In Which I Get Twitter Banned

On Twitter, there’s a hashtag called #ExMuslimBecause, where folks talk about why they left Islam.

In response to someone saying that they didn’t understand why ex-Muslims had left Islam and that they were wrong for doing so, and it was only bad or deluded Muslims that left Islam, I tweeted the following:

Many ex-Muslims left Islam because of any of the many problems with a faith that e.g. allows the keeping of sex slaves, cutting off hands, and the stoning of women to death … then some of them are sentenced to death for leaving Islam.



The result? I got thrown into Twitter jail.

twitter banned.png

Seriously? That is “hateful conduct”? On what planet? This is how far we’ve fallen?

I’ve written to Twitter to appeal their arbitrary autocratic action, saying:

Dear Friends:

I tweeted the following:

“Many ex-Muslims left Islam because of any of the many problems with a faith that e.g. allows the keeping of sex slaves, cutting off hands, and the stoning of women to death … then some of them are sentenced to death for leaving Islam. Charming. w.”

All of those are simple facts. I’ve been busted for telling the truth. If anyone is violating Twitter rules … it is Islam …


We’ll see what kind of response I get …

I understand I have no right to free speech on Twitter … but the problem is the special legal exemption for Twitter from lawsuits. They are exempt from being sued because it is claimed that they are like a bulletin board. A bulletin board is not responsible for what is posted there. The claim is that they are not publishers making decisions about what is published, so they should be protected from lawsuits. This is spelled out in Section 230 of the Communications Decency Act. CDA 230, as the law is commonly known, states in the relevant section that

“No provider or user of an interactive computer service shall be treated as the publisher or speaker of any information provided by another information content provider.”

But once they start in with this kind of nonsense, and they have done so in spades, they need to be stripped of that protection. They are now indeed making decisions about what gets published … which means that they are just like all the other media outlets, and should be treated like other publishers.

We’ll see how this plays out. In the meantime, I’ve been forced to remove the entirely truthful Tweet, and I’ll be out of twitter jail in … hang on … 11 hours and change …

twitter jail.png

My best to all, and to stay out of trouble, remember that Islam is like the polar bear—protected under the Endangered Species Act without any evidence of actual endangerment …

Posted from TwitterJail on a cloudy morning, best to all,


PS—If you’re interested in a tale of me being in an actual jail, see “Behind Bars Again” … it’s a curious life, but it’s the only one I’ve got …

92 thoughts on “In Which I Get Twitter Banned

  1. I think the solution to lots of problems (net neutrality as well as this) is to give companies the choice of either being exempt from being responsible for the traffic/posts or allowing them to do whatever they want as far as policing the traffic/posts, but then being liable for anything they allow.

    There is the problem of how to prevent spam and aggressive trolls from overwhelming a comments section, but there is a big difference between dropping something as being off-topic for the current discussion (and spam is almost always off-topic 🙂 and the type of thing that twitter is doing here.


  2. I think you should stick to criticizing Christianity. You’re sure to get a free pass every time. Those poor delicate Muslims are truly decent people who are deliberately picked on for no good reason at all.
    Why don’t you understand? SARC.

    Liked by 2 people

        • I wasn’t talking to you. I was saying it to @ngard2016 that you should stop criticizing Muslims and mind your own religion. Islam is a beautiful religion and if you ever study it you will find out how much peace there really is in this religion.♥


          • For your information, Islam is not a terrorist ideology. You christians just like to jump to stupid conclusions without studying anything. WHY WONT YOU JUST LEAVE THE MUSLIMS ALONE AND FOCUS ON YOUR OWN RELIGION??? WHY DO YOU CALL MUSSLIMS TERRORISTS WHEN REALLY YOURE THE TERRORISTS?? WHY? WHY? WHY??


          • @TheRealFatema

            It has something to do with them chanting “Death to America”, the 9/11 attacks, and the calls to kill every Jew in Israel (among many other things)

            If they were willing to live and let live, so would the rest of the world. The fact that they refuse to allow this in their own territory and elsewhere in the world leaves everyone else a choice, commit suicide (over the long term) or fight back.

