Laura Loomer’s hate speech and the Christchurch, New Zealand mass murder – a CrowdSource The Truth case study








BACKGROUND.   U.S. domestic counter-terrorism efforts are woefully behind international counter-terrorism efforts.  Specifically, domestic counter-terrorism does not address potential threats within the realm of social media where hate speech foments.

Threats such as the Call To Action (CTA) to close the Port of Charleston, South Carolina with a dirty bomb (June 14, 2017) should be taken seriously.  Social media CTA broadcasts have the potential to organize followers into a specific course of action.



The conspiracy theorist whose videos on YouTube led to an hours-long shutdown at the Port of Charleston on Wednesday says he didn’t mean to cause a stir.

In a video posted Friday afternoon, George Webb Sweigert said he wasn’t the first person to alert authorities in South Carolina about the threat of a radioactive “dirty bomb” aboard a container ship moored in Mount Pleasant. Instead, he said, word came from people who saw videos posted Wednesday in which he said he’d heard explosives were on the Maersk Memphis.

Those calls, received about 8 p.m. Wednesday, led to the closure of the port’s Wando Welch terminal into the early hours of Thursday morning. Authorities evacuated the area, closed a portion of the Cooper River and swept the ship for evidence of uranium.

Authorities didn’t find any evidence of a bomb after searching four shipping containers said to be at risk, and they reopened the port around 3:30 a.m.

Sweigert’s video Friday marked his first public statement since the port incident. In it, he says he talked with authorities about the “specific, credible warning” he’d heard from a source he declined to identify, but he denied initially reporting the threat to the Coast Guard station in Charleston.

Coast Guard officials haven’t said who first called them.

“I did not say to raid the ship in any way. We had a discussion. I didn’t even know where the Maersk was,” Sweigert said, adding later: “They are the ones who decided to shut the Port of Charleston down. I never said shut the Port of Charleston down.”

downddddload (2)




One potential example can be seen below.  Two days before the horrific shooting and mass murder in Christchurch, New Zealand a hate speech zealot (as determined by the Southern Poverty Law Center) proclaimed the “great replacement” strategy on the same platform that closed the Port of Charleston — CrowdSource The Truth.  The zealot was a “CrowdSource” regular named Laura Loomer, known widely as a alt-right counter-jihad spokeswoman.

In video content, Loomer is heard inciting fear among CrowdSource viewers with the “white replacement” theory.  This theory indicates that Muslims will eventually replace the white race due to birth rate attrition.  Many observers believe that such rhetoric can be a “dog whistle” to unstable minds — like the Christchuch shooter.


MARCH 12, 2019







MARCH 14, 2019



loose561768448 (1)

MARCH 14, 2019

“WELLINGTON, New Zealand — At least 49 people were killed at two mosques in Christchurch, New Zealand, on Friday, in a horrific and methodical afternoon slaughter, part of which was broadcast live on the internet after the publication of a white supremacist manifesto online.”





“This attack is a response to the Hispanic invasion of Texas.” Those were the words that appeared in a manifesto published shortly before the deadly shooting in El Paso on Saturday. More than half of so-called “alt-right killers” are motivated by the “white replacement” theory, which refers to the belief that white people will be systematically replaced by black and brown migrants. The killer in El Paso, who law enforcement believes authored the memo, is apparently no exception.

The white replacement theory is actually made up of two sub-conspiracies: “the great replacement” theory, which originated in France, and “the white genocide theory”, which comes from the US. Together, the theories are among the most widespread ideologies in far-right spaces, and the primary catalysts of far-right mass violence.



Originally published: MintPress News (March 15, 2019)   | 
What is without question the worst mass shooting in New Zealand’s history took place on Friday when shooters, 28-year-old Australian Brenton Tarrant among them, opened fire at two Christchurch mosques. Four, including Tarrant, have been arrested for the heinous act, which claimed at least 49 innocent lives. Tarrant was responsible for killing more than 40 victims, among them several children, in a rampage he live-streamed on Facebook, sending chills throughout the Muslim community, particularly Muslims living in Western countries.Tarrant’s motives and ideology, laid bare in a 74-page manifesto, show a concern over the fertility rates of non-white groups as well as the immigration of non-whites to countries like New Zealand and Australia, which he likened to an “invasion” that threatened the white majority in those countries. However, Tarrant — in his ignorance — failed to grasp that many of the Muslim immigrants he targeted had come to New Zealand after fleeing Western-backed invasions, occupations, or persecution in their home countries.

Notable among Tarrant’s views is the fact that he is a clear ethno-nationalist, promoting his view that different ethnic groups must be kept “separate, unique, undiluted in [sic] unrestrained in cultural or ethnic expression and autonomy.” Tarrant also claimed that he doesn’t necessarily hate Muslims and only targeted those Muslims {i.e., immigrants) that chose “to invade our lands, live on our soil and replace our people.

