#which I really do hope is the case it's a muslim government that already hates them because of their zionism just let it continue | Explore Tumblr posts and blogs

bountyofbeads · 5 years ago

Text

I Felt Safe in America. Until El Paso. https://www.nytimes.com/2019/08/10/opinion/sunday/el-paso-shooting-immigrants.html

Below are two editorial pieces written by Hispanic AMERICANS and their thoughts on America after the El Paso shooting. We CANNOT LET HATE WIN. WE MUST STAND WITH OUR BROTHERS AND SISTERS.

I Felt Safe in America. Until El Paso.

It is because of people like me and my daughter that a gunman did what he did.

By Fernanda Santos, Ms. Santos, a former national correspondent for The Times, teaches journalism at Arizona State University. | Published Aug. 10, 2019 | New York Times | Posted August 10, 2019 |

PHOENIX — A good friend who is moving to Chicago had a going-away party at a downtown brewery recently and I stopped by to say goodbye. He is an artist from Iraq who escaped to the United States in 2013 to save his life. In Iraq, Mahdi Army loyalists had chased, beaten and threatened him because he had dared to sketch nude pictures — practice for his entrance exam at Baghdad University’s College of Fine Arts. Here, he is free.

I wasn’t running from anyone when I settled in the United States 21 years ago, but I understand the idea of being free in America: For me, it has meant being free from the senseless violence of everyday life in Rio de Janeiro, from where I came. Since moving to the United States, I’ve married a white man, given birth to our daughter and moved to Arizona, where I’ve written about immigrants and the border and gotten to know both well.

I blend in seamlessly in Arizona, where about one in three residents is Latino. As a naturalized citizen, I felt safe here even when a campaign against illegal immigrants led by the infamous former sheriff, Joe Arpaio, targeted Latinos. One day after Donald Trump’s election, a man approached me while I spoke Spanish on the phone outside a coffee shop and screamed, “Speak English.” The experience rattled me, but still I felt safe. I did, however, start carrying my passport card in my wallet, just in case.

That sense of safety changed when a young white man opened fire in a Walmart in El Paso last Saturday, making targets out of brown-skinned people. I read the suspect’s manifesto Sunday morning and, for the first time, I did not feel just like an immigrant. I felt like a target. I looked at my 10-year-old daughter eating the chocolate-chip pancakes I’d made and realized that she could be a target too. Citizenship, it turns out, is an illusory shield. In the eyes of that gunman, I am not American but an invader, an instigator. It is because of people like me that he did what he did.

Segregation was codified in this country in the days after Emancipation, when Southern states enacted laws that clamped down on African-Americans’ newly found freedom to vote, own property or attend public schools. But Jim Crow extended beyond the South: It took the Supreme Court to force Arizona to stop requiring voters to take English literacy tests, and that was years after the Voting Rights Act had already banned such tests.

But if legal segregation has largely fallen before court rulings, anti-minority and anti-immigrant attitudes have not. Last month, at a Republican event in Phoenix, State Senator Sylvia Allen, who is white, said, “We’re going to look like South American countries very quickly.” Ms. Allen, who later apologized, blamed it on the fact that white women are not reproducing fast enough and on the immigrants who are “flooding us and flooding us and flooding us and overwhelming us so we don’t have time to teach them the principles of our country.”

Last week, a fund-raising email by the Arizona Republican Party called the arrival of Central Americans at the border to assert their legal right for asylum “an invasion,” echoing language commonly employed by President Trump.

This is the language of white supremacy today: that we must stop immigration because Latinos will distort American culture and replace “real Americans.” But by “American culture” they really mean white culture, a definition that, to them, doesn’t apply to people like me. Or to black people, Muslims, Asian-Americans and many others, including mixed-race Americans like my daughter.

In his manifesto, the El Paso suspect employs this narrow definition to justify the unjustifiable. He says much more in that screed, most of it vile. Some, though, reminded me, in a good way, of the young undocumented immigrants I’ve met in Arizona. “Inaction is not a choice,” he wrote, reminding me that before elections, many young immigrants, including so-called Dreamers, knock on doors and share their stories, hoping to persuade their neighbors to do what they cannot, which is to vote. For those Dreamers, inaction is indeed not a choice.

There are Walmart stores all along the southern border. If you visit one of them on a weekend, you’ll see a parking lot full of cars with Mexican license plates. In Douglas, Ariz., a city whose mayor was born in the Dominican Republic, Mexicans who cross into the United States on foot to buy discounted clothing and housewares leave their Walmart shopping carts at the border crossing.

While I was at a Walmart in Phoenix shopping for school supplies the other day, I could see the kinds of people who make up this state. There were mothers speaking Spanish to children who spoke to one another in English, Muslim refugees from Africa in brightly colored hijabs, black families and white families too.

When school starts later this month in Ciudad Juárez, Mexico, one school will be missing its principal, Elsa Mendoza Marquez. She was among the 22 people killed in the El Paso Walmart, just across the Rio Grande from Juarez. A dual Mexican-American citizen, she too was shopping and was gunned down while her husband waited for her outside, in the parking lot.

What the El Paso gunman failed to realize is that the immigrants he so hates are, like him, struggling to make sense of a changing country and claim their rightful place in it. He chose a rifle to claim his place. My Iraqi friend, who is off to pursue a master’s degree in art in Chicago, chose a brush.

The Dreamers I’ve met have chosen the power of civic engagement to fight their fight. And that, to me, makes them better citizens than plenty of the people who call themselves “real Americans” these days.

El Paso Was a Massacre Foretold

Those who are set on killing minorities are aided by the fact that they can easily obtain assault weapons in this country.

By Jorge Ramos, Mr. Ramos is a contributing Opinion writer. | Published Aug. 10, 2019 | New York Times | Posted August 10, 2019 |

Leer en español

EL PASO — “I don’t know why he took my boy’s life,” Dora Lizarde said. Her grandson Javier, 15, was the youngest victim of last weekend’s massacre, killed by a bullet to the head. “Fifteen years old; he still had so much time to live,” Ms. Lizarde told me in an interview this week. “I don’t know why he took him away, I don’t understand. He is young, too.”

Patrick Crusius is young, too.

Police have charged Mr. Crusius, 21, in the mass shooting that killed 22 people at a crowded Walmart here on Aug. 3. Nineteen of the victims had Spanish surnames, making this the worst attack on Latinos in modern American history. The Mexican government has labeled the killings a terrorist act, given that eight Mexican citizens were among the dead. And, yes, it is a hate crime.

The massacre of Latinos in El Paso is the latest and most brutal reaction by a young, white American against a future that might be dominated by minorities. The fact that this attack happened is unsurprising: What else can we expect when racism and hatred of others is promoted from the top down in a country where there are more guns than people?

Authorities have said that Mr. Crusius posted a 2,300-word manifesto online minutes before the attack. In it, he said the attack was in response to a “Hispanic invasion of Texas.” “It makes no sense to keep letting millions of illegal or legal immigrants flood into the United States,” Mr. Crusius supposedly wrote, “and to keep the tens of millions that are already here.” Those words startled me — not only because they were so hateful, but because they could seamlessly fit into speeches given by President Trump, by some members of his cabinet and by many right-wing politicians.

While Mr. Trump insists that he does not have “a racist bone” in his body, his history of making racist remarks says otherwise. After years of suggesting that President Barack Obama had not been born in the United States, Mr. Trump launched his presidential campaign in 2015 by likening Mexican immigrants to criminals and rapists. He recently said that four congresswomen of color should “go back” to the countries from which they came. The list goes on. When the most powerful man in the world uses such toxic rhetoric, we should not be surprised when others mimic him.

Beto O’Rourke, the former congressman from El Paso and a Democratic presidential candidate, recently told me that he is convinced Mr. Trump influenced the attack. Mr. O’Rourke — who along with Senator Elizabeth Warren, another Democratic candidate for the presidency, has said in recent days that Mr. Trump is a “white supremacist” — responded to a tweet from the president by writing: “22 people in my hometown are dead after an act of terror inspired by your racism.” Other leaders and politicians, including Representative Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez, have also lost their patience with Mr. Trump. “I don’t want to hear the question ‘Is this president racist?’ anymore. He is,” Ms. Ocasio-Cortez said recently.

The president’s xenophobia, and that of many of his supporters and enablers, is rooted in a dread that the day is soon coming when they will be a minority in their country. While non-Hispanic whites remain a majority of the population in the United States, in less than 30 years that may no longer be the case, according to��projections. This sort of demographic revolution is putting Americans’ tolerance to the test. Most of us welcome an increasingly diverse country, but many, like Mr. Trump, resist the country’s multiethnic, multicultural future. Some react by walking into a store and murdering innocent people.

The most racist Americans who are set on killing minorities are aided by the fact that they can easily obtain assault weapons in this country. I’ve lost count of all the massacres I’ve covered as a journalist. After each shooting — Columbine, Sandy Hook, Las Vegas, Parkland — I thought we might have reached the limit of Americans’ tolerance for such horror. But it wasn’t so. I fear that the killings in El Paso won’t change anything, and that I soon will be back on another flight headed to cover the next massacre. And then another. And another after that.

I have lost hope that the United States will ever pass laws that limit access to firearms. Like many parents around the country, I’ve had difficult conversations with my children in case they find themselves in a situation where someone is shooting at them. “Try to escape, hide or fight,” I tell them. “But don’t stay still. Gunmen have a lot of bullets, but not patience.”

Still, even if we could somehow solve our gun problem in America, our racism problem would be far more difficult to eradicate. Hate-group activity is on the rise, according to the Southern Poverty Law Center. And anti-immigrant rhetoric has already appeared in slogans shouted during the 2020 presidential campaign.

I crossed the border from El Paso to Ciudad Juárez, Mexico, one morning this week. For many years, Juárez was considered one of the most dangerous cities in Mexico because of the presence of drug cartels. Yet on this visit some people I spoke with told me that they didn’t dare cross into El Paso with their families. When I asked why, some said that they feared being hunted for being Mexican, and all said that racism was a factor.

Nobody should live in fear because they are Mexican nationals in the United States or members of the Latino community. But that’s where we are now in this United States of Trump. The abundance of weapons of war on the streets and Mr. Trump’s unending racist rhetoric are indisputably connected to the massacre in El Paso. What happened in this city was a massacre foretold. Words matter. When they are filled with hate, they cause great damage.

Mr. Ramos is an anchor for the Univision network and the author of “Stranger: The Challenge of a Latino Immigrant in the Trump Era.”

