t mess with Texas!
Don’t mess with the free West!
Don’t mess with our freedom of speech! [. . .]
Let me end by quoting Sam Houston, the founding father of this great state of Texas:
“Texas has yet to learn submission to any oppression, come from what source it may.”
May his words inspire us all today never to submit to Islamic barbarism.
Former CIA operative Gary Berntsen appeared this morning on Fox News to talk about what happened, and he knew a couple people at the event. Those friends said the attackers were carrying AK-47s with drum magazines that hold a lot of ammo. Berntsen observed, “That means significant capacity to fire on a crowd. They probably weren’t there to kill one person. They were probably looking to do mass casualties. Thank goodness for the Garland Police.”
CBN reporter Dale Hurd recently visited the socialist multicultural utopia to see how all the imported diversity is working out.
Not so well, it appears.
Could it be that not all cultures are equal or compatible? Sweden has been particularly stubborn in avoiding the obvious truth that knuckle-dragger Islamic tribes should be left in their own locales to sort out their issues.
But saying political correctness is strong among Swedes is an understatement: the fear of discussing anything controversial, particularly diverse immigration, is extreme, despite the Muslim rape wave. Aren’t women’s rights and safety supposed to be important to liberals?
Have the Swedes always been such loathesome weenies? They were officially neutral in WWII, although it has recently been reported that Sweden made secret loans to Nazi Germany.
Swedes are so silenced by PC, self-censorship and fear of being called racist that Somali refugee Amun Abdullahi (pictured) who tried unsuccessfully to report on jihad went back home to Mogadishu in disappointment.
Diverse liberalism is poison; Sweden is but one example. The national experience also shows what a mistake Muslim immigration is for any western society.
STOCKHOLM, Sweden — When President Barack Obama visited Sweden last year, he expressed his deep admiration for the Swedish model. But that should make Americans a little nervous.
One U.N. report says Sweden will be a third-world nation in about 15 years, below Libya and Bulgaria. Sweden is a society that believes it is racing into the future, but critics warn that it is racing to the bottom.
It has been a laboratory for all kinds of social experiments: Swedish leaders are trying to build the perfect society.
The country has been compared to two nations that also tried to build perfect societies: North Korea and the Soviet Union.
In Sweden, if you don’t like how utopia is being built, you won’t be shot like in North Korea, but your life could become very unpleasant, very quickly.
A Perfect Society? A YouTube video shows a journalist from one of Sweden’s leading tabloids, Expressen, confronting a Swede at his home.
The man, a professor, made what he thought were anonymous negative comments on a website about immigrant problems in Sweden.
But left-wing hackers helped the newspaper track him and others like him down so they could be exposed before the whole nation as racists. Another man, a manager, was fired because of it.
Sweden’s leftist establishment and media believe a cornerstone of their perfect society is multiculturalism: large scale immigration from some of the poorest, most backward nations on earth. Swedes who disagree with that plan risk being labeled racist, fascist, even Nazi.
“Immigration is the starting point and the finishing point. It’s the most important point to prove you’re friendly toward foreigners, you’re friendly toward immigration,” Danish journalist Mikael Jalving, author of the book Absolut Sweden, said.
“It’s all about whether you can be said to be hostile to immigration. Once that is ‘proven,’ you’re out of the game. Once you’re ‘proven’ to be a racist or fascist or nationalist, which is almost as bad, you cannot have any legitimate positions or points of view,” he explained. Continue reading this article
I’ve been getting uninvited e-mails from CPAC about its upcoming yak-a-thon conference, and the schedule of speakers looks pretty snoozeworthy. But what can you expect from an organization (American Conservative Union) that has consistently been too hidebound to grasp the growing threats of hostile Islam and open borders?
The ACU is quintessentially establishment conservative, but seems like it wants to get hip to new things happening, like the Tea Party (albeit five years late).
An indication of CPAC’s slight lean toward grassroots is the lack of an invite to House Speaker Boehner, although uber-suit types like amnesty hucksters Marco Rubio and Paul Ryan are appearing as usual.
House Speaker John A. Boehner, who has tangled repeatedly with the right wing of the Republican Party, has not been invited to this week’s Conservative Political Action Conference, a major snub at the annual gathering and a sign of the top Republican officeholder’s struggle to find common ground with grass-roots activists.
People familiar with CPAC’s planning, who spoke only on the condition of anonymity, said the American Conservative Union, which hosts the event, never sent an invitation to Mr. Boehner, in part because it wanted the focus this year to be on leading conservative thinkers at the grass-roots level and not at the congressional or party leadership level. [. . .]
Good luck with that outreach thing. Critical issues like immigration enforcement are still overlooked because CPAC at heart represents Conservatism Inc. with a large dollop of Chamber of Commerce.
The censorship became so bad that last year Breitbart.com held its own panel called “The Uninvited” which included NumbersUSA’s Rosemary Jenks, JihadWatch.org scholar Robert Spencer and counterjihad writer Pamela Geller. See my blog, How to Get Uninvited to CPAC for details.
Breitbart upped its game this year and has set up a whole day of Uninvited speakers. The only truly sour note is Newt Gingrich, who likes his amnesty in Spanish. Hopefully Gingrich will get the smackdown he deserves for promoting non-assimilation for his own political advantage.
More information about the Thursday March 6 event is available at Homeland Threats. The conference will be live-streamed online.
Breitbart News Network will hosting its second annual national security forum during the Conservative Political Action Conference and expand the event from a single panel to a full day of events with top conservative leaders.