            Back in the middle ages, The Catholic Church and countries under it’s control had similar problems with the idea of live-and-let-live (but the Crusades were a response to attacks by Islamic countries). Luther and the Reformation didn’t solve things in the short run (see things like the 30 years war for when the Christianity wasn’t tolerant), but they started the series of changes that eventually led to the different Churches backing down and accepting that individuals have a right to decide their own religion.

            Islam has not gone through this yet. they still are preaching and practicing ‘conversion by the sword’ and that requires that people who don’t want to be ‘converted’ fight back.


          • Anyone who cries to have babies killed because of who their parent are is EVIL plain and simple. In this case it’s not even for what their parents have done but simply due to their race/religion.
            And Israel is killing very few Muslims, outside of those who are attacking them (it’s a sad fact that when you return fire on attackers who hide among civilians, you are going to kill civilians as a side effect, but that’s the fault of the attackers who choose where and when to attack, not the people returning fire)


          • Excuse me, Israel is killing a *lot* of Muslims. You’re just too arrogant to admit it. You christians just think the world revolves around you. Well, you might be surprised to find out that it, in fact, *doesn’t* . Please care for someone’s feelings other than you. Please, I request you.


          • This just in. TheRealFatema may not have heard yet. Wives are disposable. And she seems unaware that Muslim men are allowed to beat their wives.

            “Saudi Arabia has adopted a new regulation that requires courts to notify women by text message if they’ve been divorced. The forward-thinking law is designed to crack down on the kingdom’s penchant for “secret divorces”.
            “Before the new rule, Saudi men were able to end their marriages without telling their wives.”

            “A fatwa issued by Turkey’s Directorate of Religious Affairs in December 2017 ruled that unhappy unions can be dissolved via telephone call, fax, letter or even text message, using a method known as a “triple talaq” divorce.”

            I wish Fatima would tell us where that peace-loving Koran is. She says to go study it, but whenever we (or Muslims) take a closer look, that is not what we find. The peace in the Koran is similar to R.I.P. Is she talking about the early early early parts? Before PBUH invented jihad?


          • Oh dear, Fatemah. @ngard 2016 was being ironic. Me, I’m rather well-disposed to Islam as the path of knowledge that complements the path of sacrifice in Christianity and of law in Judaism. But it’s in dreadful shape, and you can’t dismiss the monstrosities committed in its name as the acts of an aberrant few.


          • wonderingscot: “Islam as the path of knowledge that complements the path of sacrifice in Christianity and of law in Judaism”
            That’s an intriguing comment. What does it mean? In what way does Islam complement those other two religions? All three are related and have elements in common. The word ‘complements’ implies that Islam has elements which add something good to Christianity and Judaism What is that?

            BTW, you are off base about the “path of sacrifice in Christianity”. Sacrifice is about as old as religion, human sacrifices and animal sacrifices both. Christianity’s first and last sacrifice was Jesus. Buddhism is about the only other religion without sacrifice. Islam has an interesting twist, that a sacrifice is not an offering to the gods, but rather a submission to the will of Allah. See for example,


          • The problem with Islam is that the Muslims may not question or criticize it. And they don’t, in any manner. Even in very moderate countries such as Indonesia, where, until recently, politics and religion stayed in their lanes, and women had equal standing with men, (and where I lived out a large part of my life).
            In that regard (being unable to tolerate any criticism) it lags some 500 years behind christianity, which was the same until the middle ages.

            With the strong support of the US and the UK behind them, the Saudis will continue to export their severe wahhabism in the form of trained imams, scholarships and the construction of their mosques and madrassas as ‘assistance’ to other countries, and will affect the politics of Indonesia, Pakistan, Afghanistan…. and others. Unfortunately the US will very soon choose to go to war against Iran and further bolster the Saudis in the process.

            And ‘peaceful and beautiful’ seems terribly lacking when one seeks beauty in islamic prayer to bury a loved one. It is all about the inevitability of death, and punishment and interrogations: (Don’t you just love the way the religious make all this up and present it with such confidence?).


          • Muslims don’t criticize Islam because there is nothing to criticize of it and if you think there is then that is just because you haven’t studied Islam deeply. Don’t think that you can just jump to stupid conclusions and judge Islam only from those so-called Muslims. I assure you, Islam is not like that at all. My request to you, dear brother, is to think, and then speak.


