Wednesday, January 22, 2020

Is Slavery Legal under Islamic Social Norms Today?

Is Slavery Legal Under Islamic Social Norms Today?

      It is understood that not everyone who says they are Muslim has the read Qur'an. It is also accepted that not every Muslim has read Sharia. But for those who claim this religion as their own, they must understand that certain beliefs come with the claim, irregardless with if they knew of the belief, accept the belief personally or not. This is the same for all faith structures.  When people come from countries where shariah is stated as the ruling authority in their country to your country, they bring those political beliefs.

Under Western Civilization slavery, which had existed for centuries no matter the race, was outlawed in the mid 19th century. It is now the 21st century. Throughout the world, slavery is considered to be one of the most heinous crimes. Prostitution is often seen as a form of slavery, when someone controls how much the woman/man sells their body for and determines how much they will give them if anything at all. But is actual slavery of a person is akin to the 19th century slaves on American plantations is permissible under Islam today? Read on for the answer?

The Quran has several references in it to slaves and the treatment of them. Most of these references are to those serving as sex slaves.

Sura 23:1-6: “Certainly will the believers have succeeded: Certainly will the believers have succeeded: They who are during their prayer humbly submissive And they who turn away from ill speech And they who are observant of zakah And they who guard their private parts Except from their wives or those their right hands possess, for indeed, they will not be blamed.”

Sura 33:52: “Not lawful to you, [O Muhammad], are [any additional] women after [this], nor [is it] for you to exchange them for [other] wives, even if their beauty were to please you, except what your right hand possesses. And ever is Allah , over all things, an Observer.
Sura 70:29-31: And those who guard their private parts Except from their wives or those their right hands possess, for indeed, they are not to be blamed  But whoever seeks beyond that, then they are the transgressors –

The phrase right hand possesses, refers directly to the female slaves owned by Muslims. Muhammad was a slave owner. He had numerous slaves both white and black. There are recorded in the Hadiths.


Narrated `Umar: I came and behold, Allah's Apostle was staying on a Mashroba (attic room) and a black slave of Allah's Apostle was at the top if its stairs. I said to him, "(Tell the Prophet) that here is `Umar bin Al- Khattab (asking for permission to enter)." Then he admitted me. (Bukhari 7263).


Allah's Messenger  was on a journey and he had a black slave called Anjasha, and he was driving the camels (very fast, and there were women riding on those camels). Allah's Messenger said, "Waihaka (May Allah be merciful to you), O Anjasha! Drive slowly (the camels) with the glass vessels (women)!" (Bukhari 6161)


It was narrated that Abu Hurairah said: "We were with the Messenger of Allah in the year of Khaibar, and we did not get any spoils of war except for wealth, goods and clothes. Then a man from Banu Ad-Dubaib, who was called Rifa'ah bin Zaid, gave the Messenger of Allah a black slave who was called Mid'am. The Messenger of Allah set out for Wadi Al-Qura. When we were in Wadi Al-Qura, while Mid'am was unloading the luggage of the Messenger of Allah, an arrow came and killed him. The people said: 'Congratulations! You will go to Paradise,' but the Messenger of Allah said: 'No, by the One in Whose hand is my soul! The cloak that he took from the spoils of war on the Day of Khaibar is burning him with fire.' When the people heard that, a man brought one or two shoelaces to the Messenger of Allah and the Messenger of Allah said: 'One or two shoelaces of fire.'" (Sunan an-Nasa'i 3827)


In Pakistan on May 31, 2010, talk show host Mubasher Lucman, interviewed Islamic clerics Maulana Naeemi, Mohammed Siddiqui, and Allama Zaheer on Pakistani television channel Express News on various topics. Amongst them the topic of slavery came up.
Screen shot: 


Mubasher Lucman: "I have a question. I will move to the details later. Does Islam allow slave trading?"

Allama Zaheer: "Islam allows to trade slaves where there are established markets for this purpose. Taking new [i.e. free] men as slaves is neither allowed in Islam nor does Islam encourage it."

Mubasher Lucman: "The offspring from a slave is a slave, isn't it?"

Allama Zaheer: "No. There are a number of conditions under which an offspring of a slave is free. If the owner wants to set him free, he is... If somebody marries a concubine and she gets pregnant, the offspring is not a slave. After marrying a concubine either the master can set her free or can marry her to another man, but cannot sell her again...It's not that slave of a child is always slave..."

Mubasher Lucman: "What are the conditions in your eyes?"

Maulana Naeemi: "...First it is important to note that slaves were sold and markets were established even before Islam... How were they enslaved? They were captured in conditions of wars; were abducted from roadsides; children were kidnapped by force and sold; slaves were leading a miserable life before Islam.

"The conception of slavery in Islam is not to continue its practice, but the concept of slavery was allowed because it existed at that time; ending it suddenly could have resulted in a host of problems. Therefore, the concept of slavery was adopted but a number of steps were stipulated so that it is not thought that slavery is permitted in Islam, that slavery will continue; rather, along with those steps, slavery began moving toward its end from society.

"Insofar as the question is how the people were enslaved... and how those slaves were treated is concerned; during the times of the prophet (peace be upon him) a battle was fought from where war booty was brought; among them was a beautiful lady. She was given to a companion of the prophet (peace be upon him). The prophet took her back from him, sent her to Mecca and a few Muslim prisoners there were gotten free in exchange for her. There are a number of similar examples where slaves brought from wars were used for prisoner exchange, or were set free against some payment, or most importantly were set free as a goodwill gesture."[1]


This interview included a question about how they would get slaves since many believed if they had signed an alliance with the United Nations that they would be forbidden from taking slaves from any country that had also become part of the UN. This left many questions indeed. There was also an exception to this rule. That will shock you!

Screen Shot:
Mubasher Lucman: "Suppose today, if we go to war against Kufr [infidel world] on the Kashmir issue, win it, and bring slave men and women..."

Mohammed Siddiqui: "You should consult religious scholars; they are of the opinion that the countries which have signed the Charter of the United Nations Organization are not permitted to take the citizens of other member countries as slaves."

Mubasher Lucman: "I am talking about the perspective of Islam, not of the UN as the UN is not following Islam."

Mohammad Siddiqui: "Why are you arguing about it?"

Mubasher Lucman: "I am not arguing about it. I am trying to understand it."


Mubasher Lucman: "How are UN and Islam linked?"

Mohammed Siddiqui: "The link between the UN and Islam is that we have been ordered by the Koran to keep our accords. If an accord is not against Islam, we are bound by it."

Allama Zaheer: "Maulana Mohammed Siddiqui has rightly said that we cannot take the citizens of the countries as slaves who have diplomatic relations with us."

Mubasher Lucman: "What if we go to a war against Israel, can we take slaves and concubines as we don't have diplomatic relations with them...?"

Allama Zaheer: "Yes, we can. It is permitted to have concubines [from Israel]."

Mubasher Lucman: "What do you say Maulana Aslam Siddiqui? Did you listen to Maulana Ibtisam Zaheer?"

Mohammed Siddiqui: "No, I could not."

(Mubasher Lucman repeats the statement by Ibtisam Elahi)

Mohammed Siddiqui: "We do not have any accord with the countries with which we have no diplomatic relations..."

Mubasher Lucman: "So, we can take [slaves] from Israel, if we achieve victory over Israel and get manpower?"

Mohammed Siddiqui: "Imagine! I am surprised how far-fetched you think..."

[Interruptions and laughter...]

Maulana Naeemi: "Islamic laws are very old and true. The law from the times of the caliphs is that you have to keep your promises. If you have an accord of prisoner exchange with a country, you have to give the war captives back to them."

Allama Zaheer [interrupts]: "You gave the example of Israel very positively. They are Jews. We could have married with their women in case of a victory, but we don't need that as we don't have diplomatic relations; so if we win and get slave women, and if the emir of the army distributes concubines, we can keep them as concubines if we get some of our share of war booty. And we should be thankful to Allah for that. But we cannot steal a woman from war booty..."