Speakers for the event include former House Speaker Newt Gingrich, former Attorney General Michael Mukasey, and Reps. Louie Gohmert (R-TX), Trent Franks (R-AZ), and Jim Bridenstine (R-OK).
Many of the speakers presenting at the Uninvited II were not invited to CPAC, which is organized by the American Conservative Union.
EMPAct America’s Henry Schwartz and Breitbart News Executive Chairman Stephen K. Bannon will be leading the summit; Center for Security Policy President and former Reagan official Frank Gaffney will moderate.
The summit will take place at the Westin Hotel around the corner from CPAC’s location at the Gaylord National Resort and Convention Center at National Harbor. This year’s “Uninvited” event will take place on Thursday, March 6, the first day of CPAC.
“Conservatives — and Americans more generally — must be informed about the various international challenges confronting the United States today and in the years to come, and what we can do to address them,” Gaffney said. “The National Security Action Conference is a much-needed corrective to the failure of CPAC to cover such topics. Better yet, it will do so with many conservative leaders and others from whom especially the CPAC audience needs to hear, but no longer can.” Continue reading this article
Free speech is increasingly under attack in the West, due to Muslim immigration, but there has been little media attention given to alarms like the attempted assassination of Danish journalist Lars Hedegaard (pictured) in Copenhagen earlier this month.
A Muslim came to his front door pretending to deliver a package, but instead drew a gun and fired at Hedegaard for his outspoken views in warning against hostile Islam. In January, he began publishing Dispatch International to report the unpleasant news about Muslims in Europe which made him a bigger target for jihadists.
One might think the press would be concerned about censorship, but in general it has been paralyzed in fear, for safety concerns and dread of racism accusations, even though Islam is clearly not a race. During the Danish cartoon controversy of 2006, only a couple American publications actually printed the drawings of Mohammed.
Regarding the Hedegaard assassination attempt, only Canada’s SunTV has paid attention on this side of the Atlantic. You don’t see this sort of coverage on Fox News.
Here in northern California, we have a case of censorship/punishment of two local radio guys Armstrong and Getty over a rip on Muslims going nutso worldwide over an unfriendly video, and suggesting that a thousand Mohammed videos should bloom for a massive desensitization project. Actually, plenty already exist, like Geert Wilders’ Fitna and The Third Jihad.
Armstrong and Getty were removed from broadcasting for one day because of the following rant:
Incidentally, I disagree with the underlying supposition that Muslims simply have issues with anger management, which can be handled by western strategies of apology (Obama’s choice) or desensitization (Armstrong & Getty here). Another exponent of the latter approach is Islam scholar Daniel Pipes who thought a major print-in of cartoons by the press would create a “routinization” that would wear out the unfriendlies: A Muhammad cartoon a day.
Unfortunately, the MSM’s cowardice about defending free speech makes Pipes’ suggestion unlikely to take root.
The deeper problem with Muslims is the violent supremacism that comes from the Koran’s religious teaching. The book of Islam has over 100 verses calling for violence against unbelievers. If there’s instruction about how to graciously accept apologies from infidels, I haven’t heard of it. Mohammad told followers to offer Islam to outsiders, but if they refused, then they should be killed.
Most Muslims don’t want the secular state with free speech that we in the West understand as democratic governance, as a Pew poll of several countries shows.
A more reasonable approach for America would be to give up on the idea of Islamic democracy and even having friendly relations. Washington should work hard to expand domestic energy supplies with the possibility in mind that a Middle East flare-up could severely reduce oil. Elites must realize that dar al-Islam is a separate, irrational universe where being nice is seen as weakness.
Above all, end Muslim immigration to this country. It is crazy to endanger American society and safety by following Europe’s descent into hell.
Here are more details about Armstrong and Getty’s enforced day off:
Popular talk radio show hosts Armstrong & Getty were absent from Clear Channel’s live programming Tuesday amid controversy around one of the hosts’ on-air comments about Muslims.
KSTE (650 AM) aired a previously recorded “Best Of” morning show on Tuesday instead of its regularly scheduled live program featuring Jack Armstrong and Joe Getty. Officials for the Sacramento station and its owner, Clear Channel Media and Entertainment, offered no explanation for the change, sparking questions and heated comments among fans on the show’s Facebook page.
During an on-air discussion Monday, Armstrong criticized the United States for what he characterized as apologizing for a crude YouTube video that mocked the Prophet Muhammad and sparked anti-U.S. uprisings around the globe. He urged listeners to make their own “anti-Muhammad ads” and post them to Al-Jazeera, the Arabic news network. “We need to bombard them with ads until they grow up,” he said. Continue reading this article
Fair Use: This site contains copyrighted material, the use of which has not always been specifically authorized by the copyright owner. We are making such material available in our efforts to advance understanding of issues related to culture and mass immigration. We believe this constitutes a "fair use" of any such copyrighted material as provided for in section 107 of the US Copyright Law. In accordance with Title 17 U.S.C. Section 107, the material on this site is distributed without profit to those who have expressed a prior interest in receiving the included information for research and educational purposes. For more information, see: http://www.law.cornell.edu/uscode/html/uscode17/usc_sec_17_00000107----000-.html. In order to use copyrighted material from this site for purposes of your own that go beyond "fair use", you must obtain permission from the copyright owner.
Have the Swedes always been such loathesome weenies? They were officially neutral in WWII, although it has recently been reported that 
Free speech is increasingly under attack in the West, due to Muslim immigration, but there has been little media attention given to alarms like the 