          • Islam is not the codification of evil. You’re only judging it from those so called Muslims. Don’t jump to stupid conclusions without deeply studying. And here’s another thing: Educate yourself and stop being so judgemental. I have no idea where these uneducated psychopaths come from who know nothing but to rant on subjects they clearly know nothing about. Sick of these people.


          • And I keep telling you, I have studied islam indepth and at great length. It is the codification of evil. It gives evil acts the veneer of god’s approval. You can do anything you wish to infidels and sanctimoniously proclaim “god” commanded you to. That is evil and you revel in it.


          • I do not revel it okay. Stop saying that. And for your information you don’t just do anything you want and say that God has commanded you to do so. How stupid can you get??? Islam forbids us from being evil, hurting others, etc. and we don’t do these things just in the name of God whenever we feel like it. Some Muslims might do these things but it’s wrong for you to judge Islam from those so called Muslims. Give me a few reasons of how it’s the codification of evil. Then I’ll explain to you how it isn’t. And at the moment, I don’t want to waste my precious time arguing with such an uneducated person anyway.


          • And yet you do. The killing of infidels and apostates fills you with holy joy, the subjugating of any who oppose you is your goal. Lying continuously to achieve your holy jihad against all infidels is all you have.

            Now, lie some more. It is all you are, a lie and no soul.


          • markx: “Don’t you just love the way the religious make all this up and present it with such confidence?”

            Exactly, that is how religions work. Religion is the ultimate group-think. It’s purpose is to give answers to questions about the unknowable, to create a myth that everyone can go along with, to believe in. Within one religious group, everybody agrees, so the amazing consensus means it’s true, and it gives super confidence.

            Of course, you have to ignore all those other religions and factions. They are just wrong. Or as Pauli would say, not even wrong.

            Having said that, religion is one of the few civilizing forces (it’s hard to say that with a straight face) keeping a lid on human nature, which is barely a step removed from the law of the jungle. If God didn’t exist, we would have to invent him. “Si Dieu n’existait pas, il faudrait l’inventer.” Voltaire.

            We did invent God, several times, and evolved him mercilessly. Like so:

            Or, this one is even better, but it requires a whole wall to display it:

            Since we started with Islam, here are a few words in praise of Prophet Mo. Mo grew up in the middle of nowhere, but the big trades routes crossed through. So Mo met lots of people, from various different cultures and they told stories. In particular, they told stories from the Bible and stuff. They say Mo couldn’t read and write but there is no doubt that Mo had a super memory. So much so that a lot of what he wrote has been called plagiarism (note that was not illegal at the time). But that put Mo in a position to improve upon the stories he heard. Such as this one.

            In the Bible, God told Abraham to kill his son Isaac and Abraham submitted although Isaac was spared at the last moment. What kind of God would do that? Who would want a God like that? So Mo fixed it (I’m told, although versions vary). Instead of God telling Abraham, he has Abraham have a dream in which God says to kill his son. Subtle, clever.


          • Click to access Rapport_iran_2019-GB-BD.pdf


            “The Islamic revolution marks the start of an era where the death penalty became a “normal” part of people’s everyday lives.”

            “Many of the trials leading to death sentences are unfair according to interna- tional standards. The use of torture to extract confessions is widespread in Iran.”

            “This report does not include extra-judicial killings inside the prison.”

            “However, the number of crimes punishable by death in Iran is among the highest in the world.”

            “The Iranian Penal Code has described several execution methods, including hanging, firing squad, crucifixion and stoning. However, hanging has been the main method of execution and the only method used since 2010.”

            And activists against the death penalty are put in prison.

            The rose-colored view of Islam in Iran is more like blood-red.


      • muslims are easy to understand, they openly hate everyone who is not muslim, they actively attack anyone who is not muslim, they murder their own children and women because they are f**ked up in the head. islam is the codification of human evil. They surpass the Catholic Church at every level! And no, I ain’t catholic.


