Skip to content
Google

Google Warns Freedom Center to Censor Mentions of Islamic Terror

Google Warns Freedom Center to Censor Mentions of Islamic Terror
Big Tech monopoly finally reveals why it’s censoring Front Page Magazine.
By Daniel Greenfield

When Front Page Magazine applied to join Google’s AdSense advertising program, we were turned down. Since Google, like other Big Tech monopolies, has censored and deplatformed us in the past, we weren’t too shocked. But this time, Google told us why we had been banned.

Usually Big Tech monopolies censor, shadowban and deplatform you without telling you why.

But the Google AdSense rejection told us what we could do to make our way into the good graces of the company that dominates online search and advertising, controlling what much of the country and the world sees. All we had to do was stop talking about Islamic terrorism.

According to Google AdSense, our “entire site” contained “dangerous or derogatory content”, as did David Horowitz’s writing in particular, but one of the sample pages that the company claimed contained forbidden content was an article about the San Bernardino Muslim terrorist attack.

The article, “Remember The San Bernardino Fourteen” by Lloyd Billingsley, like a lot of our articles, is blocked in Google Search. The Front Page article doesn’t come up when you type in its name. It doesn’t even appear when you do a site search for the exact title in quotation marks that has been entirely limited to the Front Page Magazine site. That means that Google likely specifically excluded it. And it’s far from the only one of our articles banned by Google.

It’s an extraordinary act of censorship for a company that claims to want to collect all the information in the world and make it easily available for everyone to find. But it’s also a silent act of suppression that is hard to confirm and easy to blame on technical factors or errors.

But now here it was, Google flagging “Remember The San Bernardino Fourteen” as “dangerous” and “derogatory” content, not to mention guilty of “unreliable and harmful claims”.

What’s dangerous, unreliable and harmful about “Remember The San Bernardino Fourteen”?

Published on Dec 3, 2021, around the anniversary of the Islamic terrorist attack, it contains fairly little editorial commentary and a great deal of uncomfortable facts.

Lloyd Billingsley starts by documenting how “Syed Farook and Tashfeen Malik drove up to the Inland Regional Center in San Bernardino, California, and began firing automatic rifles.” He names the victims, describes the bombs and quotes Kamala Harris, then attorney general, defending Islam and excusing Islamic terrorism, as she would go on to do after the Islamic terrorist attacks of Oct 7, while promoting CAIR and other Islamist terror friendly groups.

Billingsley’s article laid out the complicity of other family members of the Muslim terrorists in the attack, and the silence of Biden and Kamala about Islamic terrorism, and closed by urging, “remember the 14 innocents murdered by Islamic terrorists Syed Farook and Tashfeen Malik on December 2, 2015, in San Bernardino, California, USA.”

Google would rather that you not remember the 14 victims or the Islamic terrorists who killed them. It has told us that we “must fix” this and numberless other articles that it objects to. But what would it like us to “fix” here? What else except the truth about Islamic terrorism.

The Big Tech’s ‘Dangerous and Derogatory’ content policy has previously cast a wide net, banning Martin Luther King’s “Letter From Birmingham Jail” at one point because the civil rights leader had used the “n word” in the letter and also banning skin lightening products because they “imply the superiority of one skin tone over another.”

Conservative sites had previously been forced to dump their comments sections to appease Google AdSense, but we will not self-censor or compromise to appease the Big Tech giant.

The David Horowitz Freedom Center has always spoken out for what we believe in. And that’s not about to change. In a time of severe financial challenges, it would be easier for us to go along. And it would have been easier for us to bow to the IRS when it came after us for writing about Hillary Clinton’s emails than to spend 5 years resisting because we believe that our journalism is legitimate and important, not something to be ashamed of and apologized for.

We know what Google’s politics are.

We remember the Google employees crying publicly when Trump won. We know that Google employees funneled $21 million to Democrats in 2020. And we know a lot of that money went to Biden. And we know that this time around, they’ve already pumped in nearly $300,000 into the Biden campaign, over $400,000 to Democratic congressional campaign committees, $174,000 to the DNC and another fortune to leftist extremists like Silicon Valley’s Rep. Ro Khanna.

A few years after the San Bernardino terror attack, Imam Omar Suleiman, who had called for a Caliphate, defended Muslim sex slavery, described Jews as “apes and pigs”, and prayed, “we ask Allah to humiliate this Israel”, had demanded that Google ban “Islamophobia” from its search engine.

And Google complied.

After I tweeted that, “Google just erased my Sultan Knish blog and Front Page Mag articles from the first pages of results for my name doubt very much this is accidental”, Robert Spencer wrote that, “I checked for myself, and sure enough: a Google search for ‘Robert Spencer’ now does not bring up Jihad Watch, where most of my writing outside of books has been published for the last seventeen years, but it does give you defamatory and distorted attack pieces from the far-Left Southern Poverty Law Center and the Saudi-funded Bridge Initiative, and nothing that doesn’t portray me and my work in the most unfavorable possible light.”

Google has been purging us for political dissent for at least 5 years. So we’re not surprised by what happened, but we are determined to continue fighting for the truth at all costs.

The David Horowitz Freedom Center is dealing with some very challenging times because we held fast to our principles. Facing a financial crunch, we looked at AdSense as an option, but we won’t compromise our belief in the truth in exchange for Google’s money. As we struggle to navigate the high legal cost of fighting the IRS, we are exploring every possible option.

But we’ll do it while holding on to our traditional commitment to fighting for what’s right.

Original Article

Back To Top