Mubasher Lucman: "I have an important question that demands a detailed answer... any of you can answer it... It appears that there is a grey area where we are no defining zina [rape/adultery] as zina, as it is."

Maulana Naeemi: "No, it's not so..."

Mubasher Lucman: "You said, it can be without nikah"

Maulana Naeemi: "We have to follow Koran. We cannot question the Koran. If the Koran says it is black, we have to say it is black; we cannot think if it is black or not. If the Koran says it is white it is white. The Koran says when you have women in war booty, you are allowed to have sexual relations with them. This is what the Koran says, not you and I."

Allama Zaheer: "There is no grey area. What the Koran allows is allowed, what the Koran forbids us from is forbidden..."[2]


In 2011, Salaw al-Mteiri, a Kuwaiti political activist woman discovered an issue she wanted to push. She made not one video to express her opinion on the issue, but two!  The Middle East Media Research Institute translated these speeches and shared them. In 2011, the world that saw the video translated was horrified. Those who understand Islam were not surprised about anything except that a Muslim woman was on video and talking politics. In her first video which aired on May 25th, 2011, she said:

I asked [a Saudi mufti]: What is the law with regard to slave girls? The mufti told me that the law requires there to be a Muslim country raiding a Christian country – sorry, a non-Muslim country – and taking POWs. I asked him whether it was forbidden [to turn them into slaves], and he said that Islam does not prohibit keeping slave girls – on the contrary.

The law pertaining to slave girls is not the same as for free women. Free women must cover their bodies, except for their hands and faces. The slave girl must cover up from the belly button down.

There is a big difference between slave girls and free women. With a free woman, the man must make a marriage contract, but with a slave girl – all he has to do is buy her. It's as if he married her. So there is a difference between slave girls and free women.

Here in Kuwait too, I asked religious scholars and experts about this, and they said that for the average, good religious man, the only way to avoid forbidden relations with women is to purchase slave girls.[3]

Later in July she was interviewed on July 1 on Al-Hayat TV. Her political activities seemed to fascinate the interviewer. His first question addressed her opinion and research on slavery.


Salwa Al-Mteiri: "I thought that if the age of slave-girls was restored in a proper legal fashion, it could be a solution [to many problems], Allah willing."

Interviewer: "Will women and wives in Kuwait welcome the idea of slave-girls, and have their husband go to some office and buy a slave-girl or two? How will they accept it?"

Salwa Al-Mteiri: "The believing woman is content with the law of Allah, and with what her religion requires her to do. In my opinion, this is the best solution to reduce the rate of marital betrayal and the spread of disease. This is a problem not only in Kuwait, but throughout the world."

Keep in mind this is before ISIS became the Islamic State and enslaved hundreds of Yazidi and Christian girls as sex slaves. There are little hundreds of articles out there from those who survived and were freed somehow either by their own escape or the military squashing of the Islamic State.

The reason that slavery is still legal under Islam is that Muhammad owned slaves. In order to be a good Muslim you must imitate Muhammad in every way, so this is one thing that is currently not permissible in most non-Islamic countries. Some Islamic countries also do not permit slavery—according to their posted laws. But keep in mind that each Islamic country states in their constitution that the country is subject to shariah, so while a law may exist banning slavery, under shariah it is permissible.

[1] (Pakistan TV Debate on Concubines and Slavery in Islam, 2010)
[2] (Pakistan TV Debate on Concubines and Slavery in Islam, 2010)
[3] (Al-Mteiri, 2011)

Friday, October 11, 2019

Islamist Social Norms Vs. the World.. Part 1: Islamic Supremacy

Subscribe to our mailing list

* indicates required


Thursday, August 22, 2019

Stand with Mr. Prentice! Just say NO to CAIR!