        • Muslims are not a bit like that! That’s just you misunderstanding Islam! And how dare you use swearwords for other religions?? Don’t you have the least bit respect for other people? Islam is so *not* the codification of human evil? Who the hell told you that? I’m a Muslim and I know more about Islam than you do. All you non-Muslims say that Muslims are terrorists when in reality, *you’re* the terrorists. Haven’t you seen the Jews killing all those poor Muslims in Palestine and Israel? And what about Trump creating mayhem in Syria between the Muslims? Seriously, we are decent people. We follow Islam, the religion of peace. And if you’re thinking that’s ridiculous then right. I agree that a lot of Muslims are giving Islam a bad name because of their behaviour, but don’t you believe that there is only so much oppression a human can take? In Paris, having beards and wearing Hijab are considered signs of terrorism. Lots of Muslims in lots of different countries don’t get religious liberty when they *should* . All these religions opposing Islam- it’s just ridiculous. I assure you @2hotel9 that if you take out the time to study Islam, you will surely see what a beautiful religion it really is. I understand your feelings. I know what you feel. That Muslims are terrorists and I don’t blame you for this mistaken belief because of all those Muslims’ acts. But I promise you, they are only behaving this way because either they or their families are being oppressed and they are retaliating. Or they have gotten het up seeing the treatment of Muslims in different countries. I hope that you don’t think Muslims are terrorists anymore. I am not abusing you and I hope that you change your view about Islam. See, you should judge Islam from the *good* Muslims, not from the ones who engage in immoral acts because I assure you, they will get their punishment. I hope you don’t think about Islam the same way.♥


          • Fatema, you say:

            I agree that a lot of Muslims are giving Islam a bad name because of their behaviour, but don’t you believe that there is only so much oppression a human can take?

            Fascinating. Not only do many Muslims behave badly, as you yourself admit, but then you blame us for your bad behavior!

            And you wonder why Muslims are not liked?

            Fatema, Muslims treat women like dogs. The testimony of a man in Sharia courts has the same weight as the testimony of two women … so if a man and a woman face off in court, the man always wins. And you support that?

            And women are forced to wear totally enclosing, demeaning garments. The Muslims claim that it’s a good thing that women have to wear them … well, if wearing the hijab is such a good thing, how come the men don’t wear them too? And you support that?

            Finally, according to the Koran and the Hadiths, Muhammed was a pedophile who married a girl of six and had sex with her when she was nine, and who kept sex slaves for his own pleasure. And you support that?

            The Koran also says that if someone leaves the religion that they should be killed. And this is still practiced today, as in the cases of Ayaan Hirsa Ali, and Salman Rushdie. Yes, and under Sharia Law, women still get stoned to death … and you support that?

            And you want us to believe that the Koran and the Hadiths are worth following? Sorry, not buying it.



          • What do you mean by saying that Muslims treat women like dogs?? Islam treats women like *pearls* to be accurate. Islam tells women to wear enclosing garments, like pearls are enclosed in a clam, so that they can hide their beauty from unknown people who will do nothing but misuse it. Do you like seeing women going outside dressed half-naked, exposing all her woman parts? Do you want that? Islam permits women only to expose her beauty to her husband for her own protection because a husband values the beauty and does not misuse it. Islam permits women only to expose her beauty to her husband and some other boys who are called “Mehrams”. Mehrams include father, father’s brothers, mother’s brothers etc. And when you say that why doesn’t Islam require men to wear hijab then for your information in Surah Noor Allah first told *men to keep their gazes down and not stare at girls and then told women to wear hijab* so that means that men are also not permitted to stare at girls. And if you must know, there are some other things as well that come in men’s hijab. Also if you think the at woman wearing Hijab is unfeminist then let me tell you, *it is actually more feminist because with hijab, women will not be treated as objects in front of other people. Hope the aforementioned cleared your misconceptions about hijab.
            Also I would like to talk to the genius who said that Prophet Muhammad (Peace and blessings be upon him) was a paedophile. Seems like that person doesn’t know better than to criticize a person of pure character. Who told you that anyway and how old are you to believe in such a disgusting myth? Because that’s all it is- a disgusting myth. If you want to know how then please consider the following four points closely:
            1) If he was a paedophile then why did he marry Khadija, a 40-year-old woman, and remained in a relationship with her for 25 years?
            2) If he was a paedophile, why did he willingly marry all his 12 wives who were 22, with only Aisha being the exception?
            3) There were hundreds of his strong opponents who had ideological differences with him and blamed him for various of his thoughts but they never said he was a paedophile and those people were way more educated than you and other people who go around saying that Muhammad is a paedophile in the mistaken belief that he is.
            4) If he was a paedophile, why did he wait 3 long years to consummate his relationship with Aisha?
            Hope that clears your misconception about prophet Muhammad (Peace and blessings be upon him).
            The Prophet Muhammad (P.B.U.H) only ordered us to kill a Muslim who left Islam because at that time there were these people who were Muslims in the day and turned into non-Muslims in the evening just to torment the Muslims and it was disrespectful to them so that’s why he said so. People are just misunderstanding his statements. I’m sorry if they are still practicing it wrongly in many countries.
            By the way, Allah said, “Those who commit adultery, men or women, give each of them a hundred lashes.” Qur’an 24:2. It should be noted that Allah said *both* men and women should be penalised for adultery and not just women, which is generally assumed.
            Also notably, there is no verse that says men or women should be *stoned*. That’s just another misconception. I hope this comment clears all your misconceptions about Islam and if you have more, you can email me
            My request to you is that please study Islam properly before jumping to mad conclusions as people normally do but I assure you, I don’t blame you for any of these misconceptions. Many get these kind of wrong beliefs and we should correct them and not rebuke the person who made the mistake.
            Thank you.


