Decision time! McCarthy reportedly makes a decision on House leadership race
Egads: Video of bizarre, unsafe gun range practice is making Twitter/X cringe
WATCH: Acting Speaker of the House McHenry slams the gavel HARD in frustration
'Diversity hire from Maryland' The Democrats' official account gets fact-checked on 'histo...
'Dilbert dude' Scott Adams gets the last laugh, sadly
Horrifying video shows brutal dogfighting ring run by senior Pentagon official
'Do not trust the press'; CNN says yelling at your kids is the...
'We can't have anything': Men take over women's tech conference claiming to be...
If you use the word 'sp**ky' this October this tweeter will not vibe...
Illegal immigrants can now obtain driver's licenses in Minnesota, making the roads safer
Axios: Facebook and X are leaving us more susceptible to misinformation ahead of...
BREAKING NEWS: Democrats and a coalition of Republicans unite to vacate McCarthy as...
Irony can be pretty ironic: Climate-focused Global Citizen Festival destroys Central Park
NBC News analysis shows Trump's statements have taken a 'dark and aggressive turn'
Stop trying to make Biden COOL, he's NOT cool! DNC tries to make...

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:


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:


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:


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:


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.


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


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?


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


Trending on Twitchy Videos