GOOGLE CLAIMS IT DIDN’T MANIPULATE SEARCH RESULTS FOR “ISLAM” AND “MUSLIM” But we have known for well over a year that it did.

GOOGLE CLAIMS IT DIDN’T MANIPULATE SEARCH RESULTS FOR “ISLAM” AND “MUSLIM” But we have known for well over a year that it did.
September 25, 2018 Robert Spencer
Now that even President Trump has complained about Google manipulating its search results, the social media giant’s underhanded practices are finally getting some attention. A Fox News report Friday noted that at Google, “internal emails show conversations between employees highlighting a desire to manipulate search results on the heels of President Trump’s controversial travel ban in order to mute conservative viewpoints and push ways to combat the ban.” Google claims that this remained on the level of discussion, and wasn’t implemented, but there is considerable evidence to the contrary.

The emails show that “Google employees suggested ways to ‘leverage’ the search engine to combat what the tech giant staffers considered anti-immigration rhetoric and news.” Specifically, “Google staffers suggested actively countering ‘islamophobic, algorithmically biased results from search terms “Islam,” “Muslim,” “Iran,” etc.’” But all is well, Google would have us believe, because this wasn’t done.

Really? But we already knew that Google was manipulating search results for words such as “Islam” and “Muslim.” We have known for quite some time. On July 26, 2017, Turkey’s state-run news outlet Anadolu Agency reported:

Google’s first page results for searches of terms such as “jihad”, “shariah” and “taqiyya” now return mostly reputable explanations of the Islamic concepts. Taqiyya, which describes the circumstances under which a Muslim can conceal their belief in the face of persecution, is the sole term to feature a questionable website on the first page of results.

“Reputable” according to whom? “Questionable” according to whom?

Google was bowing to pressure from Texas imam Omar Suleiman, who led an initiative to compel Google to skew its results. Apparently Google didn’t consider whether those who were demanding that search results be manipulated in a particular direction might have had an ulterior motive. Could it have been that those who were pressuring Google wished to conceal certain truths about Islam that they preferred non-Muslims not know?

“Queries about Islam and Muslims on the world’s largest search engine have been updated amid public pressure to tamp down alleged disinformation from hate groups,” Anadolu Agency reported. Google could have performed a bit of due diligence to determine if sources being tarred as “hate groups” actually deserved the label, and if the Hamas-linked Council on American-Islamic Relations (CAIR) and the hard-Left smear propaganda organization the Southern Poverty Law Center (SPLC), both of which are invoked in the Anadolu article, were really reliable and objective arbiters for defining “hate groups.” Google could have tried to determine whether or not the information it was suppressing was really inaccurate. Instead, Google swallowed uncritically everything Omar Suleiman and his allies said.

Despite his success, Suleiman still isn’t satisfied:

One leading activist in favor of Google modifying its results told Anadolu Agency he noticed the updated search results and thanked the company for its efforts but said “much still needs to be done.” He claimed that Google has a responsibility to “combat ‘hate-filled Islamophobia’ similar to how they work to suppress extremist propaganda from groups like Daesh and al-Qaeda.”

This should have made Google executives stop and think.

The Islamic State (Daesh) and al-Qaeda slaughter people gleefully and call openly for more mass murders. There is no corresponding “Islamophobic” terror organization. There have been over 30,000 lethal jihad attacks worldwide since 9/11, and no remotely corresponding wave of “Islamophobic” violence. CAIR and the SPLC claim in the Anadolu Agency article that supposedly “Islamophobic” rhetoric has led to a rise in hate crimes against Muslims, but this is not supported by a scintilla of evidence.

When Suleiman equated critical words about Islam with the direct exhortations to murder emanating from actual murderers, Google should have realized that Suleiman had an agenda and wasn’t being honest. Yet he tried to pose as an impartial arbiter: “Suleiman said Google should differentiate between ‘criticism of Islam and hate-filled Islamophobia’, emphasizing the religion should not be infringed upon.”

Suleiman is granting that acceptable criticism of Islam is different from “hate-filled Islamophobia.” But if that is so, then the religion can be “infringed upon” by this legitimate criticism, no? Or if the claim that Islam must not be “infringed upon” means that it cannot be criticized, why is that so of Islam but no other religion?

Suleiman says: “I don’t think Google has a responsibility to portray Muslims positively. I think Google has a responsibility to weed out fear-mongering and hate groups but I don’t want Google to silence critique of Islam, or critique of Muslims.”

The problem with this is that neither Suleiman, nor Hamas-linked CAIR, nor anyone else who has ever said that there was a distinction between legitimate criticism of Islam and “hate-filled Islamophobia” has ever identified anyone they think is a legitimate critic of Islam without being “Islamophobic.”

Through 18 books, thousands of articles, and over 60,000 blog posts at Jihad Watch, I have attempted to present a reasonable, documented, fair, and accurate criticism of Islam and explanation of the jihad doctrine. Nevertheless, I’ve been tarred as a purveyor of “hate-filled Islamophobia” by groups and individuals that have never given my work a fair hearing, and have read it only to search for “gotcha!” quotes they could wrench away from their obviously benign meaning in order to claim I was stating something hateful.

This doesn’t happen only to me. It happens to anyone and everyone who dares to utter a critical word about Islam or jihad, wherever they are on the political spectrum.

This experience, reinforced countless times over a decade and a half, makes me extremely skeptical when Omar Suleiman says that he doesn’t want Google to silence critique of Islam. If he could produce a critique of Islam that he approved of, my skepticism might lessen. But he won’t, and can’t.

It seems much more likely that he pressured Google to skew its results so as to deep-six criticism of Islam. Probably, knowing that he couldn’t reveal he was trying to bring Google into compliance with Sharia blasphemy laws forbidding criticism of Islam, he told them instead that he wasn’t against criticism of Islam as such, but only against “hate-filled Islamophobia.”

And they fell for it, making their present claims not to have skewed searches on Islam ring hollow.

When I examined the Koran, the hadith, and the Islamic books under a microscope, I came to the absolute conviction that it is impossible – impossible! – for any human being to read the biography of Muhammad and believe in it, and yet emerge a psychologically and mentally healthy person.

Following are excerpts from an interview with Arab-American psychiatrist Wafa Sultan, which aired on Al-Hayat TV on May 29, 2008.

Wafa Sultan: When I examined the Koran, the hadith, and the Islamic books under a microscope, I came to the absolute conviction that it is impossible – impossible! – for any human being to read the biography of Muhammad and believe in it, and yet emerge a psychologically and mentally healthy person.


Do you remember the way that [the Prophet Muhammad] killed ‘Asmaa bint Marwan? His followers tore her body apart limb from limb, while she was breastfeeding her child. When they returned to him shouting “Allah Akbar,” he said: “No two goats will lock horns over her.” As you know, goals lock horns over the most inconsequential thing. For Muhammad, however, the killing of a woman while breastfeeding was too trivial a reason for goats “to lock horns over.” Is this a prophet of God?


It makes me very sad that Al-Jazeera TV allows an insane and terroristic creature like Al-Qaradhawi to use it as a medium for the spreading of his poisons, his terroristic fatwas, and his babbling. The words he used against me incited many young Muslims – who have been brainwashed and blindfolded, and who have been programmed to hate – to rain curses and threats upon me, right after the show in which he discussed my appearance on Al-Jazeera.


When Islam considers women to be deficient in reason, and I refute this assertion – in that case Islam attacks me, and I am merely attacking back. When Islam calls to kill whoever does not believe in it, and I refute this, in that case Islam attacks me, and I am merely attacking back. I do not attack Islam. I criticize it, but unfortunately, we, the victims of Islamic upbringing, view any criticism as an attack.


I always focus on the language – the language of Islam. The language of Islam is a negative, dead language, replete with violence, anger, hatred, and racism. Man is the product of language, the outcome of the negative and positive language to which he is exposed in this lifetime. If his life is dominated by negative language, he will emerge as a negative, reckless, and non-productive person, who rejects everything. On the other hand, if positive language dominates his life, he will emerge as a positive, happy, and productive person. This is why the negative language of Islam has failed. It has failed to produce people with a spontaneous and positive outlook. It has produced negative people. If we take a look at Islamic societies, we see what that negative man did.


I do not view Islam as a religion – according to my notion of religion. Islam is a political doctrine, which imposes itself by force. Any doctrine whatsoever that calls to kill those who do not believe in it is not a religion. It is a totalitarian doctrine that imposes itself by force. When I read, for example, the verse: “The adulterer and the adulteress – flog each of them with a hundred stripes, and do not let compassion for them move you” – I do not discern any spirituality in this verse. Whena certain faith manages to can strip its believers of their last grain of compassion, it strips them of their spirituality as well.

The Rubber Whip: Extremist Persecution of Christians, October 2018

Following the secession of South Sudan in 2011, Sudan President Omar al-Bashir vowed to adopt a stricter version of sharia (Islamic law) and recognize only Islamic culture and the Arabic language. Church leaders said Sudanese authorities have demolished

Source: The Rubber Whip: Extremist Persecution of Christians, October 2018

Is Islam a Violent Religion and Muslims Identify with Terrorism

Is Islam a Violent Religion and Muslims Identify with Terrorism

Is It Fact or Fiction?