          • TheRealFatema wrote, “If he was a paedophile, why did he willingly marry all his 12 wives who were [above] 22, with only Aisha being the exception?”

            Q: What do you call someone who pays for his groceries most of the time, and only occasionally shoplifts?
            A: A thief.

            Q: What do you call someone who tells the truth most of the time, and only occasionally lies?
            A: A liar.

            Q: What do you call someone with many adult wives or mistresses, and one nine- or ten-year-old?
            A: A pedophile.


          • Wrong. Absolutely wrong. He was not a paedophile because he willingly married all his wives who were above 22. Please search about him being a paedophile because he so isn’t. It’s just you stupid chritians’ misconception because you want to criticize him in every possible way. You should be ashamed. And may I ask you how old are you to believe in this disgusting myth anyway? Do you literally believe every myth presented before you like that? And what about all those other educated people who opposed Prophet Muhammad? They knew more than you and never ONCE said that he was a paedophile. And he wasn’t because wouldn’t he want to consummate his relationship with Aisha before those three years?? Seriously, you should be ashamed of yourself, criticizing a person of such pure character like that. I once heard about a book about the best people to walk the earth that just published recently and it had the Prophet mentioned as the NUMBER ONE in this. And get this, it was written by a christian. Now this is a christian who doesn’t call the beloved Prophet Muhammad a brutal warlord like all those others do. Please research about him properly before jumping to stupid conclusions. And who’s the flipping genius who told you that “a paedophile is what you call someone with many adult wives and one nine year old”? Who’s the idiot that told you that? Aargh you christians are driving me insane by jumping to mad conclusions without doing research.


          • At least Mohammed didn’t have Aisha’s husband murdered — unlike Rayhana.

            After the Banu Qurayza Jews surrendered to Mohammed’s army, he had all the men beheaded, and took the women as slaves. One of the newly widowed Jews was Rayhana, whom he subsequently married.

            Another of his wives was also a widow thanks to Mohammed. Juwayriya (then about 20yo) was widowed when Mohammed’s army attacked and defeated the much smaller Banū al-Muṣṭaliq village, and took Juwayriya captive. Her husband was apparently either casualty in the battle, or killed afterward for having fought against the Muslim attackers.

            The story was similar for another of his wives, Safiyya, a Jew of the Banu Nadir tribe. Her husband was either a casualty in battle, or killed afterward, by the victorious Muslims at Khaybar.

            Religion of peace, eh?


          • Everything you have said is wrong. Haven’t you read about my comment in which I have explained your misconceptions about Islam? They were his wives if you must know, and they loved and admired him. Never once did they complain about anything he did or said. What do you know about Islam anyway? You’re just one of those people who literally believe every myth presented before them. You haven’t even read the hadiths properly, because in them, all the 12 wives of the Prophet are admiring him in every way, so stop criticizing him and calling him things he never was.


          • Fatema, try to understand that sex with a nine year old is paedophilia regardless of how many other women older than 22 he had sex with. Till you can justify sex with a child, any child, you haven’t addressed the issue. Just because he waited 3 years does not address the issue either. She’s still a child at nine.

            And as far as this goes “You haven’t even read the hadiths properly, because in them, all the 12 wives of the Prophet are admiring him in every way, so stop criticizing him and calling him things he never was.”