He also stated that he chose to target Muslims because “Islamic nations, in particular, have high birth rates, regardless of race or ethnicity” and to satiate “a want for revenge against Islam for the 1,300 years of war and devastation that it has brought upon the people of the West and other peoples of the world.” His views are remarkably similar to those of Norwegian terrorist Anders Breivik, which is unsurprising given that Tarrant named him as an inspiration for the shooting.

Though many — in the hours after the shooting — have sought to place blame and point fingers at notable demagogues like President Donald Trump or “counter-jihad” alt-right figures like Laura Loomer and Jacob Wohl, it is important to place Tarrant’s motivations in context.










PayPal banned far-right figure Laura Loomer on Tuesday, making her the latest right-wing figure to be banished from the online payment and funding platform.

The ban is another blow for Loomer who has already been tossed off of a number of other tech platforms, including Venmo and GoFundMe, over attacks on Muslims that included calls for Muslims to be banned from working for rideshare companies.

Before the ban, Loomer frequently asked her fans to support her with contributions to her PayPal account. She claims that she’s racked up $40,000 in credit debt in pursuit of her pro-Trump activism.


Facebook today removed Louis Farrakhan, Alex Jones, Paul Nehlen, Milo Yiannopoulos, Paul Joseph Watson, Laura Loomer, and Infowars from Facebook and Instagram, saying their accounts violated its policies against dangerous individuals and organizations. They will be prohibited from creating new accounts, although Facebook and Instagram users will continue to be able to create posts praising them and their viewpoints, the company said.

“We’ve always banned individuals or organizations that promote or engage in violence and hate, regardless of ideology,” the company said in a statement. “The process for evaluating potential violators is extensive and it is what led us to our decision to remove these accounts today.”

A far right activist has been banned from ride-sharing services Uber and Lyft after launching into a vitriolic anti-Muslim tirade in the wake of the New York terrorist attack.

Laura Loomer, an internet personality, prompted anger for her response to the attack that killed eight people after a pickup truck crashed into a bike path in Manhattan on Tuesday.

The provocateur, who works for far right site The Rebel Media which has been nicknamed “Canadian Breitbart”, claimed passersby in hijabs enjoyed the attack and called for the creation of a “non-Islamic” ride-hailing app.






Michel Coulombe, director of the Canadian Security Intelligence Service, told a Commons committee today that Canada’s spy agency has used new disruption powers it was granted when Bill C-51 became law this past summer.

This marks the first time CSIS has publicly acknowledged the use of its new powers under the Anti-terrorism Act to disrupt suspected plots rather than just relay information about those plots to the federal government and the RCMP.

The disruption powers allow CSIS to interfere with, telephone calls, travel plans and bank or financial transactions. The agency can also disrupt radical websites and Twitter accounts of groups or people inside and outside of Canada.

This provision in the act has garnered criticism from the outset, because there is no clear definition of what “disrupt” means in the legislation, causing some to be concerned the power would be abused by police and intelligence services.



The Government of Canada introduced new national security legislation in the summer of 2017. Bill C-59, National Security Act, 2017 (“Bill C-59” or “the Bill”), would significantly change how Canada’s signals intelligence agency, the Communications Security Establishment (CSE) operates. These reforms are largely contained in the proposed Communications Security Establishment Act (“CSE Act”) in Part 3 of the Bill.

. . .

Past revelations of the CSE’s activities included realizations that the Establishment has deployed a global sensor network, cover-named EONBLUE, which analyzes vast quantities of information that is directed at the Government of Canada’s infrastructure as well as information which transits the global information infrastructure. This proposal may expand the CSE’s ability to further deploy its sensor network which, in addition to passively monitoring for threats is also intended to interdict and degrade possible threats by manipulating communications. There is a significant risk that such activities both may inadvertently target legitimate communications made by Canadians, persons in Canada, and residents and citizens of foreign countries. Moreover, such activities constitute mass surveillance of communications infrastructure and, thus, an explicit approval for the CSE to engage in highly controversial and rights-infringing activities.


A General Comment about the Proposed Cyber Operations Powers

As part of the proposed legislation, the CSE would gain the ability to engage in defensive and active (or offensive) cyber operations. The defensive cyber operations aspect of the mandate would enable the CSE to carry out activities “to help protect federal institutions’ electronic information and information infrastructures as well as other electronic information and information infrastructures which have been designated as being of importance to the Government of Canada.” In contrast, the active cyber operations aspect of the mandate would allow the CSE to carry out activities “to degrade, disrupt, influence, respond to or interfere with the capabilities, intentions or activities of a foreign individual, state, organization or terrorist group as they relate to international affairs, defence or security.


To be continued ……..



Copyright 2019.  Reproduction prohibited.



Leave a Reply

%d bloggers like this: