Here is a full transcript of the video. Where is the “hate speech”? Where is there even any factual inaccuracy?

For the Left, truth is no defense. What they want to do is silence their ideological foes. That’s all. The problem with the increasingly mainstream concept that “hate speech is not free speech” is that what exactly constitutes “hate speech” is a subjective judgment, often based on the political proclivities of the person doing the judging. If a Leftist analyst who subscribes to the fantasy that the Muslim Brotherhood is a “firewall against extremism” is doing the judging, he may think that the information below is “hate speech” — not because it is actually hateful, but because he opposes this message. On the other hand, if someone who is aware of the true nature and magnitude of the jihad threat is the judge, he would more likely consider Hamas-linked CAIR’s “Islamophobia” reports to be genuine “hate speech.”

The concept of “hate speech” is, in reality, a tool of the powerful to silence and demonize their critics. It has no place in a free society. This action by YouTube is ominous in the extreme, and is almost certainly the harbinger of much worse to come.

You can still see the video here, and here is the full transcript: “CENSORED: YouTube Uses Anti-ISIS Policy to Pull CounterJihad Video. Watch it here,” Counter Jihad, July 6, 2016

On Thursday of last week, this site published a video on its YouTube channel. As of yesterday, YouTube has pulled that video declaring it a violation of its “hate speech” policy.

We spoke with Jim Hanson, Executive Vice President of the Center for Security Policy and the official in charge of the video’s production. “I am stunned,” he said, “that the policy that YouTube developed for the express purpose of fighting Islamic State propaganda is now being used to silence critics of radical jihad.” He pointed out that this means that supporters of groups like the Islamic State (ISIS) have managed to turn YouTube’s own policies against it. “Instead of counteracting radical propaganda online,” Hanson said, “these policies are now being used to silence the very speech that YouTube said it wanted — speech that challenges ISIS.”

Hanson appears to be correct that YouTube initially developed its policies with countering ISIS in mind. In an article in the Huffington Post, Jaweed Kaleem interviewed a number of content producers that YouTube had specifically contacted in order to generate content that would overwhelm ISIS with alternative viewpoints.

“The words “Islamic State” appeared nowhere in the note asking Muslims like Ali to ‘change the discourse,’ but the message was clear. The terrorist organization’s vast media arm, with its slick recruitment videos, was winning the propaganda war.”

YouTube solicited this kind of content, from Muslims like our Shireen Qudosi, for the express purpose of contesting its space with ISIS propagandists. Somehow, its own policies have been turned against it.

“YouTube’s removal of CounterJihad’s factual analysis of the threat of ISIS and radical Islam is a devastating blow against credible counter-terrorism efforts,” Qudosi said. “No company or individual can legitimately say they support free speech and at the same time set up blockades against the very people doing the work necessary to counter the ideology. There is no other way to look at this.”

The text of the video is posted below.