            So we should believe propaganda written by the men who followed him as to how his wives felt about him? Of course it’s part of your religion so you hold to it by faith but we don’t have to accept it as justification for a rape of a nine year old. Oh, and besides, the Prophet has said that the testimony of women is only worth half that of a man so they only count of six men’s testimony.


        • Most of them actually don’t. Too many do. But you can’t hope to understand and live with a billion of your fellows if you limit your view to such a caricature. Islam is deeply troubled, but it stretches across the world’s heartland, from Morocco across Central Asia to China and southeast to Indonesia. That’s a billion people, raising families, going to work, fearing God, doing their best. The mad fucks by no means represent all of them.


          • The problem is that the religion has justification for the actions of those terrorists, abuse of women, slavery, and murder of apostates. The fact that most aren’t violent is the aberration.


          • I limit my view to reality, which is clearly visible throughout the majority muslim countries every day of the week. I know several muslims who immigrated to America in the 1970s and early ’80s, their grandchildren are where the problems are arising now, several of them have gone fundamentalist, two left America and subsequently died fighting with terrorist groups in Iraq and Yemen. First gen thanks God they escaped the terror of islam, the second views it as something in the past, in the third you begin to have those who fantasize about the glory of islam and some of them actually delude themselves into going through with it. islam can not be integrated into modern human culture, modern human culture must be dragged down to islam’s level.

            I leave you a last point to ponder. I do not submit. I will never submit. I will fight the malignant cancer of islam till my final breath.


          • wonderingscot January 17, 2019 at 3:29 am

            Most of them actually don’t. Too many do. But you can’t hope to understand and live with a billion of your fellows if you limit your view to such a caricature. Islam is deeply troubled, but it stretches across the world’s heartland, from Morocco across Central Asia to China and southeast to Indonesia. That’s a billion people, raising families, going to work, fearing God, doing their best. The mad fucks by no means represent all of them.

            scot, unfortunately, most of them actually do … according to the Pew Trust poll:

            About eight-in-ten Muslims in Egypt and Pakistan (82% each) endorse the stoning of people who commit adultery; 70% of Muslims in Jordan and 56% of Nigerian Muslims share this view.

            Muslims in Pakistan and Egypt are also the most supportive of whippings and cutting off of hands for crimes like theft and robbery; 82% in Pakistan and 77% in Egypt favor making this type of punishment the law in their countries, as do 65% of Muslims in Nigeria and 58% in Jordan.

            When asked about the death penalty for those who leave the Muslim religion, at least three-quarters of Muslims in Jordan (86%), Egypt (84%) and Pakistan (76%) say they would favor making it the law; in Nigeria, 51% of Muslims favor and 46% oppose it.

            Heck, even in Indonesia, one of the most liberal Muslim countries, some 72% of the people polled want Sharia Law …

            So yes. Most of them actually do. It is NOT a caricature. It is NOT just Christianity in funny hats. It is a death cult, and it contains the death penalty for leaving the cult. On my planet, that’s not just another religion. That is a recipe for disaster, and it has been a huge problem for the world’s non-Muslim population for 1400 years now.



  3. I grew up in a Communist country, a self-declared paradise. My friend Tom signed a “Charter 77” [] and got invited to a police station. He said “We have a free speech here. I can say or sign anything I want.” Policeman: Yes you can say anything you want – but you have to bear consequences. Tom: Then we have a freedom to murder, if we are ready to bear consequences.

    Liked by 1 person

    • Reminds me of the joke where an American and a Russian are talking.

      The American says “In America, we have freedom of speech. I can stand on a soapbox in front of the White House and criticize President Trump all I want!”

      “That’s nothing,” said the Russian, “we have that as well. Just like you, I can stand on a soapbox in front of the Kremlin and criticize President Trump all I want!”


      Liked by 1 person

  4. Once you are sprung repost using Christian and Christianity instead, see how long till you get pinched again! Mayhaps we could start a betting pool or drinking game on how long it will take.


  5. Willis, I am about to promote this post in a tweet, Given that it contains the shockingly hateful thing you said about followers of the Religion of Peace, I wonder if I shall also be sienced?

    Best to you and your gorgeous ex-fiancee, and Merry Christmas. If I also am Twitter-silenced, you won’t see my Christmas Greeting there.


    Liked by 2 people

  6. Seems you fed them some facts of which they were unaware.
    Now they have indigestion.
    Clearing that up could take a long while.


  7. Stay out of twitter. I never joined twitter or facebook, and am profoundly grateful for the fact.

    If you stay in, then you have to play by their rules, and they subtly change your thinking. You have to become politically correct to survive, and will find yourself self-censoring.

    Your post breached no twitter rules. You will find, if they can be bothered to reply to you, that what you said was ‘problematic’. That means it disturbs us, so shut up. You are better off out of such a forum…


      • I used to think that – but it’s very subtle. Remember what Feynman said about who the easiest person was for you to fool?

        You will also find,that if you are only allowed to say what a company deems acceptable, then people will think that this is what you really believe. Working with broken tools is not a good idea, either in carpentry or the development of ideas…


  8. A more insidious trick Twitter frequently does is shadowbanning (ghosting) conservatives’ comments.

    Twitter is sneaky. They don’t want blacklisted conservatives to know they’re being censored, so Twitter usually lets let them tweet — but hides their tweets from everyone else. To the person whose tweet is shadowbanned, it appears that everything is normal, except that nobody bothered to respond to the tweet. The actual reason nobody responded to it is that no one else saw it.

    When Twitter shadowbans my tweets, they usually just hide them in the list of replies to other tweets. If another user has the direct link to a shadowbanned tweet, they can still view it, but otherwise they’ll never see it.

    Here’s an example: a tweet by climate alarmist Karl Gary:

    I posted what was apparently the only reply to that tweet, but you can’t see it, unless I give you the direct link to my reply:

    Here’s a pair of screenshots:

    Here’s another example (one of many). It is another tweet by a climate alarmist:

    If you view that tweet, you’ll see only four replies to it, But there are actually five. The one you cannot see is the shadowbanned reply from me. This is what I see, when logged into my twitter account:

    The only way for you to see my tweet is if I give you the direct URL to it:

    Shadowbanning is widely & rightly considered underhanded. Twitter has publicly claimed that they never shadow-ban. Here’s a 1/11/2018 FoxNews article by Christopher Carbone, reporting Twitter’s claim that they never shadow-ban:

    The company also pushed back on the notion that it uses “shadowbanning” as a way to block certain opposing viewpoints on the site:

    “Twitter does not shadowban accounts. We do take actions to downrank accounts that are abusive, and mark them accordingly so people can still to click through and see these Tweets if they so choose.”


    I don’t know whether or not this is related, but it often happens immediately after I “follow” a conservative:


  9. Mr. Eschebach,

    It is increasingly difficult (if not downright impossible) to find anyplace on the internet where one may exercise one’s First Amendment rights.

    Main stream media has led the way in this demonstration of hypocrisy, intolerance and authoritarianism.


    • The only site of which I’m aware is the site. I don’t follow anyone there, but should anyone want to post, they don’t censor – with all the attendant problems and trolls – but you are free to speak your mind.


  10. It is increasingly difficult (if not downright impossible) to find anyplace on the internet where one may exercise one’s First Amendment rights.

    It’s the same in shopping malls. I don’t remember who wrote about this, maybe Neil Postman or Noam Chomsky, some 15 years (?) ago:

    In a public place, I can stand on a box and say (almost) whatever I want. But, the public places (streets and parks and such) are disappearing and being replaced by shopping malls and more recently by Facebook and Twitter.

    Those places are privately owned and I have only the rights the owner grants me. A pity.


  11. If some software scanned your post for certain words or phrases, it would have found several threats and violent acts, and it would probably not care whether you made them or someone else did.

    If some human read it, who is to say that it was understood? It was not written at the requisite Grade 3 level. Grammar is hard you know. Sarc, but for all I know it is in the fine print EULA.

    If you reposted replacing the name of a certain religion with a euphemism, say TRWMNBC, would it be banned?


  12. So the interesting question is: why hasn’t Twitter banned President Trump? He tweets more violations of Twitter’s alleged rules “against hateful conduct” in a day than you can manage in a month. (At least I’ve been assured this is true by CNN, MSNBC, ABC, CBS and all those gals on “The View”).

    But President Trump is good for business.


    • Re Trump’s tweets. There is the obvious scale of the big guy. If he got shadow-banned there would be no plausible deniability. Also think “progressive” for a moment here. They think letting Trump sound off is giving him rope to hang himself.


  13. Willis: “In response to someone saying that they didn’t understand why ex-Muslims had left Islam and that they were wrong for doing so, and it was only bad or deluded Muslims that left Islam, I tweeted the following:”

    He implies it’s worse than we thought. For Christians, there are Christians who only come out at Christmas and Easter, there are even CHINOs. Practicing versus in name only. Same thing for Jews, and probably every other religion which is not a cult. But for cults and Islam and other sects, that is not allowed. You must be all-in, true believers. In totaliarian states no one dares to be a moderate.

    In the case of the two Danish girls who were slaughtered by four Moroccan extreme-Muslims, how many moderate-Muslims are going to say what a terrible act was done in the name of Allah?


  14. Try this and see what happens:

    “1/2 Many North American Baptists split from the Baptist denomination because of the many problems with a faith that e.g. allowed the keeping of slaves, cutting off part or all of a foot to prevent a slave’s escape, and non-consensual sex with enslaved women … some of whom were sentenced to death for fighting back against their ‘masters’.

    2/2 The modern analogy to Islam is obvious. “


  15. As Jordan Peterson often states, a big problem with banning hate speech is the question of who gets to decide what constitutes hate speech. One must, in the spirit of Murphy’s law, assume that the worst possible person will eventually be the one making that decision.

    Liked by 1 person

    • Certainly the “consensus” decides. Totalitarianism is extreme consensus (97%?). Probably dissidents in the USSR numbered ~3%. Sounds familiar.


  16. TheRealFatema January 4, 2019 at 12:20 am



    Because you put prisoners in cages and burn them to death. Because you kill people who try to leave the religion. Because you flew jet airplanes into the Twin Towers. Because you sentence cartoonists to death for drawing cartoons. Because you keep sex slaves. Because you bury women up to the neck and stone them to death with carefully selected small stones to prolong their agony. Because you cut people’s heads off, film the execution, and post it on social media. Here’s a list of hundreds of Islamic terror attacks JUST IN 2018.

    THAT’S why we call Muslims “terrorists”—because far too many of them are terrorists, and the religion approves of terror.



  17. Fatema, your logic is hilarious. I pointed out that Muhammad married Aisha when she was six, and had sex with her when she was nine.

    You respond:

    ” And he wasn’t [a pedophile] because wouldn’t he want to consummate his relationship with Aisha before those three years??”

    I see … Muhammad was not a pedophile because he waited to have sex with her until she was nine …




  18. Willis,

    I agree with you that Twitter (and Facebook and Alphabet) should lose the exemptions. Unlike bulletinboards, Twitter and Facebook excercise editorial review and are therefore responsible for what is on their sites. Alphabet’s Google has been artificailly manipulating search results with the acknowledged intent of influencing elections. Their behavoir as the “Good Censor” (an oxymoron of the first order) should be grounds for revoking their exemption.



    • My answer to the Net Neutrality problem is to give companies the choice of what rules to operate under.

      If they are ‘common carriers’ they are not liable for what people post (but are not allowed to exercise [much] control over what people do on their networks, as long as they have paid for the bandwidth)

      If they want to regulate what goes over their network (or what content is uploaded) they can do so, but then they are liable for anything that they allow that’s found to be illegal.

      Now, even in the ‘common carrier’ world, companies should be able to offer filters (child safe, etc) for people who want to use them, but there need to be ways to challenge being filtered out. Every time that filters have been created, they catch things that should not be filtered. When filters are mandated for Schools and Libraries, having the filters filter out things for political reasons (like Prager U) you have problems.


      • David,

        I agree with you. The situation with the internet today has become a distorted caricature of what Twitter, Facebook and Alphabet claim that it is. They exercise control which is highly subjective and claim that “mistakes” are due to algorithms while expecting their users to ignore that these algorithms are coded by humans and are thus likely to have the same biases as their creators. No control is far preferable to what we have today.


You are invited to add your comments. Please QUOTE THE EXACT WORDS YOU ARE DISCUSSING so we can all be clear on your subject.

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in: Logo

You are commenting using your account. Log Out /  Change )

Google photo

You are commenting using your Google account. Log Out /  Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )

Connecting to %s