Lame Duck President Joe Biden Stuck in the Back of APEC Family Photo
Elon Musk Says the 'Hammer of Justice' Is Coming for Those Who Pushed...
Mother Arrested for Letting Her 10-Year-Old Walk to the Store Alone
Zelensky: 'War Will End Sooner' After Trump Takes Office
Harry Sisson and Other Straight White Dudes for Harris 'Will Be Back in...
Amy Klobuchar Earns EPIC Ratio After Saying RFK, Jr. Believes Dangerous Conspiracy Theorie...
Adam Schiff: A President Who Cared Would Want to Ensure His Nominees Were...
Bulwark Writer Wants Proof the Jerusalem Cross Is a Normal Symbol of Their...
Winds of Change in the Windy City: Watch Chicago Residents Stand Up to...
One of the the 'Ladies' from 'The View' Leaves Twitter Because People Disagreed...
UK Police Investigate Telegraph Columnist Over Deleted Year-Old Tweet
No More Pallets of Cash: Trump Admin to Put 'Maximum Pressure' on Iran...
Owner of Bakery Defamed by Whoopi Goldberg Speaks Out
J.D. Vance's Shorts Scandal: TMZ Snaps Incoming Vice President in Rare Casual Outing
Huntington Beach City Attorney Sticks It to Gavin Newsom's Ridiculous Voter ID Ban

Criticizing George Soros is antisemitic … according to organization receiving money from Soros!

Yesterday, @KanekoaTheGreat turned us on to a story demolishing the credibility of Trump accuser E. Jean Carroll, and today he helps take a sledgehammer to someone else’s credibility:

Advertisement

In that Tweet he links to a report by the ‘Institute for Strategic Dialogue’ which is a non-government organization partially funded by Open Society Foundations, which is why he or she says it is funded by Soros. The report is called ‘Antisemitism on Twitter Before and After Elon Musk’s Acquisition.’ It uses a computer program called ‘Beam’ to identify ‘plausibly antisemitic’ tweets. So… basically a search engine.

Thus, if you just mention Soros, you get flagged as ‘plausibly antisemitic’ and you are counted. For instance, this tweet would get tagged:

Advertisement

After all, he mentioned Soros.

And it gets more ridiculous from there. For instance, it claims that ‘goy’ and ‘goyim’ are plausibly antisemitic. From the document:

Originally a Yiddish word for a non-Jewish person, ‘Goy’ or ‘goyim’, can be used in antisemitic speech to describe the non-Jewish victims of imagined Jewish plots and conspiracies.

Now, it is true that a person might bitterly complain that ‘evil joooooooooos are ruining my life because I am a ‘goy.’’ Or it might literally be used by jews (or even non-jews) to talk non-pejoratively about non-jews. So, for instance, if this tweet by Ron Coleman, an actual jew …

… was sent out during the period in which they were measuring ‘plausible anti-semitism,’ it would be counted as an example of rising antisemitism by this study. And while ‘kike’ is undoubtedly used as an antisemitic slur, it is equally true that people can use it to mock antisemitism, as Mr. Coleman did, here:

My gosh, Mr. Coleman is becoming a repeat offender! Next up is Soros, and by their dumb algorithm, even this tweet would be counted as antisemitic:

Advertisement

Also, the NGO quoted three alleged tweets that were considered ‘plausibly antisemitic’ against Soros. However, using google and Twitter’s search engine, we could actually only verify one actually existed:

We don’t agree with calling Soros a Nazi, but there’s nothing obviously antisemitic about the Tweet. And while we can’t vouch for everything @CooI4Cats has ever tweeted over the last thirteen years, it hardly seems obvious that this person is antisemitic. Indeed, this tweet indicates sympathy for the Jews who died in the holocaust:

Advertisement

For the record, @CooI4Cats’ claims are backed up by this old report on 60 Minutes:

Again, maybe someone can find something he said that was genuinely antisemitic, but this NGO certainly hasn’t made the case for it.

They also flag ‘Zionism,’ making Ben Shapiro a repeat offender:

Also, references to Kanye West are included. Now, West himself has undeniably said some antisemitic things, but not all references to him are antisemitic. For instance, you might say ‘I used to love Kanye’s music but I threw it in the trash because of his comments about Hitler’ and find yourself included in this study and a plausible antisemite.

In short, it is a garbage study.

Advertisement

We note that this is part of the process of Brian Krassenstein trying to woo Elon Musk.

We haven’t seen the commercials on any streaming service, but we did see this on Twitter:

Now, we are against antisemitism, too, but complaining that there are over 70,000 times someone said ‘Hitler was right’ online loses its punch when you realize they just said it, too. We suppose now it had been said 70,001 times.

Oh, except we said it when we quoted the phrase in the last paragraph, so that would be 70,002.

And for that matter, the numbers are less than impressive. That 70,000 number covered a year-long period and applied to the entirety of the Internet. The Institute for Strategic Dialogue report focused on Twitter and claimed that

Advertisement

Our analysis showed the volume of antisemitic Tweets more than doubled after Musk’s acquisition. Between June and October 27th, the weekly average of plausibly antisemitic Tweets was 6,204. From October 27th until February 9, the average was 12,762, an increaseof 105%.

By comparison, as of August 2022, approximately 6,000 tweets on any subject were sent per second, which is more than 500 million tweets a day. In a three-month period, that is more than 46 billion tweets, making these suspected antisemitic tweets less than 0.000003% of all tweets—and, frankly, we are being extremely ‘generous’ in our math toward this NGO.

Now, we wish people would voluntarily be 0% antisemitic (and 0% bigoted on any topic). But freedom of expression is not simply the right to say and believe the ‘right’ things, but the right to say and believe the wrong things—sometimes deeply wrong things. Naturally, it’s not because we want people to be wrong but because we don’t trust any entity that purports to decide what is true or false, right or wrong. We don’t want a ministry of truth, whether it is a government body or an NGO.

And make no mistake, that’s what organizations like the Institute for Strategic Dialogue wants to be. From the same report, discussing ‘Beam:’

Beam is a multi-lingual, multi-platform capability to expose, track and confront information threats online, from disinformation to hate, extremism, information operations, harassment and harmful conspiracy theories.

(Emphasis added.) Unsurprisingly, these things always have a leftward bias. If you complain about Soros, you are antisemitic. But if you denounce Clarence Thomas, you are not an anti-black racist. If you complain that big tech unjustly suppressed the Hunter Biden laptop story and, therefore, might have interfered with the election, you are a dangerous right-wing conspiracy theorist. But if you think George W. Bush invaded Iraq to steal their oil, well, that’s just fine. Would it be too much for people to chooses one standard, instead of a double standard? Just once?

Advertisement

Still, our point is that they want to focus on the this supposed 105% rise. They complain about the glass being 0.000003% empty. We would rather focus on the glass being over 99.9999996% full.

***

Editor’s Note: Do you enjoy Twitchy’s conservative reporting taking on the radical left and woke media? Support our work so that we can continue to bring you the truth. Join Twitchy VIP and use the promo code SAVEAMERICA to get 40% off your VIP membership!

Join the conversation as a VIP Member

Recommended

Trending on Twitchy Videos

Advertisement
Advertisement
Advertisement