9 notes · View notes

scripttorture · 6 years ago

Note

Hello, I saw your response about conditioning through torture and how it does not work. I was wondering though, if a torture victim was rescued by someone and then kept in their care could they be conditioned by them while being taken care of? I'm working on a henchmen whose horribly dependant on the villain as he views her as his savior to the point of his own self destruction and I'm not sure if it would be a conditioned response or just a feeling of debt.

Theanswer to this depends on the sort of responses you’re talkingabout and I don’t think the wording is great-

Butit’s difficult to know what the ‘right’ terms are when mostexperts disagree. I respond very negatively to the term‘brainwashing’ because of cultural implications that go alongwith that word. However there aremental health professionals who use the term, even those who researchthings like cults.

They’reusing the term to refer to a very specific set of manipulativetechniques in a way they hope will appeal to and be understood by themainstream.

I’mrejecting the term because I think it ends up leaving people with avery skewed view of what’s possible and confusing people further.

AndI think ‘conditioned’ looks very much like a synonym for‘brainwashed’ in this context.

Theword implies a lack of agency or choice on the part of henchman. Andit’s impossible to take away someone’s ability to choose.

Avillain can take away their physical capacity to make a choice (acharacter with their hands tied behind their back can’t choose toshake someone’s hand). A villain can manipulate. A villain cancoerce, so that the choice a character makes isn’t a free choice. Acharacter with a gun to their head being told notto shake hands is likely to think that shaking hands isn’timportant enough to risk their life over. But the character stillchooses.

Thereare a couple of ways that you can make the relationship between thishenchman and the villain extremelyunhealthy, manipulative and coercive, while having him realisticallyview her positively. I get the impression you already know that noneof them involve violence.

Let’sstart by talking about ICURE.

ICUREis an acronym that covers a set of techniques which are scarilyeffective at manipulating people and coercing them into changingtheir beliefs. It stands for Isolate, Control information, introduceUncertainty, Repetition and Emotive responses.

Fromyour description there’s a lotof potential for all of those right at the start of this relationshipwhen the villain rescues the henchman. In fact in the environmentyou’ve suggested it might not even be entirely conscious on thevillain’s part.

Dependingon his injuries and the way medicine is practiced in this setting itmight be perfectly natural for the henchman to be isolated fromalmost everyone butthe villain while he recovers. And that could be a long period oftime- months or years with complex injuries.

Ithink complex injuries with a long healing time would fit really wellwith this scenario and could help make the relationship appear ‘good’from the point of view of the henchman and the villain. Somethinglike complex breaks in major bones, requiring physical assistance andthen possibly physiotherapy providing a ‘natural’ reason for thecharacters to spend a lot of time together and for the henchman to beisolated from others.

Duringthat time the villain has a massive amount of power over thehenchman. But it doesn’t need to be wielded in ways that seemobviously forceful.

Tellingsomeone you won’t let them contact their friends or family has avery different effect to telling a vulnerable character in this sortof position that it’s too dangerous to do so.

‘Ireally wish I could but then wemight be captured. Or they might be tortured too.’ This makes itsound as if the villain’s motive is primarily to protect thehenchman, rather than to isolate him, manipulate him and make himreliant on her. It encourages him to view his isolation positively,to agree to it for the greater good.

Andthe terrible thing is it’s not untrue. Part of the reason torturesurvivors are often ostracised by their communities is the fact thatpeople close to them could also be targeted. This happens especiallyoften with charity workers, politicians and activists.

Soit’s relatively easy for the villain to isolate the henchman inthis scenario.

Onceisolated the villain would need to carefully control the informationthe henchman has access to. Essentially the villain is making surethat the henchman only ever gets her side of the story.

Ina modern setting that could mean telling him that it’s ‘safer’if they can’t use the internet or phones. They can’t be traced orfollowed. This has the added bonus of reinforcing and repeating themessage that the henchman is only safe with the villain and thatshe’s trying to protect him.

Ina more historic setting it’s often part and parcel of isolationitself.

Whateverthe setting part of this means controlling who communicates with thehenchman and what they’re likely to say. The aim is to make surethat almost nothing contradicts the villain’s version of events.Anything that does is a rare blip.

The‘Uncertainty’ aspect of ICURE is probably more relevant if she’strying to get him to break with a group he was previously part of orcompromise on some of his values. It means exposing him to thingsthat are designed to make him question his membership of a group orthe values that group instils.

I’mtrying to think of a…less awful example of this for the purposes ofthis ask. Most of the things that spring to mind are part ofsustained campaigns of hate speech before and during genocides.

You…may or may not be aware of the current problems Muslims in China arefacing.Several years prior to this people in these states reported that thegovernment had started an information campaign against fasting. Thesesponsored messages were supposed to be ‘proving’ that fasting isdangerous and unhealthy.

Theaim in this case was to spread uncertainty about a practice that is acornerstone of Muslim peoples faith.

Howapplicable these tactics are to your story depends on the henchman’sbackground and how much he (broadly speaking) agreed with the villainbefore hand. She may not have try and make him feel uncertain if hedoesn’t have strong objections to what she does and alreadyfeels isolated from his previous community because he’s beentortured. His community’s ‘failure’ to rescue him may havealready created a lot of uncertainty about the place he used to holdin society and the people he used to be surrounded by.

Repetitionis pretty simple, we tend to see repeated points as more credibleeven when there isn’t data behind them. So long as the villain andthose around her are repeating the messages she wants the henchman tohear that will reinforce them.

Thefinal point involves trying to trigger intense emotional responsesaround both the things the villain wants the henchman to relate toand the things she wants him to abandon.

It’sframing things in ways that make logic go out the window and pushemotional buttons instead.

Takethe earlier example of isolating the henchman from friends and family‘for their safety’. If the henchman questions this a possible wayof using emotional responses would be to jump from something like-‘Well I understand your points but surely I could just tell themI’m still alive?’

Toresponses like- ‘God after every thing I’ve risked and sacrificedto keep you safe you want to put usin danger?’

‘Whydon’t you trust me?’

‘Fine.Get them killed. I’m just trying to look out for you.’

Notethat all of these responses derail the conversation. None of themaddress the actual point of the question, they just reframe theargument in a way that’s aiming to get a reaction, whilereinforcing the messages the villain is trying to send:

‘I’mthe only one who can take care of you.’

‘I’mthe only one protecting you.’

‘Youshould put your faith in me not other people.’

Andso forth.

Giventhe situation you’ve outlined it would be perfectly natural for thehenchman to feel indebted to the villain, even without any of thisbeing used to manipulate him.

Butindebtedness will only go so far. Depending on the characters and howmuch they have in common it could be more than enough for thescenario you want.

Butif you want to make their relationship more obviously unhealthy andcoercive, then introducing manipulative ICURE elements is a realisticway to do that while still having a character who is completelydevoted to the villain.

Hedoesn’t have to view her as the best or nicest person in the world(though that might help), he just needs to see her as better than hisalternatives options.

Ifyou have the henchman changing his views after torture then be sureto lay the ground work for that change. Show a natural progression,with doubts or a lack of deep thought about his opinions beforetorture. If you like show the villain manipulating those doubts laterin an attempt to reach an outcome that suits her.

Butthat might not be necessary. Think about whether the character reallyhad a strong belief against violence or loyalty to groups the villainis fighting before he was tortured.

ICUREdoesn’t create loyalty or affection, what it can create is relianceand (over long periods) shifts in views. It doesn’t ‘work’ overnight and it’s not completely reliable. But this kind ofmanipulation canresult in genuine cooperation while torture can’t.

Ithink you need to decide how healthy you want the relationshipbetween the henchman and the villain to be and howmanipulative/creepy you’re comfortable with writing it.

Buthopefully this post gives you enough information for you to choosewhat you’d like to do. :)

Edit: Just wanted to acknowledge that commenters are correct these tactics do get used in more conventional settings, sometimes with good intent. They are just a tool, a tool that’s often used to abuse. But that doesn’t mean there’s no possible ‘good’ use for ICURE or that political parties etc don’t attempt to use it to get votes or change policy.

Mustard gas was the first successful cancer treatment. Awful things can sometimes be put to good use.

Disclaimer

#tw torture #tw emotional abuse #manipulation #coercion #unhealthy relationships #ICURE #gotowhatsanapocalae

