When the Obama White House can’t get it’s act together on calling Islamic Jihad by its real name, it should come as no surprise that Google wants to make a buck off of the Charlie Hebdo assassins. Google, Facebook and the rest of these tech oligarchs hide behind laws they created because they want the traffic, the data and most of all the advertising revenue from all forms of human activity, including Man’s inhumanity to Man.
Here’s an example:
This is a YouTube video with English subtitles of a recruiting speech by Abu Muhammed Al-adnani entitled “Oh Crusader”. Who is Abu Muhammed Al-Adnani? Let’s ask Wikipedia, Google’s favorite information source.
Shaykh Abu Mohammad al-Adnani al-Shami is the official spokesman and a senior leader of the Islamic State of Iraq and the Levant, and its primary conduit for communicating official messages. He is also the emir of ISIL in Syria.
The State Department has designated him a terrorist:
The Department of State has designated Abu Mohammed al-Adnani as a Specially Designated Global Terrorist under Executive Order (E.O.) 13224, which targets terrorists and those providing support to terrorists or acts of terrorism. The consequences of this designation include a prohibition against U.S. persons engaging in transactions with al-Adnani, and the freezing of all property and interests of al-Adnani that are in the United States, or come within the United States or the possession or control of U.S. persons. Abu Mohammed al-Adnani was also included in the annex of the recently adopted United Nations Security Council Resolution (UNSCR) 2170, which condemns the Islamic State of Iraq and the Levant (ISIL) and al-Nusrah Front, both designated by the Department of State as Foreign Terrorist Organizations, as well as all other individuals, groups, undertakings, and entities associated with al-Qa’ida. Along with al-Adnani’s U.S. designation, he will be added to the UN 1267/1989 al-Qa’ida Sanctions list, requiring all member states to implement an assets freeze, a travel ban, and an arms embargo against al-Adnani.
The YouTube video is straight from the horse’s mouth.
There are literally tens of thousands if not hundreds of thousands of videos posted on YouTube from jihadi groups. YouTube monetizes these videos in two ways that I can tell. First is in search results. Here’s a couple ads returned in response to my search for “Abu Muhammad Al-adnani” (remember–the State Department designated Specially Designated Global Terrorist):
This is a two-fer. Not only is Google monetizing a search term for a known terrorist, they’re serving up an ad for what is likely to be a human trafficking site “Date Arab Women”, trafficking being something else that Google’s RINO Susan Molinari says that Google doesn’t support.
Yep, looks like Google knows the old sex and violence is a winner.
But wait, there’s more. Here’s a refresh on the search term that serves up a different ad:
This is the same search for the known terrorist, but this time Google serves an ad for something called “Osmo”. I’d never heard of Osmo, so I looked it up.
Osmo is a children’s toy company with an interesting and highly worthwhile product designed to combat Internet addiction.
What does Osmo have to do with a terrorist on the State Department Specially Designated Global Terrorist? Nothing at all, I’m sure. Did Osmo have any knowledge when they bought into the YouTube video monopoly that their ad would be served in response to a search for a Specially Designated Global Terrorist? No.
And here’s the more interesting part–should Osmo have to pay for an ad served against search results that associate their brand with scumbags and bad guys who want to destroy our country? Who actually murder children by cutting them in half?
So we wonder why it is that the Obama White House can’t seem to call a terrorist a terrorist? Think about this angle–after the Charlie Hebdo assassinations many European governments are questioning whether social media platforms should be permitted to be the propaganda outlets for Specially Designated Global Terrorists like our boy Abu. France in particular, but also the UK and Germany.
And it comes right here at home (Fox News):
The Investigative Project on Terrorism reviewed videos posted on the YouTube channels of Tamerlan Tsarnaev and his younger brother Dzhokhar A. Tsarnaev.
Both brothers had YouTube channels in the United States and in Russia. Emerson’s group reviewed about half of the 22 videos posted on the U.S. channel. The videos were viewed by a small number of people. One video received 5,000 views, another just 1,000 views.
Based on the content of the videos, which feature Bin Laden, calls to kill Americans, Jews, Christians and exhortations to establish a world-wide caliphate, it is clear that these message are not directed just at Chechens. “They are directed primarily against all non-Muslims and are very similar to the Al Qaeda videos we’ve seen in years past.”
The two brothers clearly want “to express a message that they totally sympathize with the jihadist cause. These were jihadists, they were not just Chechen separatists.”
When we read this kind of report as well as the stories about social media use by terrorists, why do we not question how these people manage to get access to YouTube in the first place? And even if you willing to trade off giving them access to YouTube based on first amendment concerns–which I get and respect, kind of–should Google be able to profit from the prophet?
World governments are going to crack down on this stuff any minute. Will the Obama Administration be leading from behind again on this issue, too? When it affects their biggest campaign donors and the company that has filled so many jobs in the White House? From the company that gets so many huge government contracts? The company that gets a below market lease on Moffet Field to keep the Google private jet fleet in easy reach?
Drums of Liberty 
How would Google stop a jihadi from posting a video? Wouldn’t that mean that Google would have to devote resources to making editorial decisions?
That’s the problem with YouTube anyway, they want shareholders to believe they compete with TV, but they don’t want to have any responsibility responsibility for what they air. I’m not a big fan of “lists” but these are videos calling for the murder of Jews and Christians. Not too hard to figure out who the good guys are here. If Google’s going to take advantage of US law, they they shouldn’t be promoting people whose stated goal is to destroy America.
Typical Hollywood wanting to black list peeps they don’t like just like mccarthyism.
different, the Hollywood black list was grudge informing fueled by McCarthyism which was the government itself coming up with a black list of political speakers it didn’t like who sometimes also worked for a foreign government spying on the US. The terrorist list is about people who work for foreign states or non state actors who probably want to kill us and who definitely want to kill Jews. They also bombed our country. I don’t think it’s the same thing at all. I don’t like the list part, but this time I think it’s healthy. Just because both used a list doesn’t make using a list wrong. It’s what we the people allowed our government to do with the McCarthy list that’s wrong. Nobody is being denied the rights of an American because they’re on the terrorist list. Not to say that some people are on other lists like the no fly list incorrectly.