Banner Header

Bitchute-Founder and Creator of Bitchute Has Bank Account FROZEN

Screenshot 32chu f
Founder and Creator of Bitchute Has Bank Account FROZEN in Blatant Act of THEFT AND CENSORSHIP!!!
Screenshot 32ray vahey bit
 On the right Ray Vahey, the founder and chief executive of Bitchute.

Bitchute was created out of a need for free speech absolutism during a time when YouTube was busy working on tweaking their algorithms to shadow ban voices who they disagree with.

Big tech has now taking this battle to another level by freezing the funds of the Bitchute bank account in yet another attempt to silence voices they don’t like!

In this video Dan Dicks of Press For Truth interviews Ray Vahey, the founder and chief executive of Bitchute about his bank account being frozen, why free speech absolutism is important and most importantly where he sees things going for Bitchute into 2023.



From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Jump to navigation Jump to search
A tilted black square with white text reading "BIT", followed by red text reading "CHUTE"
Type of site
Online video platform
Available in English
Country of origin United Kingdom
Created by Ray Vahey
Parent Bit Chute Limited
URL Edit this at Wikidata
Registration Optional
Launched January 2017; 5 years ago
Current status Active

BitChute (a portmanteau of "bit", a unit of information in computing, and "parachute"[1]) is an alt-tech video hosting service launched by Ray Vahey in January 2017.[2] It describes itself as offering freedom of expression,[3][4] while the service is known for hosting far-right individuals, conspiracy theorists, and hate speech.[a][b] Some creators who use BitChute have been banned from YouTube; some others crosspost content to both platforms or post more extreme content only to BitChute.[5][16] Before its deprecation, BitChute claimed to use peer-to-peer WebTorrent technology for video distribution,[2] though this was disputed.[17][18]


Vahey interviewed in 2018

Bit Chute Limited, BitChute's corporate identity, was registered by Ray Vahey in January 2017 in Newbury, England.[3][19][20] At the time of the site's launch, Vahey described BitChute as an alternative to mainstream platforms; he believed these platforms had demonstrated "increased levels of censorship" over the previous few years by banning and demonetising users (barring them from receiving advertising revenue), and "tweaking algorithms to send certain content into obscurity".[2] In 2018, the creators of BitChute described themselves as a "small team making a stand against Internet censorship because we believe it is the right thing to do."[21]

In November 2018, BitChute was banned from PayPal.[22][23] PayPal also banned Alex Jones, the Proud Boys, Tommy Robinson, and several anti-fascist groups and users at the same time.[22] In 2019, crowdfunding website IndieGogo also banned BitChute.[15] BitChute has also been banned from using Patreon and Stripe.[17]

In January 2019, BitChute announced in a post on Gab that they would move their domains over to Epik, a small domain registrar known for accepting the registration of websites that host far-right content.[12][24]

In March 2020, a new provision to Germany's Network Enforcement Act required social media companies to report instances of hate speech on their platforms to authorities. However, online news platform Coda reported that while the law applies to platforms including YouTube, Facebook, and Twitter, BitChute is one of the platforms not affected by the provision.[25] In early August 2020, Twitter began blocking posts linking to the site, later showing a warning to users who clicked on the links.[26][15]

As of January 2021, BitChute was in the process of being reported to Ofcom by the Community Security Trust after discovering Holocaust denial and Holocaust glorification content on the website, among other content considered harmful by the charity such as conspiracy theories related to COVID-19.[27] The trust's blog stated this will be an important test case for Ofcom's new role regarding regulation of social media in the United Kingdom, especially concerning extremism and hateful content.[28] Also in January, BitChute added "incitement to hatred" to its list of prohibited content, using the definition from the United Kingdom's Audiovisual Media Services Regulations 2020,[29] though Bellingcat wrote the following month that "racist slurs, Nazi imagery and calls for violence against Jews remained common in video comment sections."[15]


Jews Admit They Want Bitchute Shut Down
Screenshot 3truth does fear

Jews Admit They Want Bitchute Shut Down For Posting Content They Don’t Like.

Screenshot 3christian truth twice

Jewish Groups Openly Admit They Want Bitchute Shut Down For Posting Content They Don’t Like

At the behest of powerful Jewish interests, this week Google Play banned the third-party app BitChute — a “free speech” alternative to heavily censored YouTube — because it has become a safe haven for people and groups who openly oppose Jewish supremacy and draconian Soviet-style censorship:

[The Tel Aviv-based] Google suspended the app, stating that it is in violation of its affiliate spam policy, although BitChute denies this claim, tweeting a photo of Google’s notification.

The UK-based video platform was set up in January 2017 by tech entrepreneur Ray Vahey and Richard Anthony Jones. It has become a platform used by alt-right groups, with UK-based Community Security Trust (CST) finding it to be one of the four most dangerous outlets of extreme anti-Semitic content on the Internet.

According to pro-Israel lawyers and activists, in the context of rising antisemitism, public access to this platform and the site’s active promotion of antisemitism are cause for major alarm. Recently, social media companies are being pressured to clean their platforms of hate speech and adopt the IHRA definition of antisemitism, but this has led antisemites and white supremacists to look for other places to share their content.

Despite the site’s community guidelines that say “incitement to violence” and “malicious use of the platform” will not be tolerated, on the site are pro-ISIS content, calls for the killing of Jews, Holocaust denial, classic antisemitic characterizations of Israel and Israelis, and drawing comparisons to a contemporary Israeli policy to that of the Nazis—each with tens of thousands of views…

Director of UK Lawyers for Israel, Caroline Turner, maintained that online antisemitism promotes and incites hatred of Jewish people, and even violence against Jews. “It twists the truth, contains blatant lies and promotes conspiracy theories suggesting that Jews are the cause of various evils in the world,” she told JNS.

There is no specific law against antisemitism in the United Kingdom, although there are more general laws about sending grossly offensive and menacing messages, and stirring up racial hatred. If the person who uploaded the offensive material was based in England or Wales, and traceable, then it is possible to report their behavior to the police,” she explained, adding that there has been a precedence of prosecuted individuals who have sent antisemitic messages over social media, though they have been few and far between.

Turner related that fighting antisemitic material online is especially challenging due to the prevalence “difficulties in finding out who is responsible for the post.” Another challenge, she added, is “if the service provider and those posting the material are in a jurisdiction where the right to free speech is considered absolute.”

UK Lawyers for Israel has contacted Bitchute’s Internet service providers, including “Epik, Cloudflare, Taboola, AS53667 Frantech Solutions, Google Ads, Microsoft Azure, Choopa, Subscribestar and Regus, to request that they terminate their relationship with BitChute. So far, said Turner, only Choopa has responded that “they had checked with the Content Delivery Network (CDN) provider, Cloudflare, who indicated that the back-end hosting provider is not Choopa, instead it appears to be AS53667.”

“It is truly shocking that there is so much antisemitic material online and on social media, and really that there have been so few convictions. History has shown that this is a dangerous trend, and it really must be stopped. If offenses are being committed, we call on the police to prosecute them, and hopefully, this will deter other from this behavior,” she said.

Gideon Falter, chief executive of British NGO Campaign Against Antisemitism (CAA), explained that “over the past several years, we have seen an exponential growth in antisemitic abuse on social media platforms, including mockery and denial of the Holocaust, anti-Jewish incitement and endless antisemitic tropes from the far-right and the far-left.”

“…The popularity of antisemitic tropes and conspiracy theories are a wake-up call,” said Falter. “Social media companies have a responsibility to clamp down on such gratuitous and dangerous racism on their platforms, and we will continue to press them to act.”

Hypocritically, Jews claim that pornography should be protected free speech — despite the fact that many legitimate studies have shown a direct correlation between exposure to pornography and extreme violence, including many serial killers.

If Jews were really concerned about “inciting violence,” they would use their inordinate power to censor pornography, not legitimate historical revisionist materials — but since Jews dominate the pornography industry and make billions off of it, it’s not likely hypocritical Jews will call for any censorship of that “popular” content.

No one has ever made such claims about Holocaust “denial” videos — that they incite deviants to become serial killers.

In fact, the opposite seems to be true — censorship of Holocaust “denial” materials may incite people to violence because it’s a cynical “trick” that represses the truth.

Video Player

And censorship of all skepticism of the official Holocaust narrative appears to encourage Jews to lie about it even more — and that’s certainly not good for Jews who often get caught in monstrous lies about their alleged experiences during WWII.

Despite their dire predictions, there is no direct correlation between “antisemitic” materials and violence — tens of millions of people have already read Holocaust “denial” and Jewish supremacist materials, and virtually none of those people went out and committed violence against Jews because of it.

Jews claim that if not censored,  “antisemitic” Holocaust denial material could lead to “another” Holocaust — but perversely, what they don’t want you to know is that there wasn’t a real Holocaust to begin with.

In My Mind It Was True
Video Player

Related important info & explanations to spread:
Trump's 'Red Flag' Laws (w/ No White Guilt NWG):
Deconstructing the DHS Document on the ‘Threat’ of ‘White Nationalism’ (Part 1, w/ NWG):

Read 2688 times Last modified on Saturday, 08 April 2023 05:10