89 notes · View notes

hg47 · 4 years ago

Text

47 Reasons Why I Fear Islam - (Reason 44)

-44-Islamic hatred of non-Muslims is often simmering just below the surface, only needing a pretext to flash into violence. We are unclean, detestable scum who are polluting the Earth, THEIR EARTH, with our miserable presence. ++++------- http://www.amazon.com/Cruel-Usual-Punishment-Terrifying-Implications/dp/1595551611/ref=sr_1_1?s=books&ie=UTF8&qid=1380310980&sr=1-1&keywords=CRUEL+AND+USUAL+PUNISHMENT+by+Nonie+Darwish In CRUEL AND USUAL PUNISHMENT Nonie Darwish is very eloquent in describing how polygamy under Islam has worked against the average Muslim man because he cannot afford the pleasures and sexual options and ego massage his religion allows him. Instead, the average Muslim man becomes an angry sexually repressed victim full of hate, cued-up for mob violence by the local ranting preacher. ++++------- A quote from Robert Spencer: The Jerusalem Post carried a report that a group of Arab villagers in Israel, rejoicing at a wedding celebration, had been heard chanting, “The Arabs will soon be cutting the throats of the Jews.” ++++------- http://www.amazon.com/Why-I-Am-Not-Muslim/dp/1591020115/ref=sr_1_1?s=books&ie=UTF8&qid=1380655534&sr=1-1&keywords=why+i+am+not+a+muslim From WHY I AM NOT A MUSLIM by Ibn Warraq: “…God could scarcely have been more explicit. He told the Arabs that they had a right to despoil others of their women, children, and land, or indeed that they had a duty to do so: holy war consisted in obeying. Muhammad’s God thus elevated tribal militance and rapaciousness into supreme religious virtues.” ++++------- tweet ~ The slave trade still flourishes in Muslim countries. There are over 500,000 slaves in Mauritania alone, circa 12/23/2013 1:14 PM ~ verify at: http://wikiislam.net/wiki/Muslim_Statistics ++++------- http://www.amazon.com/Myth-Islamic-Tolerance-Treats-Non-Muslims/dp/1591022495/ref=sr_1_fkmr0_1?s=books&ie=UTF8&qid=1380476667&sr=1-1-fkmr0&keywords=MYTH+OF+ISLAMIC+TOLERANCE+%28THE%29+edited+by+Robert+Spencer In MYTH OF ISLAMIC TOLERANCE (THE) Robert Spencer tells about the troubles his publishers and translators had with Muslims over his book ISLAM UNVEILED. The translator and the publisher both received vicious death threats by eMail. “You must be an enemy of Islam! You will die for what you do!” “You must be a Jew! I hope somebody will slit your throat, you dirty Jew pig!” @hg47 says – These events also demonstrate that Muslims are tapped into the power structure. Another way to look at that would be to say that Muslims have spies in French businesses. This is a “moderate” function that “moderate Muslims” can perform; because Muslims are at war with anything that is not Islamic, it is quite proper to glean info about the enemy and then pass that info along to other Muslims willing to take action to “Defend the honor of Islam” by shutting down the truth through intimidation, death threats, and if necessary violence, or even murder. The honor of Islam must be defended! “I am beheading you now—Infidel Scum!—to prove that we are peaceful!” WHACK! My guess is that the issue of “pretext” was also involved here. Possibly the publisher had already published things that irritated Muslims in France and/or possibly the translator had translated something that had irritated Muslims in France. This would put the publisher and/or the translator on a sort of Muslim Watch List where their actions would be tracked. Any dealings at all with Robert Spenser would endanger the publisher and translator. Muslims like to provoke the enemies of Islam into making some sort of aggression against them, so they can call their violent attack a “defense of Islam,” not an attack at all, really, but a defensive action. Working with Robert Spenser would be a sort of last-straw that could be seen as requiring counter-attack! If Muslims cannot actually provoke an aggression on the part of Infidels, a sort of straw-that-broke-the-camel’s-back effect occurs. Little irritating Infidel events build up, turning minor irritation into simmering hatred, until any imaginary slight is seen as an attack upon Islam which must be redressed! (By death threats and/or a violent attack!) Two links concerning pretext in Islam: http://www.citizenwarrior.com/2008/08/pretext-for-hostilities-in-islamic.html http://www.inquiryintoislam.com/2010/10/24-islamic-writings-teach-use-of.html ++++------- http://www.sfgate.com/news/article/Troubling-views-on-suicide-bombings-78-of-2573956.php An interesting stat from the article: The war in Iraq is wrong, according to 75 percent of the American Muslims surveyed, and only 40 percent believe Arabs carried out the Sept. 11 attacks on the World Trade Center and the Pentagon. ++++------- A quote from Ibn Warraq: …Muslims have not moved away from the literal interpretation of the Koran: all Muslims—not just a group we have called “fundamentalist”—believe that the Koran is literally the word of God… ++++------- A quote from Citizen Warrior: “Islam not only encourages intolerance and violence against Unbelievers, but commands all Muslims to show their devotion to Allah by fighting for Islamic domination over all other governments and nations.” ++++------- http://online.wsj.com/article/SB10001424127887324787004578495711470936512.html?mod=googlenews_wsj CHARLOTTE ALLEN on how when Pope Benedict XVI quoted some words from 14th-century Byzantine emperor Manuel II Palaiologos in a 2006 speech; this provoked a fatwa against Pope Benedict in Pakistan, church burnings and bombings in the West Bank and Gaza, threats of jihad from al Qaeda, and the murder of a nun in Somalia. ++++------- http://www.reuters.com/article/2013/02/28/us-syria-crisis-lebanon-idUSBRE91R0OV20130228 Evidence of how the Civil War in Syria may cause Lebanon to implode into Civil War also. ++++------- http://pedestrianinfidel.blogspot.com/2006/11/twenty-things-you-should-know-about.html Islam regards all unbelievers as ritually unclean subhumans to be killed, subjugated, enslaved, exploited, or parasitised. Kafirs are described by the Arabic word ‘najis’ - literally ‘filth’. That’s why Muslim hatred of Kafirs is intrinsic to their ‘religion’. A Kafir doesn’t need to DO anything to offend a Muslim; his very existence is enough of an affront. @hg47 says – Infidels are filth, in the same legal category as piss and poop and (if I remember correctly) dog sweat. How much do Muslims hate us? My Holy Bible is suitable for use as toilet paper by Muslims, according to Islamic law, but if I so much as touch a Koran, I make it unclean. And this puppy calls itself a religion? Preaching hatred and inciting violence toward Infidels is not an accepted religious practice, in my opinion, but rather a hate crime. But what do I know? I’m just another inferior Infidel. The United States tamed the Mormon Church; the United States tamed the KKK; it’s time to tame Islam and the Muslims among us. You don’t get a GET OUT OF JAIL FREE CARD just because you’re a religion. ++++------- http://www.familysecuritymatters.org/publications/id.9277/pub_detail.asp