Part 5

We continue in this month’s article with the conclusion of Myth #2: “Is Islam a Violent Religion and Muslims Identify with Terrorism.” (From “Myths and Facts about Muslim People and Islam”

Myth #2 stated: There is also a perception…that Muslim groups and leaders do not sufficiently denounce acts of terrorism. A 2011 Pew survey found that about half of all U.S. Muslims said their own religious leaders have not done enough to speak out against terrorism and extremists. However,…there are many Muslim heads of state, politicians, organizational leaders and individuals who regularly condemn these acts. …Further, thousands of Muslim clerics worldwide passed a “fatwa” (i.e. Islamic legal opinion) against terrorist organizations such as ISIS, the Taliban and al-Qaeda and requested that these terrorist groups not be branded as “Muslim organizations.”

Our response is this is exactly what we call the perfect example of taqiyya as it is written in Qur’an 3:28 where Allah taught the Muslims to lie to protect themselves from the infidels in America: ^28Believers do not take the infidels for friends, rather than the believers, and whoever does this so he has nothing to do with Allah, except that you should guard yourself from them, cautiously….

First, we have to understand that Muslim leaders in America do not denounce acts of terrorism because that is what they actually believe. The writer of this myth forgot to mention that Muslims celebrate all acts of terrorism in the West and around the world. As for this propaganda fatwah, which we have seen many times in the last thirty or so years, it was written by the same people who celebrate such acts of terrorism. For example, in a video in the English language, a Muslim imam condemned the 19 hijackers of 2001. Not only did he condemn them, but he cursed them to hell, calling them ever wicked name. If you watch the video, you will love the Muslim imam. However, a little later, the same imam was speaking in the Arabic language to a Muslim audience and praising the very same 19 hijackers. He congratulated them for their reward given to them by Allah as he quoted the verses of the Qur’an and the sayings of Mohammed in the hadith to support his sermon. Then he called on the
rest of the Muslim nations to rise up to follow in the footsteps of these 19 heroes. So, which is the true side of the Muslim imam? Islam is not what people say or do but simply what Allah and Mohammed said and did. Therefore, ISIS, the Taliban, al-Qaeda, and all other Muslim terrorist groups are the true picture of Islam. Do you know Islam? Have you read and studied the life and history of Mohammed and Muslim believers? We encourage you to examine the teachings of the Qur’an to know the truth for yourself.

Myth #2 continued with: Muslims are also subject to increased incidents of hate crimes. In 2014,…the number of hate crimes targeting Muslims grew from 135 in 2013 to 154 in 2014. And this is most likely an underrepresentation of the number of Muslims targeted because the numbers reflect only those crimes reported to police.

Our response is that hate crime in America is the normal way of life in the Muslim world. You can actually see this in any Muslim family in the world. I am shocked that the Muslim propagandists counted 154 hate crimes in 2014 in America against Muslims. How many of the 154 ended in death? The answer is none. Let’s choose any of the 57 Muslim countries in the world and there are 154 murders on any given day, that is Muslims killing non-Muslims or even killing other Muslims. Christians are treated by Muslims with hatred everyday all over the Muslim world, so that number of hate crimes is in the millions not just 154. Christians are being killed and their women are being kidnapped and raped with the blessing of the word of Allah in the Qur’an and the command of Mohammed in the hadith, but there is no support of such hate crimes in American throughout the teachings of the Bible. Do you know every time I speak and share the hate which Muslims are taught from birth in the Qur’an
and in the hadith, Muslims and liberals alike in America call me a hate minister?

Then Myth #2 ended with: …terrorist attacks in the United States have been committed by extremists who have adhered to a wide range of ideological beliefs including the Ku Klux Klan, white supremacy, anti-government, Islamic extremism and others. No one ideology is responsible for terrorism in the United States.

All hate crime in America is the result of sin in the life of individuals. As for hate crime which is committed by Muslim believers, it is not a result of Muslim extremists or Muslims “who have adhered to a wide range of ideological beliefs.” It is simply in direct obedience to the commands of Allah in the Qur’an as interpreted by all Muslim scholars, with one range of ideological beliefs as it is understood and practiced with the noble example of all Muslim believers, that is the false, self-proclaimed prophet of Islam, Mohammed, as is taught in his teachings (hadiths) and in his actions (sunnah) as well as it has been observed in the life of Muslim believers in the last 1400 years. The best evidence of this is to read our accurate translation, The Generous Qur’an, which is available on our website: