From Atlas Shrugs:
Paypal Called, Paypal Caved
Paypal backed down. Excelsior!As many of you know, on Friday of last week, my paypal account was "restricted." After a recent review of my account they said, "it has been determined" that I was "currently in violation of PayPal's Acceptable Use Policy. Under the Acceptable Use Policy, PayPal may not be used to send or receive payments for items that promote hate, violence, racial intolerance or the financial exploitation of a crime."
Huh?
I posted it over the weekend and received over a thousand letters of support, hundreds of ccs of paypal account cancellations........ the people spoke. Love that.
And so today, about an hour ago, a very pleasant and rather deliberately clueless executive called me from paypal to say it was all a big misunderstanding and Atlas would be reinstated (and the subsequent restriction of SIOA and FDI removed also).
Not so fast, Leslie.
I asked her why I was singled out and who designated me as a hate speech site, and on what basis? Why was revolution muslim (which threatened to murder the producers of Comedy Central) and Imam Awlaki DVDs part of the paypal stable of vendors? She said she was "unaware of a hate speech designation and would inquire and call me back."
And so she did.
She said Atlas was mistakenly designated when "in review." I asked why was Atlas in review. Paypal has been on this website since 2005. She did not have an answer. I asked what recourse do smaller websites have? As this is my real concern. My soapbox is pretty big, but what about small blogs?
I told Leslie that reinstating me was not good enough. If a site is designated a "hate site," who decides? Once designated, you have two choices -- lose paypal, or change content. Unfair, mon frere. Leslie agreed. She said she was going to recommend a third choice so that one could contest the designation before a mandatory choice had to be made of either signing off of paypal or changing content.
Frankly, I find this weak. They should remove the designation altogether. If they are going to allow jihadis to raise dough using paypal, what's the point of any hate speech designation?
Needless to say, I am not going back. I told her that, too. She wished I would reconsider. But, no. I am sticking with Gpal -- the G stands for guns :)
The real story is that we stood up and the weasels backed down.
The following is also an important read over at Pamela's place:
Leftist/Islamic Narrative: Pro-Freedom = Anti-Muslim
The Islamic supremacists and their left-wing shills are getting nervous that good people are beginning to stand up, get up, stand for their lives. The recent counter jihad actions, i.e., fighting the Muslim Brotherhood in Staten Island, Sheepshead Bay, Brooklyn, and the mega mosque at Ground Zero are just the beginning.
And so we get another insulting piece about the counter-jihad force over at the Washington Post. They refuse to engage in the most basic journalistic standards. Get a statement from me or anyone else they cover. But no, their dhimmitude and capitulation to islamic supremacists is painful -- look at their most obvious headline:
How influential will anti-Muslim groups become? Washington PostWe are not anti-Muslim. But they must say this to discredit us, so afraid are they of reason and logic. We are anti-Islamic supremacism. We believe all men are created equal, no special rights for special classes. We are counter-jihad.
What is the future of the anti-Muslim movement in the United States?Translation? They managed to keep the counter-jihad movement contained and marginalized for years but now folks are waking up so they have to nip this sucker in the bud.
For years there has been a small but passionate group of people concerned with the influence of Islam, and their activism seemed to be largely focused on blogging and lobbying political conservatives. But their presence -- and the arguments they raise -- seem to be coming into the broader sphere of late.
Go read the whole thing.
3 comments:
Um. I'm anti-Muslim/anti-Islam. Very.
Still anti-Muslim:)
It's hard not to be considering this simple fact;
the more Muslims who are allowed to become citizens of the United States, the more radicals there will be, and the more likely (given the evidence in France, UK, and Sweden) there will be attempts to enforce Sharia law in our streets, and even in our court systems.
Therefore, it is reasonable to ask, who would want Muslim immigration?
I know I don't.
Post a Comment