LT. COLONEL JAMES G. ZUMWALT, USMC (RET) on the creeping Islamization of Western societies, partly because most Muslim immigrants refuse to assimilate, and work to impose their own values on the West. ++++------- A quote from AMIL IMANI: Islamic clerics believe it their right to execute people they consider heretics and place bounties on the heads of those their bloody hands cannot reach. Salman Rushdie is one of the widely known cases. ++++------- http://www.bostonherald.com/news/opinion/op_ed/view/2011_0405fired_up_over_nothing_book_burning_neither_illegal_nor_interesting/ Interesting article by Michael Graham on how Muslim death threats are destroying the Western concept of Freedom of Speech. ++++------- tweet ~ 1,250,000 white European Christians were captured and sold into the Muslim slave trade between the 16th and 19th century. ~ verify at: http://wikiislam.net/wiki/Muslim_Statistics ++++------- http://www.investors.com/NewsAndAnalysis/Article/568093/201104041857/Beheading-Ourselves-Over-Islam.htm Quote from Rashad Hussain, U.S. special envoy to the Organization of the Islamic Conference: “I am of the opinion that one of the strongest tools that you can use to counter radicalization and violent extremism is Islam itself, because Islam rejects violent extremism.” After Hussain spoke to the locals in Afghanistan, telling them that the antidote to Islamic violence was Islam itself, the Afghans reacted by murdering a dozen United Nations workers. In the name of Islam. Rashad Hussain’s message plays very well in the West; unfortunately, the only people who agree with him are Infidels, even though many other Muslims are singing the same tune to fool us inferior creatures who must be subdued. ++++------- A quote from Pamela Geller: It needs pointing out that wherever Muslims live in non-Muslim countries, there is a level of agitation, conflict if you will, the level of which is directly tied to the size of the Muslim population. ++++------- http://www.foxnews.com/world/2011/02/02/christian-persecution-continues-amid-egypt-turmoil/ Christian Persecution Continues Amid Egypt Turmoil. ++++------- A quote from Terry Kelhawk: Middle Eastern countries should open their eyes to see that the United States is not working on an anti-Islamic agenda in Middle East, but rather is cooperating with their leaders, and in fact is showing restraint… ++++------- http://www.citizenwarrior.com/2009/05/terrifying-brilliance-of-islam.html A quote by Citizen Warrior in this excellent article: The use of pretext means you need only the barest excuse to begin hostilities. It means you’re actually looking for an excuse, and even trying to provoke others into striking the first blow (“starting” the hostilities). @hg47 says – When Muslim mobs go on a rampage on the other side of the world “because” of a cartoon in the West, that’s not what is really happening. It’s pretext in action. Islamic leaders have long lists of Infidel targets they are itching to attack because the presence of Infidels that have not been properly humbled in their midst is an affront to their Muslim “superiority” and dignity. The preachers just need a theme for their next Rave Jihad Paradise Party: a pretext. The best way to fire up an angry Muslim mob is by ranting that Islam is under attack, and Muslims need to defend the honor of Islam, and by the way, there are a bunch of Infidels at the U.N. outpost just down the block, Go There! Also, angry rioting Muslim mobs are the result of a carefully orchestrated plan; not some spontaneous eruption. The official word authorizing the attack comes down from above to many separate preachers, operating from the same script, pointing their crowds at the same designated target. The proximate cause of the violence is never some cartoon or holy book that got burnt. That’s just the excuse to attack NOW. The proximate cause of Muslim mob violence is a high-up Muslim religious leader giving the order to Cut Loose The Dogs, and the many preachers following orders likely ranting from the same script to incite violence against a specific Infidel target. ++++------- KORAN; Sura 47, 4: “When ye encounter the infidels, strike off their heads till ye have made a great slaughter among them…” Keep in mind that Christianity has an interpretive tradition where the violent Old Testament passages are moderated by Christ’s teachings in the New Testament. Also keep in mind, that Islam is the reverse: every last peaceful passage in the Koran about Infidels has been officially abrogated, reduced to meaningless pretty words of nonsense by the intolerant and violent passages about us. ++++------- tweet ~ Africans taken as slaves by Muslims (or killed while being taken) is estimated to be higher than 140,000,000! ~ verify at: http://wikiislam.net/wiki/Muslim_Statistics @hg47 says – Yes, the United States has an awful and terrible history of slavery, in our past. I timidly suggest that before you hate our own culture so much that you love Islam without reservation, check the facts. 140 million African slaves taken or killed by Muslims! If Sharia law triumphs over the U.S. Constitution, here we go again: Slavery without limit! “Tote that bale, Y’all!” ++++------- http://www.jpost.com/home/article.aspx?id=188855 DANIEL PIPES about the erosion of Western Freedom of Speech. Muslims in the West have achieved a privileged status where they are free to insult others, but Muslims may not be insulted. ++++------- http://www.nationalreview.com/articles/249704/islam-and-west-conrad-black From the article by Conrad Black: When a completely unofficial Danish cartoonist produced some relatively innocuous renderings of Muhammad five years ago, Danish embassies were stoned and the whole nationality was anathematized in many Muslim countries. ++++------- A quote by Oskar Freysinger: Kurt Westergaard, a Danish cartoonist, lives in hiding under the threat of a fatwa. Having survived three attacks, he often changes his town and country, never leaves home without armed escort and turned his home into a fortress. This hell has lasted five years. Enough to discourage other practitioners of “misplaced” humor. ++++------- tweet ~ 95% of all suicide bombing attacks conducted worldwide are carried out by Muslims. ~ verify at: http://wikiislam.net/wiki/Muslim_Statistics ++++------- http://blogs.forbes.com/abigailesman/2010/10/12/just-say-nothing-is-the-american-press-afraid-to-talk-about-radical-islam/ From the article, by Abigail R. Esman: So while the Dutch courts try parliamentary leader Geert Wilders on charges of hate speech (or what in another era we’d have called “free speech”), America, it seems, has adopted another approach: Just say nothing. ++++------- http://pajamasmedia.com/blog/former-cia-agent-in-iran-comes-in-from-the-heat/2/ An article which gets into the radicals who control Iran. “We are anti-American and we are America’s enemy,” and “Non-Muslims are animals roaming the planet.” +++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++ +Go-To-45+ +Go-To-Beginning-Of-47-REASONS-WHY-I-FEAR-ISLAM+

#islam

0 notes

swawesome-wow · 7 years ago

Note

If you wanted people to be informed, you'd have mentioned Palestinian terrorists and Hamas. You'd have mentioned the suicide bombings and hundreds of murdered innocent Israelis. You'd have mentioned the Palestinian leadership that first declined coexistence in 1948 and rejected every offer of peace since then. You'd have mentioned lies and propaganda and blood libel against Jews, thought in Palestinian schools. You care about playing the victim. But it's an old game. And you'll lose.

I wasn’t going to take the time to respond, but it’s summer break, and I refuse to let you hide behind anonymity and not learn a little something while you’re there.

1. “If you wanted people to be informed, you’d have mentioned Palestinian terrorists and Hamas. You’d have mentioned the suicide bombings and hundreds of murdered innocent Israelis.”

Oh yes, how could I forget to talk about Palestinian terrorists and Hamas. The thousands upon thousands of innocent Israelis killed. Wait, what’s that? 1,213 Israelis have been killed since September 29, 2000. 9,478 Palestinians have been killed since September 29, 2000. I have never claimed that Palestinians have not killed innocent Israelis. Those numbers are only since the year 2000. Israel has occupied Palestine for 50 years, give or take, as you yourself aptly admitted by bringing up the conference in 1948. There is immense loss on both sides, though one has lost nearly 9x as many lives. However, comparing it numerically is extremely reductive, not only are you wrong numerically, you’re ignoring why people have been slaughtered on both sides, and what brought everyone to this point. There is no “justifying” the murder of Israelis by Palestinians, there is only understanding why these killings happened, holistically, and understanding the context.

People refer to it now as the Israeli-Palestinian “Conflict, Divide, etc.” But before recent, heavy political and monetary support of Israel, it was called the Palestinian Genocide, for good reason.

2. “You’d have mentioned the Palestinian leadership that first declined coexistence in 1948 and rejected every offer of peace since then.”

Let me make this very, painfully clear.

Palestine does not owe coexistence to Israel. Israel is an occupying state, an oppressive state, and one that has committed genocide against the Palestinian people.

To bring it down to your level of understanding, the Palestinians were there first. Palestinians of EVERY religion, including Judaism, though I’ll touch on that later. The Palestinian leadership has been lamentable, no one is denying that. But let me put it this way:

Let’s say America was invaded today, by, say, Canada. (Sorry Canada, you were the first country to pop into my head, since I owe half my citizenship to you.) After things calm down enough for the leaders to meet, Trudeau says to *shudder* Trump (or even Obama, in this fake scenario, would make the same decision), “Hey man, I know you were here first and everything, and I know we bloodily invaded you, but like, let’s just coexist, like on that bumper sticker you guys are so fond of.” Do you honestly think the President of the United States of America, would EVER agree to something like that? Seriously? Of course not, that would be ridiculous. Even 50 years later, America would still be fighting for its freedom from its maple-drenched oppressors. So why are you holding Palestine to such ridiculous standards?

I am truly saddened by the violence that has stemmed from this entire situation, but until Israeli soldiers stop wrongfully arresting, imprisoning, and killing Palestinians, even children, I don’t think you can possibly hope for “peace.”

My grandmother, a few years back on a return visit to Palestine after she fled so many years ago to Canada, was stopped at the border wall (yes, there is a wall there, in case people were unaware) for eight hours, for no reason. She was not charged with anything, neither were her daughters, my aunts, that were with her. Her crime was being Palestinian. I wonder what that sounds like.

Oh yes, and because of that wall, the already pitiful economy of the Gaza Strip has crumbled, and they have no way of rebuilding it. Even if Palestinians find jobs in Israel, they’re backed up for hours each day just trying to get processed through the wall in either direction. They’ve been economically choked off from the rest of the world, yet Israel continues to receive monetary aid as if they’re in desperate need.

3. “You’d have mentioned lies and propaganda and blood libel against Jews, thought in Palestinian schools. You care about playing the victim. But it’s an old game. And you’ll lose.”

Once again, I need to make something crystal clear. So listen up. \

Palestinians do not hate Jews. They hate the Israeli government. Not Israelis, not Jews, the Israeli government, because that is the body that is responsible for Palestinian suffering.

Since I was in elementary school, any time someone found out I had Palestinian parents, they immediately made quips or even stated directly that I must hate Jewish people. I had someone say “oh, so you’re anti-Semitic.” I’ve had people ask me if myself or my parents are terrorists (and I used to be Christian, now I don’t practice anything, my point being that I can’t imagine how hard it is for any Muslims). This misconception is so widespread that it’s toxic, killing any reasonable discourse on the subject by people stamping me with the anti-Semite sticker. So, I’m sorry, I haven’t had the chance to play the victim. Let me know how that goes for you.

What I said earlier, about all religions coexisting? Let me elaborate.