On August 16th the Hartford Courant ran a story about the owner of the Connecticut Tigers, E. Miles Prentice, refusing to meet with a group with federally recognized connections to the US government designated terrorist group Hamas. That group is the Connecticut chapter of the Council on American-Islamic Relations. Most people would cheer someone for refusing to meet with a group that has been recognized in federal courts as being directly tied to a terrorist group responsible for many deaths. But not the Hartford Courant.

This shows a disconnect between the media and the average American citizen. After all, most Americans that live on the East Coast can’t get 9/11 out of their head. Granted that was an attack by terrorists called Al Qaeda. BUT both Al Qaeda and Hamas have the same parent! The Muslim Brotherhood. Osama Bin Laden was a recognized and celebrated member of the Muslim Brotherhood, Hamas IS a chapter of the Muslim Brotherhood. It is in their Charter.

Just yesterday (August 21st ) the Washington Post ran a story by the parents of  Israeli Lieutenant Hadar Goldin, who was kidnapped by Hamas and killed five years ago. The parents are pleading for his body to be returned. Why was this story running in the USA unless they believed it possible if the US connection, aka CAIR or American Muslims for Palestine (AMP) had some influence? It could have been an attempt to get the US State Department to exert pressure, but remember now, Hamas refused our money so they could continue to pay their terrorists who attack and kill Jews. So the government influence was not the reason.

This incredibly foolish and irresponsible article by the Hartford Courant no where stated that Mr. Prentice was refusing to meet with a group that DOES HAVE terrorist ties. But they did state Mr. Prentice’s connections to the Center for Security Policy, labeling it as “an organization identified by the Southern Poverty Law Center as an anti-Muslim hate group.” The timing for this article could not have been worse. USA Today published “The Southern Poverty Law Center is a hate-based scam that nearly caused me to be murdered,” on August 17th. That is just one day later!

The Muslim Brotherhood groups in the USA are into a long range plan of Islamization of the United States of America. If you think me wrong I suggest you read their own material which the federal courts have introduced as evidence in the largest terrorism finance trials in our history.
So, what was the purpose in this news release? If it was part of a plan, what would be the reason? It seems to have activated
  • Mayor of Norwich, Peter Nystrom, who readily accepts SPLC as an authority on who is a hate group. Does this excuse his ignorance of is connected to terrorists?
  • The Norwich Area Clergy Association has decided to take a vocal and active “mediator” role. As if avoiding connections with affiliates of terrorists need a religious motivation?
The mayor told the press that he had met with Muslim leaders. He did not identify them as this may include Tark Aouadi, executive director of CAIR CT. The very person that the owner of the Connecticut Tigers refused to meet with.

Tark Aouadi is quick to scream Islamophobia before all the facts come in. When the Diyanet Mosque of New Haven was burned on the first floor from an act of arson, he called the media and made the charge that this was due to a hate crime. In fact the New Haven register went so far that day to accuse everyone who voted for Trump of being haters. But the Police said there was no evidence that this was a hate crime.

If the meeting with the clergy includes any representatives of CAIR, Mr. Prentice should hold to his original statement of refusal to meet with a group that has connections to terrorists. There has never been evidence of bias by the minor league baseball club. This ruse by CAIR to get a meeting with Mr. Prentice needs to stopped.

If Mr. Prentice holds to his refusal to meet with Tark Aouadi, executive director of CAIR CT, he will be in the company of a Connecticut Marion McGarry (D-12), who also refused to meet with him [ADDED: and/or his organization]. Perhaps this whole thing is a ruse to get Tarik some media time. Maybe he hopes this will earn him his 5 –minutes of fame?

Hold fast Mr. Prentice! You stand with our governments allies in Muslim countries when you refuse to meet with Hamas affiliate CAIR. The United Arab Emirates declared CAIR a designated terrorist group in 2014.

Oh and for those of you out there still foolish enough to believe that CAIR is a civil rights group for Muslims, ask yourselves why they defrauded Muslims by their promotion of a fake lawyer, and settled a case after 11 years  thanks in large part to the Middle East Form’s help on June 4, 2019.

This article was cross posted on to Dr. Rich Sweir's site. There CAIR official Tark Aouadi wrote the following comment:

Thank you for your article.  I would love to have a coffee with you and talk in depth on this and any other topic.  
Point of fact, I never asked to meet Marion McGarry as you article states "If Mr. Prentice holds to his refusal to meet with Tark Aouadi, executive director of CAIR CT, he will be in the company of a Connecticut Marion McGarry (D-12), who also refused to meet with him. "
We also did nothing to precipitate this story.  Had this story been about a team owner belonging to a group that spread conspiracy theories and lies against members of the judaic tradition or African Americans or Irish Catholics the need for a meeting and even greater remedies would not be questioned.  Now that its about Muslims that some how makes it better? 
I understand that this comment may do nothing, but would welcome a chance to talk to you on this topic.
Thank you again for your article.
Perhaps Mr. Aouadi has never read the source of the article on Mr. McGarry. IT IS CAIR! . Perhaps he does not recognize his own interview by the Associated Press which ran in the Hartford Courant, which is also cited above I call this an excellent example of being caught spreading misinformation to save his own skin. So Mr. Aouadi is calling CAIR, his employer a liar now??

Subscribe to our mailing list

* indicates required


Saturday, August 3, 2019

Give LEOs the power to Stop ANTIFA! UNmasking ANTIFA Protects YOU!

As an American who believes in the goodness of our Constitution, I grew concerned about Canada attempting to legislate “Islamophobia” as hate speech. For this reason I connected with PEGIDA Canada which is a Pro-Canada entity. They are nationalists! I went and gave speeches, met with Canadian patriots who love Canada and was educated on the differences between Canadian government vs. America’s government.

 Antifa was there my first time speaking. Things were Ok until they started to put on masks. This was in London, Ontario where the Mayor called PEGIDA white nationalists. I found this label amusing since natives, whites and people of different races were part of PEGIDA Canada. They only want to promote Canadian values over shariah. PEGIDA Canada actually prays in public for the Muslims who are attacked, bombed, maimed, etc. by Islamists who love shariah!

But Canada had a law against wearing masks in public, sadly most of the cops knew nothing about that in London or feigned ignorance. After the masks came on an Antifa member punched a 70 year old man. I was there. I saw it.

Every time I have been there Antifa puts on their masks and then attacks! The last time I saw them put on their masks and race ahead of us. They tried to stop us from going towards our cars. The Toronto police intervened! Antifa formed a practiced line holding flag poles. The police formed a practiced line on their bikes and pushed them back. One Antifa hit a cop in the head with a flagpole and the dogpile was on! I was profusely thankful for their work that day keeping us safe from the fascist commies.

Even the Toronto Police would tell Antifa they were the commies. In fact Toronto police protected Antifa that day in Nathan Phillips Park, telling them they could not bring their commie signs because the Vietnamese were celebrating being free of Communism for 50 years! That action saved Antifa from getting their clocks cleaned.

A number of patriots in Canada and the USA have gotten together to promote sanity and make law enforcement’s job easier! We decided we need to enable the police to do preventative things to make people safer. The best preventative measure a local cop can do is insist no one wears masks. This is not so some Big Brother device can record your face! It is so the criminal element does not feel free to do something criminal. Think about this! Laws are made for the criminals, period!

 As a Special Education Teacher, I believe simple things are often the best solutions to complex problems! So, we must enable the police to stop the small things, which is a big part of community policing. No masks, then no one feels free to attack because they can be seen AND IDENTIFIED! Who wears masks in a bank? Bank robbers! Who wears masks in a store? Robbers! Who wears masks in public? Why do people go in government buildings or get on public transportation while wearing masks. So, they can rob or beat someone without a camera recording their identity! Isn’t it better to think ahead and stop something before it happens?

The following idea for a proposed law in each state was brought forward and developed off of a law in Virginia. Their statute is tweaked giving the local law enforcement officer more teeth! Virginia does not know what it means to be cold, so this New Yorker added in the cold weather exception. Substitute your state or province for the print in red and get your state senator or Canadian government official in your province to work on this! Let’s help the police protect us by giving them the teeth to do the job! 

