Telegram is where we’re at for Tommy Robinson, Sargon of Akkad, Alex Jones, Laura Loomer and other digital refugees

Now we have to see how long before Treason May in the UK and the various forces of Mordor in the USA, marshalled by Dark Lord Soros, call for Apple and Google to remove the Telegram App from their app stores?

Tommy Robinson Telegram 40,000 subscribers.

I had a feeling we’d see a movement to Telegram. I had seen it in use by some groups and when Tommy Robinson’s and my primary Facebook account were deleted in February I set up my channel and Tommy’s. It took a while to get him using it but once he did, the growth was astonishing. Despite the initial scepticism of Lizzie Dearden of the Independent not thinking his fans were “young” enough to figure it out. Obviously we’re nudging 40,000 subscribers now!

Yes, I did call the channel “Tommy Robinson’s Friends of Zuck” because I set it up the day that Zuckerberg’s Facebook minions erased Tommy’s page: at that time probably the largest and most active political page in the UK.

This list was not compiled by me. I don’t know everybody on it, I don’t endorse all their views. I’m not interested in hearing that they’ve ever said something you don’t like or they hold views and opinions you think I shouldn’t like. See note at the end.

Telegram channel list as compiled by Alternative News (thanks!)

I don’t vouch for their content though I do recognise most of them. If any of them:

  • are actual Nazis and parade around in the uniforms of the Third Reich or wave Swastikas;
  • you can send me well documented evidence of very obvious Jew hatred;
  • show me evidence of views derived from Culture of Critique that the “Jews control the media/banks/world”
  • evidence of theories derived from the Protocols of the Elders of Zion (similar to above);

then I’ll think about taking them off my list. Even then I’ll think twice. As much as I abhor those things I’ve listed, in these days of extreme censorship I’m a free speech extremist. You can find Louis Farrakhan on your own without any help from me, however.

If you derive value from my work, please consider donating some value my way. You can find all the details on the donation page.

Carl Benjamin’s letter to constituents: Sargon of Akkad explains a tweet

Reproduced from his Google Doc.

Dear constituent, 

I realised these unorthodox methods may seem alarming but please allow me to explain.

There is a particular kind of groupthink in Westminster that is not representative of the country at large. If you do not fit this mould then your concerns will not be given a fair hearing before the country. I am one of these people and I have principled opposition to what is happening in Westminster. 

In the case of this particular tweet, it was an ironic demonstration that Jess Phillips’ desire to regulate the internet had no definable boundary and would be extended to include comments that were offensive but not illegal (such as threats).

I crafted this tweet with the express intention of proving this point. The phrase “I wouldn’t even rape you” cannot be interpreted as a threat or a promise of action, it is literally a promise of inaction and yet is consistently framed as such. 

This tweet was deliberately crafted piece of political theatre with the understanding it would be considered immoral but not illegal. I specifically chose this phrase because I knew that the political gatekeepers in Westminster, who simply ignore anyone that they do not personally like, would not be able to resist this. 

I was purposefully pushing their buttons in order to guarantee their response, and at the time I felt that it was the only way i could even get them to acknowledge my existence. And one has to admit this has been a remarkable success.

The tweet did not violate twitters rules and I was not banned from twitter for it. 

Jess Phillips did not see that tweet initially, i had previously tried to engage with her and she had blocked me. I know that she was not offended by this because Jess Phillips is not a weak woman, as evidenced her appearance the following day on Victoria Derbyshire’s live show where she said that she did not care about this because she was in the garden playing with her children.

Hypocritically, Phillips subsequently wrote an article in the Telegraph complaining that “Twitter is siding with my abusers”, because they did not ban anyone’s account for threatening to not do something. 

I am sorry if you, the reader, are offended by this but I would like it to be known that I did not intend for this to come to your attention. I intended it to come to the attention to those in Westminster who are studiously avoiding any debate over the terrible ideas they hold and the damaging policies they implement. 

They would not listen and I felt I had no choice and I will not be apologising to them, because I knew they would not accept an apology in good faith. I am a liberal activist, and I did what I felt was necessary at the time to drive a conversation regarding censorship in the United Kingdom. I do not regret my tweet and I think it is worth considering why both the media and politicians are so interested in their personal offence, instead of the policies they institute or permit that violate human rights.

In this case that would be Section 127 of the 2003 Communications Act, the legislation responsible for Mark Meechan to be convicted and fined for uploading a joke to the internet.

We have come to a point in this country where jokes can now be criminalised. This was not the intention of the legislation but it is the consequence of it. 

Section 127 of the 2003 Communications Act must be repealed. 


Carl Benjamin

Watch: a good start to understanding what Cultural Marxism is

I’ve used the term Cultural Marxism quite a bit but I’ll freely admit, I haven’t done the in depth study of the last 150 years of philosophy that one truly needs to understand it. Neither has Sargon of Akkad (though he’s studied more than I have) but he properly discusses the limits of his own knowledge here in a very interesting discussion.

As a commenter on the video writes, “Funny isn’t it, how cultural Marxists don’t want people to know about cultural Marxism?” – This reminds me of Islam and dhimmitude. One of the rules of dhimmitude is that the kuffar, the conquered dhimmis, shouldn’t be allowed to study Islam.

Tommy Robinson and Sargon of Akkad.

Watch all of this. State Persecution, Cambridge court case, deplatforming and the Nazi punching story.

If you derive value from my work, please consider donating some value my way. You can find all the details on the donation page.

Fighting the Modians at Patreon, PayPal and Mastercard

Beach Sunset Tel Aviv

The business model of Silicon Valley is to reap outsized profits by achieving a (temporary) monopoly. This is the premise behind Peter Thiel’s Zero to One. Instead of competition persisting over time, all the competition takes place in the startup phase, and the winner of this phase reaps all the profit. As a side effect, it creates a perfect environment for Modians to take charge, once the winner is declared. The effect is enhanced by the little-known (outside of Silicon Valley) truth that the best technology does *not* often win. Usually, it’s the best marketing.

David Boxenhorn, on Facebook

I watched YouTuber Law’s latest update on the letter he’s putting together about the deplatforming of Sargon of Akkad (and all the rest) by Patreon. His intention is to file a complaint with the Federal Trade Commission in the US rather than bringing a suit against any of the tech companies directly. That’s probably a smart legal plan (he knows much more than I do) but he will be fighting huge entrenched interests. His videos are below but I’ll sum them up: he’s building an ad hoc team of (highly skilled) volunteers and he thinks he has enough case law and evidence to get the FTC to start an investigation which would have much more power and weight than a collection of law suits. It would also be financed by government money.

If you haven’t already read Mundia and Modia, you may well want to.

I wanted to put some broader context around this and that’s why I quoted David at the start on how Silicon Valley and modern Tech business works. This all feeds into and flows from David’s thesis of Mundia and Modia. It also links up with the law suit I’m supporting by JPB Liberty against Google and Facebook for banning many different crypto based technologies from advertising on their platforms about a year ago.

The Federal Trade Commission is part of government. As such it will staffed by modians, people who are far removed from objective criteria of success in business or success in a technical and engineering field. This is a hugely important thing to remember when dealing with them.

Patreon, PayPal, Mastercard have all achieved a degree of market dominance in their fields. There might have been better technical competition but these guys are mammoths. As such the objective business criteria for their ongoing success are far removed from the day to day operations of the companies. Mostly their staff can do whatever they want: riding a wave of profitability they inherited from early engineering skills, excellent marketing and a healthy dose of luck. This will carry them along for a while.

The FTC is going to be staffed (especially considering Mundia Modia thinking and following 8 years of Obama) via the revolving door system between big business and the US government. Massive lobbying money has completely corrupted Washington DC. It is into this quagmire that YouTuberLaw’s letter will be sent.

As we’ve seen this week with the massive layoffs across Buzzfeed and Huffington Post, in some parts of the tech world easy profitability is going away. My belief is the entire advertising supported business model is stretched very thin and the numbers upon which Google and Facebook have grown are being understood to be grossly inflated. Everything downstream from them (and that includes “businesses” like Huffpo and Buzzfeed) which rely on web traffic and eyeballs flowing from social media sites will start to feel pain.

There has been a recent uptick in linking the brands of online advertising with the nature of user generated content it appears alongside. Today this is a modian idea to drive forward their “social justice” agenda but it was first done a few decades ago by figures like Mary Whitehouse in the UK and Jerry Falwell’s Moral Majority in the US. It has been taken to new levels of effectiveness by the far-left today. Thinking this would help them fight against online competitors for your attention, the mainstream media (M5M) thought they’d ride the wave, they’re also getting caught in the destructive tsunami now too.

The promise of digital advertising was that it can be much more targeted, if that’s really coming true, every advertising based business, even Facebook and Google, the two most capable targeted advertising delivery systems, will do themselves out of business because advertising just shouldn’t be as big an industry as it is today and the entire media world that is built around it is probably a house of cards.

So returning back to the financial deplatforming of non-advertising supported media endeavours (like Sargon of Akkad, Alex Jones, Milo and even myself): advertising supported media is going to change dramatically. I still can’t see the future but I can tell the status quo is changing very fast. Everything that can be done to stop payment systems which bypass the advertising support model from capture by the far-left, cultural marxists must be done which is why I wish YouTuberLaw and JPB Liberty both every success in shaking up these industries.

My video with Andrew Hamilton explaining the JPB Liberty law suit:

YouTuberLaw videos, two updated:

If you derive value from my work, please consider donating some value my way. You can find all the details on the donation page.