Twitter Suspends Bosch Fawstin’s Account

Bosch Fawstin is an ex-Muslim and a well-known comic book artist whose cartoon of Mohammed won the grand prize in the “Draw Mohammed” contest in 2015. Long-time readers will remember him from our reports on the jihad attack on the “Draw Mohammed” event in Garland Texas in May 2015. Four years before that, we posted on Mr. Fawstin’s Counterjihad comic book, “Pigman vs. SuperJihad”.

Mr. Fawstin has now been suspended from Twitter for being “hateful”. Not for inciting violence. Not for posting gore or pornography or “fake news”. But simply for being opposed to Islam.

Before we get into the meat of the story, I’ll just say this: anyone who relies on Twitter or Facebook or any other major social media service as a primary outlet is making a big mistake.

Yes, I know none of the alternatives — sending out an email newsletter, obtaining a domain name and starting a website, etc. — has the ease and reach of using one of the popular social media sites. But those sites can pull the plug on you at any time, and there’s nothing you can do about it.

Twitter’s motto: We don’t care. We don’t have to care. We’re Twitter.

In Germany Twitter is now required by law to take down your posts if you violate the country’s draconian “hate speech” rules. But in the USA Twitter and Facebook perform the same service, gratis.

We don’t need no stinkin’ law! If you post something politically incorrect, we’ll take you down!

So ask yourself: Is it worth it? Is it really a good idea to rely on a site where all your careful work can be totally overthrown without warning, and without any right of appeal?

Here’s what Daniel Greenfield had to say about the banning of Bosch Fawstin:

Twitter Suspends Ex-Muslim Cartoonist, Allows Hamas and Hezbollah

by Daniel Greenfield

Hamas has a Twitter account. It links directly to the website of a terrorist organization responsible for murdering thousands of people. And which advocates genocide. Al Aqsa TV, Hamas’ tv channel, also has its own Twitter account.

Hezbollah’s Al Manar TV also has several Twitter accounts.

Both of these are recognized terrorist organizations. Hamas is listed as a FTO terrorist group by the State Department. Providing services to it as Twitter does, may be illegal.

But Hamas and Hezbollah are a few of the many Islamic terrorist organizations and supporters who are active on Twitter. But while Twitter has no problem with terrorists. It does have a problem with those who criticize them.

Bosch Fawstin, an ex-Muslim critic who was targeted in the first ISIS attack in America, has been suspended by Twitter.

I challenged Twitter’s decision to suspend me, through their channels, and they just told me in an email that their decision stands, that my account will not be restored because they claim my account “was found to be violating Twitter’s Terms of Service, specifically the Twitter rules against hateful conduct.” They went on to say that “It is against our rules to promote violence against or directly attack or threaten other people on the basis of race, ethnicity, national origin, sexual orientation, gender, gender identity, religious affiliation, age, disability, or disease.”

So I replied with this:

“You have suspended my account without Any proof of your claim that I have violated your rules. You write that it is against your ‘rules to promote violence against or directly attack or threaten other people’, and yet you don’t cite any tweets of mine where I’m guilty of that, because I’ve never done that.”

Bosch’s final Tweet was this.

Read the rest (and find all the links) at FrontPage Mag.

Hat tip: KS.

23 thoughts on “Twitter Suspends Bosch Fawstin’s Account

  1. In my mind this is one of the most important issues of our time. That is a major media organization that gets away with broadcasting propaganda for terrorists – freedom of speech and all that, yes, but shouldn’t everyone in the country know about Twitters support for terrorists?

    So here we have two anti jihadist sites who have published their articles on Bosch Faustin today – differences aside for a moment – one, the best tag team since Hulk Hogan and Randy Savage, but two can only do so much, and the other Front Page Magazine which has access to lawyers, for all I know their own house lawyers, and wouldn’t it be a good idea to see if you can get Twitter into court David, to at least put some pressure on these terrorist supporting creeps, even if the case may be unwinnable on first amendment issues?

    At the least get on Dennis Prager, Joe Piscopo (it’s actually a good radio show), Hannity, the noisy Michael Savage, and come to think of it, Mark Levin.

    Come on David (Horowitz) take a day or two off from visiting colleges.

  2. Is it against Twitter’s rules to promote violence against or directly attack or threaten their staff by reason of their collaboration with or adherence to terrorist organisations such as Hamas and Hezbollah?

    Just askin’.

  3. Never have Facebook or Tweeter account..and i really don’t know what is so hot to have it ?
    Can someone explain to me meaning to have it ?..What i/m missing ?
    It is worth to open ? Thanks

    • Depends. My facebook sites are few in comparison to some people who have a couple of hundred “friends,” but they include the cemetery where much of my family is buried, a local city site, a reliable local news site, several friends from message boards going back 15 years and two historic sites I support.

      Some people with large families essentially have family pages and they post their daily activities and interests for the rest of the family to see. Some people have junk sites where they try to be cute. Some people don’t know what they are doing there.

      If you belong to any organizations run a search and see if there’s a facebook page. That includes where you work, where you live and schools you’ve attended.

      • PS: Some, like the cemetery aren’t particularly active, but it is a contact and sometimes you benefit from the contact.

  4. Let me point out a danger which I think is as great or greater than the censorship from twitter or Facebook.

    Amazon is becoming the prime source of digital (and printed) reading material. Specifically, I can store hundreds of books (or thousands) in the Amazon library, ready to read at anytime. Among these books are the ones from Stephen Coughlin (Catastrophic Failure), Dianna West (American Betrayal), and most of Robert Spencer’s books.

    We know from previous experience that Amazon is able to pull off books actually on storage devices, such as tablets, phones or laptops. That is, Amazon decided the book shouldn’t be distributed for some reason or another, deleted all copies within its purview, and issued a refund for the purchase price.

    Amazon has pretty much kept its nose clean since then, which is not reassuring to me. If you think it inconvenient to have your twitter account shut down, what about losing your entire reference library, plus notes, bookmarks, comments and highlights? Worse, Amazon can do this all at once, electronically.

    So, the danger we see is pale in the face of the danger we don’t see. If Amazon had been abusing its position regularly, like twitter or Facebook, we would be more prepared. But, I’m afraid we’re completely vulnerable right now.

    • The big difference among Amazon and Twitter and Facebook is that only the former is making money directly from sales to individuals instead of selling to advertisers. As such, Amazon is more customer-oriented and less likely to pull the kinds of tricks that Twitter and/or Facebook do.

      Not that your scenario couldn’t happen, but Bezos knows better which side of his bread is buttered.

        • From Slate:

          The power to delete your books, movies, and music remotely is a power no one should have. Here’s one way around this: Don’t buy a Kindle until Amazon updates its terms of service to prohibit remote deletions. Even better, the company ought to remove the technical capability to do so, making such a mass evisceration impossible in the event that a government compels it. (Sony and Interead—makers of rival e-book readers—didn’t immediately respond to my inquiries about whether their devices allow the same functions. As far as I can tell, their terms of service don’t give the companies the same blanket right to modify their services at will, though.)
          Interesting essay, especially considering it is on Slate.

          I disagree with the title, though: the Kindle debacle will be over, one way or another, by 2024. The American entrepreneur will quickly fill the void if Amazon begins really hitting the “kill” switch. It might be just the marketing ploy second-tier players – e.g., Barnes and Noble’s “Nook” e-reader – need to push ahead by making sure its service agreement allows for the same freedoms that real books have.

          The next essay on that page talks about Alexa, a device I find downright creepy. It appears Alexa is going to carry advertising. Since I’d never allow that thing to cross the threshold here, I was intrigued to read that 15,000 families have no problem with that form of home invasion. Lordy, people are naive. Or, heaven forfend, gadget-crazy and lazy.

  5. The BBC reports ‘Twitter’s hate speech rules are expanded’
    “Twitter’s Trust and Safety Council, a group consisting of representatives from more than 40 organisations dealing with, among other things, anti-Semitism, homophobia, sexism and racism.”
    “Those who express an affiliation with groups that use or celebrate violence to achieve their aims will be permanently suspended, Twitter said.”
    But not genocidal terrorist groups like Hamas or Hezbollah and one can imagine many if not all on the ‘Trust and Safety Council’ will be leftist organisations like the SPLC or stealth jihadists like CAIR.

    Meanwhile have Gulf-State investments affected editorial policy in Western media?

    “Twitter Suspends Women’s Rights Group After Criticizing Saudi Arabia”
    “Last year, Saudi Arabian Prince Alwaleed Bin Talal Bin Abdulaziz Alsaud became Twitter’s second largest shareholder, owning a total of 34.9 million shares, or 5.2% of the company—2 per cent more than Twitter CEO Jack Dorsey.”
    Somewhat ironic for the Guardian to be the one asking the question given its recent output regarding anything Islamic but hey-ho.
    ‘Saudi ties raise doubts about Independent’s editorial freedom’
    “Muhammad Abuljadayel, who owns 30% of news site’s shares, works for investment arm of government-controlled bank NCB”

    The ‘Independent’ newspaper has gone in around 10 years, much like the Guardian, from publishing highly critical articles to publishing outright Islamic propaganda and apologism.
    In the Guardian we learn Aisha wasn’t really 9 she was 18 and the Muslim Brotherhood are just like the Levellers, are two of the most egregious examples off the top of my head.
    In the Independent after the Weinstein affair broke:
    ‘How the teachings of Islam could help us prevent more sexual abuse scandals’
    “This is where Islamic teachings and Prophet Muhammad’s example provide a solution that no state truly can.”

    As Mark Steyn has remarked, leftist attempts to stifle free speech are on much the same continuum as Islamofascist attempts to impose de-facto blasphemy laws.
    De-facto Sharia blasphemy and slander fits all too snugly in leftist concepts of ‘hate-speech’.

    The right needs its own long march through the institutions, not to attempt to control narratives as the left does but re-introduce free speech, critical-thinking and truth-seeking.

    • This comment is so very long.

      Please consider breaking up your responses into smaller chunks. Not only does this make them easier to moderate, but you are likely to get more people reading what you have to say. There is something about hyperspace which makes it difficult to take in so much information. So rather than attempt it, readers are more likely to scroll by to the next, briefer comment.

      • I left another overlong comment on the ‘No Democracy Without Cultural Gratitude’ article (as you know), which may have seemed a tad provocative but I just hadn’t seen your response here, so, again, apologies for rambling on. I don’t know what I was thinking, it’s almost like stream of consciousness…with links.

        • As I said, I understand the tendency since I have it also. When you find yourself with one of these ‘rambles’ – not quite sure how you got there – consider putting it into a word document, cleaning it up a bit, and submitting it as a guest essay. You do have some good things to offer.

          • I don’t know how you do it. Thumbs galore?

            I tried using an iPhone for texting and decided I’ll stick with my landline. It has a connection out here, which cell phones don’t dependably hang onto. And then I thought it might be handy to use in town but it lay there in the car, unused. The B hates it so he will only use it in an emergency.

            Useless for us.

    • “The ‘Independent’ newspaper has gone in around 10 years, much like the Guardian, from publishing highly critical articles to publishing outright Islamic propaganda and apologism.”

      Quite. It really should be hauled into court under the Trade Descriptions Act. I remember being quite impressed when it first started, but it has now slid, as you note, into the same ‘journalistic’ abyss inhabited by the Guardian, where witless Left-Wing monkeys pound away on keyboards in the endless quest to accidentally produce an intelligent sentence. It would be quite funny if people did not take them seriously.

      I, sadly, think it is a bit late for a “long march through the institutions” for the right thinkers. I believe the Left is so entrenched now – government, local government, social services, civil service, police, media, judiciary, academia, schools, pre-schools, social media, search engines etc etc, that [intemperate remarks redacted].

      • The Guardian readership would seem to be quite far apart from the editorial policy.
        Hardly scientific but interesting analysis of readers comments under articles related to Islam.

        ‘think it is a bit late’
        I fear you’re correct and new generations, that are even more biased, are being indoctrinated.

        As Steyn opines of the US education system, it is ‘the biggest structural defect in the country’.
        That could be extended across much of the West, where academia, particularly in the social sciences, inculcate an anti-Western internationalism.
        It can’t end well, although I suspect Islam, most notably in Europe, will force the issue sooner rather than later.

  6. It is totalitarianism, pure and simple. Free Speech, as he says, is the absolute bedrock of a civilised society. Without it there is no civilised society, and it does not take long to research the truth of that.

    I seem to recall that the first legal definition of Free Speech in Britain – a country that was a veritable beacon of such when I grew up there – made a very clear distinction between incitement to violence and opinions on violence (for and against). The best defence against vile speech is opposing speech.

    Twitter et al are no more than brainwashed enforcers for the coming totalitarion NWO that George Orwell forecast. They have not accidentally thrown the baby out with the bathwater, they have deliberately and unforgivably done so. They should be banned from any intelligent person’s life, and left to wallow in their self-made, self-indulgent dung heap.

    Quis custodiet ipsos custodes?

    • What Twitter did is not totalitarianism. Those who use Twitter are under no obligation to do so, do not get fined if they fail to participate, etc.

      We don’t bother with the execrable Facebreak – never saw that it increased our readership one way or another – so when Zuck reported that German to Merkel, we had our volunteer admin close up shop. Neither of us had ever bothered to look at it, so what was the point?

      I enjoy Twitter: it’s a challenge to come up with something intelligible in such a limited number of letters. At first, I was using SMS text shortcuts, but Fjordman told me it was considered tacky so I reverted to real words. If they ever suspend our account, I might let our readers know, but I wouldn’t work real hard to get it back.

      OTOH, it was at Twitter that I found the map of Iran’s protests, so it has its uses. Not many, though…

      • In the current day and age, Twitter is a very important medium which proclaims to be neutral politically (so, different to the average newspaper, which has a certain editorial line). It proclaims not to be an editor of opinions, but an enabler of them. On that basis, it has gotten so dominant on the market.

        However now, under certain scenarios it’s possible for twitter to remove certain personalities say just before an election, and hence potentially impact considerably the campaign in favour of one candidate. While that’s not yet dictatorial, could it not be said that Twitter is abusing its market position to influence the democratic process, by silencing some voices, while putting others on their “trending” list?

Comments are closed.