Prohibition of wearing of masks in public and private places; exceptions
Purpose: to increase security in all public places covered under the jurisdiction of NEW YORK STATE, and promote civil harmony and assimilation in a climate of increasing public safety issues.
  1.     It shall be unlawful for any person over 16 years of age to, with the intent to conceal his/her identity, wear any mask, hood or other device whereby a substantial portion of the face is hidden or covered so as to conceal the identity of the wearer, to be or appear in any public place, or upon any private property in NEW YORK STATE without first having obtained from the owner or tenant thereof consent to do so in writing. Persons who do not meet the exceptions listed below will be charged with a Class B Misdemeanor.
  2. It shall not be lawful for a person over the age of 16 to conceal his/her identity, wear any mask, hood, or other device whereby a substantial portion of the face is hidden or covered so as to conceal the identity of the wearer, on any form of public transportation or within any government building in the STATE OF NEW YORK. Persons who do not meet the exceptions listed below will be charged with a Class B Misdemeanor.
  3. It shall not be lawful for a person over the age of 16 to conceal his/her identity, wear any mask, hood, or other device whereby a substantial portion of the face is hidden or covered so as to conceal the identity of the wearer, at any political gathering or protest. Persons who do not meet the exceptions listed below will be charged with a class E Felony.

However, the provisions of this section shall not apply to persons
(i)                  wearing traditional holiday costumes;
(ii)                engaged in professions, trades, employment or other activities and wearing protective masks which are deemed necessary for the physical safety of the wearer or other persons;
(iii)               engaged in any bona fide theatrical production or masquerade ball; or
(iv)               weather is determinedly cold and the event is OUTSIDE where it is colder than 10 degrees Fahrenheit and facial coverings are deemed necessary and protective; or wearing
(v)                a mask, hood or other device for bona fide medical reasons upon
(a) the advice of a licensed physician or osteopath and carrying on his person an affidavit from the physician or osteopath specifying the medical necessity for wearing the device and the date on which the wearing of the device will no longer be necessary and providing a brief description of the device, or
(b) the declaration of a disaster or state of emergency by the Governor in response to a public health emergency where the emergency declaration expressly waives this section, defines the mask appropriate for the emergency, and provides for the duration of the waiver.

Monday, June 3, 2019

Important Responses to the CT Mirror Promoting Misinformation on Jihad by an Islamist!

By Paul Sutliff

The CT (Connecticut) Mirror recently published, "At Muslim Sunday school, learning about Islam — and correcting misconceptions" by Vanessa De La Torre. This article had a lot of misinformation within it. Sadly, this comes as no surprise since the "trusted source" was Dr. Reza Mansoor. 

Dr. Reza Mansoor is not someone to trust when he talks to non-Muslims about what Muslims believe. Part of this is because he believes it in Islam's best interest to deceive you, the non-Muslims about what Islam teaches on Jihad. This practice is part and parcel of practicing shariah and deceiving the non-believer.

This article provides no sources to stand behind Dr. Reza Mansoor's statements on jihad. It ignores shariah which is cited in Reliance on the TravellerAn English translation of Arabic Umdat al-Salik. This book is recommended by the International Institute of Islamic Thought (IIIT). I  personally recommend to anyone who wants the truth on what jihad means to read o.9.0 Jihad. I also recommend reading the 1915 Fatwa given by the last official caliph. This fatwa was very clear on what jihad means and how it should be carried out. It speaks of three different levels of jihad, Heart, Word, and Action/Deed.

It is unethical in this country for a person claiming the title of professor to purposefully misinform the public in the area of his/her content. This is grounds for dismissal by professorial malfeasance.

In the same respect, articles and books exposing the recent lies of Dr. Mansoor on this topic were previously written in detail. "How Taqiyya Alters Islam's Rules of WarDefeating Jihadist Terrorism," by Raymond Ibrahim  was published in the Winter of 2010. This is among the best responses to this misinformation. Humorously, it was written 9 years ago.

