Sunday, January 29, 2012

YouTube Cracks Down on British Freedom

The British Freedom Party reports that YouTube has just shut down the party’s channel for violating the company’s terms of service. The reason? BF had the temerity to post a copy of Geert Wilders’ film Fitna.

The horror!

Here’s the report from the BF website:

Censorship of Geert Wilders’ Film Fitna — Does YouTube Follow Sharia Law?

The British Freedom YouTube account has been suspended because it included Geert Wilders’ controversial film Fitna. British Freedom received the following message from YouTube:

“The YouTube Community has flagged one or more of your videos as inappropriate. Once a video is flagged, it is reviewed by the YouTube Team against our Community Guidelines. Upon review, we have determined that the following video(s) contain content in violation of these guidelines, and have been disabled:

“Fitna — The Geert Wilders Movie — YouTube.mp4 — (BritishFreedomTV)


“We encourage free speech and defend everyone’s right to express their points of view even if unpopular. But YouTube does not permit hate speech. “Hate speech” means content that promotes hatred or violence against members of a protected group (race or ethnic origin, religion, disability, gender, age, veteran status, and sexual orientation/gender identity). Sometimes there is a fine line between what is and what is not considered hate speech. If you’re not sure whether or not your content crosses the line, don’t post it.”

It seems that YouTube which claims to encourage free speech could be accused of basing its understanding of such freedom in accordance with principles of sharia. Sharia does not allow the criticism or negativity towards the holy book of Islam. The website fidh.org reports that a man in Afghanistan was sentenced to 20 years imprisonment “for having distributed a document criticising the Koran and its views on women’s rights”. Would YouTube censor a video that pointed this out? Fitna is simply a film that quotes the Koran and then shows how some people have interpreted those quotes. To call it ‘hate speech’ indicates a political agenda and an attempt to stifle debate.

Why has British Freedom been specifically targeted? There are many YouTube channels that contain the film Fitna which can be found quite easily by a simple search. Has British Freedom been targeted because it is a political party? The OIC is already trying to meddle in the internal affairs of Western democracies via its global campaign against free expression. The very nebulous and ill defined term ‘Islamophobia’ is often used to restrict debate with regard to subjects that discuss issues relating to political Islam. The Secretary General of the OIC, Ekmeleddin Ihsanoglu, has specifically referred to Western politics. Does this mean that there is now an organised campaign against specific political parties and if such a campaign exists has YouTube inadvertently found itself embroiled in it? Has YouTube now sided with the OIC and accepted its narrative? If the public are prevented from making informed decisions at election times due to politically motivated censorship then democracy looses all its true meaning.

The European Union has offered to host the next meeting of the Istanbul Process which relates to the OIC campaign against freedom of expression. If the European Union bows to OIC pressure on this subject then it means that very significant legislative changes might occur in European states that could put democracy itself in serious danger. The issue of freedom of expression is therefore the subject on ongoing political debate and materials like the film Fitna is an important component of that debate. Censorship of this film could be seen as an attempt to stifle debate on a subject of significant public interest. YouTube’s action against the British Freedom YouTube channel may cause some people to conclude that YouTube is effectively taking sides in an extremely significant political debate.

We call upon YouTube to take a position of political impartiality and reinstate the British Freedom channel with the film Fitna included on it.

Here’s a Liveleak version of Fitna.

16 comments:

Ex-Dissident said...

They rightly fear violence, but they do not realize that their actions promote violence. I doubt that YouTube, Google, and the rest of these boobs will wise up any time soon.

Anonymous said...

Fitna was on You Tube...

FITNA Full Movie

Anonymous said...

YouTube shut down Pat Condell's channel for a brief time until--apparently--they had so many complaints that they thought better of it.

I think that it might help if large numbers of us complain.

Also, they can't justify shutting down one YouTube channel if they allow other YouTube channels to show Fitna. I'm not sure, however, that I want to use this argument with them if there is any chance that they would see it as a reason to remove all postings of Fitna on YouTube.

Anonymous said...

I'd bet money that someone at #10 Downing Street made a phone call to Youtube's CEO to shut down BF on the slightest provocation that could be found.

The sad fact is nationalistic parties are anathema to the globalist plutocrats who run the EU and by proxies GB. And these people will do anything to keep them marginalized and powerless.

ENGLISHMAN said...

There was no problem,whem the house of lords viewed this film,so are they "racist" too?

Anonymous said...

I agree with the comment above. But let's not give up. They put the "Islamophobic" Pat Condell's channel back after enough complaints. The people at YouTube still have to pretend to themselves that they are in favor of freedom of speech; this can make them vulnerable to pressure from us as well as pressure from the other side.

Anonymous said...

I agree with the comment above. But let's not give up. They put the "Islamophobic" Pat Condell's channel back after enough complaints. The people at YouTube still have to pretend to themselves that they are in favor of freedom of speech; this can make them vulnerable to pressure from us as well as pressure from the other side.

War Blogger said...

I doubt the theory about No. 10. If you take a close look at most media-related corporations you'll find a strong tendency and willingness for self-censorship and a lack of accountability. In Youtube's case it's even compounded by the fact that the complaints process is an intentional mess meant to dissuade users from using it.

Anonymous said...

I have noticed of late there has been considerable concerted effort made to fragment / censor the EDL message and suspect this is an attempt to undermine one aspect of British Freedom support. I believe there are significant areas of agreement across other like minded political groups that a consensus could be reached on how to best to present continuity in public in one particular area “Islamic extremism”. Therefore I would suggest in order to circumvent recent overt media and covert operations against areas we have in common we should coordinate information for public consumption.

Fitna is still on youtube so their argument is clearly false.

Anonymous said...

Brilliant! InYouTube’s own words…

“Hate speech” means content that promotes hatred or violence against members of a protected group…” (My bold.)

…by which they really do let the cat out of the bag.

Now we know for sure what their instructions are from on high – Islam is officially a ‘Protected Group’, not equal before the law as all are supposed to be in this glorious, brave new multicultural world, but privileged, allowed to peddle their primitive filth with impunity whilst any who would point this out are silenced.

Seneca III

Anonymous said...

Correct, Seneca III.

Youtube is Sharia-compliant.

Lenick said...

I still have Fitna on my video channel.
http://www.youtube.com/user/Art19HR

Paardestaart said...

So, Youtube does not very much mind that in the free west there is a fine line sometimes between what is and what is not considered hate speechnowadays. ´Sometimes´ of course means when the islamic thought police make a lot of noise; that´s when ´someone´ thinks the fine line has been overstepped, and that is enough for Youtube.
Youtube does not want to recognize that it is censoring itself: it´s just that a fine line has been overstepped. But Fitna is on Youtube already.
So it all depends on who posted it, and with what objective; what is acceptable coming from third world imams or jihadists, is verboten for free infidel westerners..

Youtube is not prepared to say anything more than not to post if you’re not sure whether your content crosses the line - it refuses to take a stand and stand it´s ground, maybe because it is not so sure that it´s government will protect our rights

I wonder if Youtube would be prepared to openly acknowledge that freedom of speech no longer exists in the west, let alone that they are frightened. Youtube would much rather go on pretending that everything is still OK, same as it ever was, and it is hoping that all this unpleasantness will just go away..

Anonymous said...

Why not use rutube?

1389 said...

1389 Blog has the movie here, on its own hosting.

RonL said...

Google can and does take down politically incorrect sites and videos. I believe that those of us putting up these PC thought crimes should always do so both on Youtube and alternate sites like Metacafe, Veoh or Dailymotion. Similarly, I worry for the continued existance of Gates of Vienna on the Blogger platform as it is owned by Google.
I hope that you have it backed up so you can set up a site quickly at Gatesofvienna.com orGatesofvienna.org.