Imagine if a Jew told a true story about how he was brought up by his religious parents and his rabbis to hate Muslims and Palestinians, and then—after reading about the conflict between Israel and Palestine, and visiting Palestine—changed his mind and discovered that Muslims (and the country of Palestine) weren’t so bad after all. That would be good, right? Or at least something one could put on YouTube without fear?
Now imagine the opposite: a Muslim brought up by his parents and imams hating Jews and Israel, but who changed his mind after some reading and a visit to Israel. What would be the fate of such a video?
Yep, you guessed it. The former would be okay, but the latter would be deemed HATE SPEECH. And so deemed by both Muslims and Regressive Leftists.
And so YouTube deemed this video from Prager University, which was taken down after complaints of hate speech. Regardless of what you think of Israel and Palestine, watch the story of Kasim Hafeez, a British-born Muslim. (And yes, I know that Prager University is right-wing and has its problems. And you don’t even have to believe this story (though Hafeez’s story is also on Wikipedia with references): the point is how such stories are treated by places like YouTube.)
After Prager put up a petition, the video was reinstated, though it’s still said be “restrictable” by parents and schools (I don’t know how that’s done). The petition also lists 18 other Prager videos that are restricted; these are, of course, pushing a right-wing agenda or are anti-Islam.
I quote my friend Malgorzata, who sent me the link:
Of course, it was “hate speech” according to the definition of “Social Justice Warriors” and Islamists. Anything bad about Muslims, no matter whether it’s true or not, is “hate speech”. If you say that Muhammed consummated his marriage with a 9-year-old girl it’s hate speech. It may be in the Qur’an, but you are not allowed to say it because somebody might think something unflattering about the Prophet and about Islam. And that is “Islamophobia”.
Whatever you think about the video above, under what definition of “hate speech” does it fall?