My suggestion is for CT Mirror should remove the purposeful misinformation by Dr. Mansoor. Reliability of sources is key for any piece of journalism. Dr. Mansoor has shown himself not to be credible! 

Jane Bate, of Connecticut ACT! for America also wrote a response: 

I was very disappointed to read Vanessa de la Torre's article, "At Muslim Sunday school, learning about Islam and correcting misconceptions." This piece is full of 'taqiyya,' the obligatory deception of non-Muslims. An explanation of this phenomenon can be found in section r8.2 of the "Reliance of the Traveller": r8.2 “Speaking is a means to achieve objectives. If a praiseworthy aim is attainable through both telling the truth and lying, it is unlawful to accomplish through lying because there is no need for it. When it is possible to achieve such an aim by lying but not by telling the truth, it is permissible to lie if attaining the goal is permissible and obligatory to lie if the goal is obligatory”.

In the article, we're told the popular line that 'jihad' means a personal or spiritual struggle. Though it can mean that, and that sort of 'jihad' is considered the 'greater jihad,' nonetheless, approximately 98% of the times the word 'jihad' appears in Islamic doctrine, its meaning is military warfare. To describe it as a "personal struggle, then, is disingenuous.

And, of course, there's the ubiquitous claim that Islam is the "religion of peace." But how peaceful is a religion that mandates death for apostasy? (Section o8.1 of the Reliance) How about a religion that assigns no penalty to a Muslim who kills his children, grandchildren or non-Muslims? (Section o1.2 of the Reliance). Lastly, a thorough reading of the section of 'jihad' -military warfare against unbelievers - which begins with Section o9.0, will leave the reader with no doubts that this is no religion of peace.”

Tuesday, March 19, 2019

YouTube Censors Anti-Jihadist News Source - Vlad TepesBlog

In the beginning of February a coordinated reporting campaign against the YouTube channel of Vlad TepesBlog began. Simple examination of the filed complaints reveals the idiocy of the reporting. Vlad TepesBlog shared a few of the hundreds of their videos that were suddenly reported within a week.  The vast majority of what was on Vlad TepesBlog’s YouTube channel were news reports from foreign countries subtitled into English. Below are two examples of YouTube’s response to the reporting sent to Vlad TepesBlog.
View here judge for yourself if this deserves an Adult Rating:

View here judge for yourself if this deserves an Adult Rating:

Is Google Politicizing viewership and subscriber numbers?
Vlad TepesBlog’s YouTube Channel had over 30,000 subscribers.  Their videos were not monetized as the goal was to get the truth out and not have it be thought that income would sway what was shared. One of Vlad Tepes Blog’s subscribers wrote to them that they were under attack by Google, because his subscription count was not increasing and appeared frozen. It became a talking point for months when the number was approximately 24,xxx for a few weeks. It then shot up to 30,000 within 6 weeks. Having posted several hundred videos Vlad TepesBlog had other concerns that YouTube was adjusting the viewership statistics.

Vlad TepesBlog works with Gates of Vienna sometimes. In this case he embedded his videos on the Gates of Vienna with YouTube videos averaging a daily viewership at YouTube of between 600 to 1600 views per day. Sometimes they might get as high as 3,000 to 4,000. This encouraged further curiosity at statistical manipulation by YouTube/Google. So Vlad TepesBlog did some work with a place he had ZERO subscribers, unlike YouTube where he had accumulated 30,000+. So the only people who saw the video were people who saw the social media ties to the site. 

There were 15,000 to 30,000 views which over a several days. Vlad TepesBlog states that this count far exceeded the amount of viewers YouTube was reporting for the hundreds of videos on his channel over the same period time.

The frozen subscription count plus the low viewership counts made Vlad wonder if they are concerned about his actual influence. Influence? Yes! When a channel gets a lot of attention YouTube promotes it in various ways. Even individual videos get promoted due to high viewership. So was the attempt purposeful to limit their influence hence stopping videos from going viral?

Congressional leadership prior to the Democratic takeover of the House was pursuing a look into flagrant First amendment violations of these Social Media platforms like Facebook, Twitter and YouTube for directly limiting the influence of persons who are Conservative and/or Anti-Jihadists.
Sadly, the mass reporting of VladTepesBlog and the forced closure of its channel show a huge flaw in the security measures of YouTube, and other Social Media platforms. That being the evident lack of 

Due Process.
Due Process is what protects a person from false accusations and usually ferrets outs liars in a timely fashion. YouTube accepted complaints that videos with no violence or sexual themes should now be labeled and require age verification to view adult content. This implies that your daily news feed according to YouTube should be labeled Adult Content. This means no comments can be seen or written.

The worst problem here is that NO HUMAN CONTACT is possible! You can only appeal a decision with a form response that may or may not be read by a human.

Important Questions for YouTube
Are bots all that reviews complaints? Are there security measures in place to address mass reporting?  What is the process of review for an actual complaint before a label of Adult Content is applied? What happens if a reviewer shows bias or incompetence when reviewing content?

YouTube Does NOT CONSISTENTLY close Hate Channels
Social Media giants seem set on controlling messages to their platform. YouTube has been caught hosting content that promotes Anti-Semitism under the guise that it is Islamic. The Middle East Media Research Institute has caught several videos on YouTube and noted the names of the persons and the organizations posting Anti-Semitic content under these circumstances. Persons with platforms that have been exposed by MEMRI include Zafar Bangash, who leads the Institute of Contemporary Islamic Thought (ICIT). ICIT has a YouTube Channel called the ICIT Digital Library.

Perhaps YouTube thinks this is acceptable because this channel only has 4,562 subscribers?
MEMRI also exposed Sheikh Omar Baloch. His promotion of Islamic Relief should be enough of a concern to remove his You Tube Channel. The Middle East Forum’s extensive expose of Islamic Relief’s connections to known terror entities and persons is more than enough to post a flagged warning of adult content! But as you can see Sheikh Omar Baloch’s channel still exists.

There are far too many examples of this non-censorship of channels sponsored by persons connected to Anti-Semitism and Jihadi terrorism.

You have to ask how Google aka YouTube finds reason to justify keeping content that is connected to Anti-Semitism and terrorism, AND how are news feeds subtitled into English deemed offensive at all!

Yet YouTube claims it catches most of the hate and terror videos. It hosted Islamic State videos that the government had to request be taken down! Yet their own content reviewers seem to target persons who have influence and are sharing actual News coverage simply because the content reveals unpopular truths?

This past December YouTube made the news after closing 1.67 million channels and all of the 50.2 million videos associated with them. According to Reuters, YouTube claimed, “Nearly 80 percent of the channel takedowns [were] related to spam uploads. About 13 percent concerned nudity, and 4.5 percent child safety.”

Final Thoughts
Are we to believe news is now to be counted in the same category as spam, nudity, and child safety issues? But Anti-Semitic speech is protected if it is Muslim?

Lets not forget the monetary value of good will. It doesn’t matter that Vlad TepesBlog was not asking for income. What matters was his influence grew because he was respected. That respect earned him a high subscription rate and a total viewership of all 1600+ videos in the millions. Vlad TepesBlog considers the action of closing their channel a fraud. The work portrayed was not porn, it was not a safety concern, it did not violate community standards, so the shut down of his channel was an act of fraud.

While a formal apology and restoration of all the work of Vlad TepesBlog would be considered a good business strategy for YouTube, versus a lawsuit for alleging that news which was subtitled needed an Adult content rating.

Vlad TepesBlog now posts their work at http://Bit.Tube. They ask that you sign up and subscribe to their Channel here. Vlad TepesBlog continues to not ask for any monetary assistance. They only want you to have the truth and subscribing to their work helps them to get the word out!

Subscribe to our mailing list

* indicates required