For the thousands of years that Palestine has existed, Christians, Muslims, Jews, ~whatever~ lived side by side, happily and comfortably. Another misconception is that the Israeli movement came from within Palestine, which is just plain misinformation. This is a very, very reductive explanation of what actually happened, forgive me for not being more detailed:

When the second World War ended, there were thousands upon thousands of displaced European Jews (mostly German as you might imagine, but elsewhere as well). When Europe (and America) tried to figure out where to help these people relocate, no one wanted to take them in, deciding it would be too difficult to reintegrate. Palestine had the room and the kind heart needed to take them in, so that’s where many were relocated, en masse. But it was a finite time that Palestine agreed to host these refugees as refugees, they would eventually need to either integrate with the Palestinian people (gain citizenship, etc), or decide where they would want to move, if not stay there. But the relationship began to change, as some began to perpetuate the idea that they belonged there all along, and that the Palestinians were the ones that needed to leave or integrate elsewhere. As with most conflict, religion took a match and set it to kerosene, as suddenly Jerusalem was the center of the occupier’s claims to the land. While I won’t try to argue about it as I’m not informed enough on religious history, I will say that it is entirely possible to create a religious homeland without literally invading the country and creating a religious state. Church and state are separate for a reason, and have to cooperate, not override one another.

So there are plenty of Palestinian Jews that understand and are outraged at the Israeli government, though they have been left out of intentional eviction, arrests, torture, and killings.

COMIC RELIEF BREAK that is actually somewhat related but I promise it’s funny:

One time my mom was telling me about something that happened over in Palestine to friends of our family so word made it back to us. Like I said, the three major religions were living pretty happily together, especially where these friends lived. The IDF was evicting all the Palestinians from a neighborhood to allow Israeli settlers to take over. Our friends were one of the families kicked out, and they were best friends with the Jewish family next door! So when the IDF came knocking on the Jewish family’s door to offer them the keys to their best friends’ house, (they were Jews so they were allowed to stay with the new Israelis coming in), the husband of the family was FURIOUS. He started to back-talk, offended at the very thought, but his wife (the really clever one in this story) shut him up and took the keys. The husband couldn’t believe his wife would betray their best friends like that, but she just rolled her eyes in a “you idiot” fashion. They had the keys now, and they promptly gave them back to their best friends so they could reclaim their property! I always thought that story was hilarious :D

While I am disgusted at the thought that you could somehow compare this entire subject to a game, if that’s the only way you can comprehend such a vast discourse, I’m happy to oblige the metaphor: The only “loser” here is the one who can’t think for themselves and hasn’t done a little goddamn research, you soggy walnut.

Speaking of research! Here are a couple of resources for those who have been following along! I honestly can’t say that the second is an unbiased source, however if you’re looking for straight statistics and numbers, check out the first link! It’s where I got the exact numbers I used above. If you want the international law/human rights perspective, check out the third link. Thanks y’all!

http://ifamericaknew.org

http://www.globalresearch.ca/israels-genocide-towards-palestinian-arabs/5591341 (thanks canada)

https://ccrjustice.org/genocide-palestinian-people-international-law-and-human-rights-perspective (really good source explaining the international law and human rights perspective on the issue)

#palestine #israel #palestinian #palestinian genocide #israeli occupation #international law #human rights #anon #swawesome is pissed right off

12 notes · View notes

militant-holy-knight · 6 years ago

Text

Using Tragedy For Political Gain For the Nth Time.

I am torn as to whether or not I should have written a personal take on this so soon. When I woke up in Friday morning to see the news about the Christchurch terrorist attack I was alarmed. Yes, I saw the footage and yes, I read his manifesto - it was nothing short of absolutely grotesque and degenerate. Plain and simple. Make no mistake, this was an racist attack whose perpetrator is indeed a terrorist. In fact, I won’t even dignify him by referring to his name - he will simply be called henceforth the NZ terrorist. On Tumblr I shared a few articles and reblogged a few posts calling for moderation. But as I see the events further develop I can’t help but address this situation which I believe will make things worse unless if we talk about them anyway.

We don’t often get the luxury of having a mass murderer explain himself such as the Las Vegas shooter (whose motivations are still a mystery to this day and will never be explained). And while the NZ wrote an extensive manifesto and made it clear what his positions are. I’ve struggled (and I still do) on whether or not saying his manifesto should be read by people so that people can draw their own conclusions, but I’ve questioned how much he is a point he would have when the doc is filled with so much misdirection, shitposting and trolling. I’ve questioned if he really is world-traveled as he claims he is since his manifesto drips with the words of someone who never left his parents’ home and decided to go on a shooting because of death... Until I saw there is evidence he visited at least Pakistan, with video and passport to confirm it.

As far as we know, his manifesto was made to misdirect with only one thing for certain that we can assess: he wants to further cause division between the left and right and escalate the culture war. Unfortunately, many individuals have either mindlessly fallen into his trap and started heaping the blame on the wrong kind of individuals for allegedly “radicalizing” this criminal or even more insidiously, forming some sort of unholy ideological alliance with the terrorist because he knows his crimes will play into a certain course of action that he hopes they will take and they are grateful that someone did actually did it so he could use the tragedy as an convenient excuse.

A good example that comes to mind is the dictator of Turkey, Reccep Tayip Erdogan, (who is name dropped in the manifesto and who the terrorist calls for his death) blamed the attack on the “rise of Islamophobia” and went on to say the Hagia Sophia will never be a church again so long as there are Turkish people. Very typical behavior from him and to say so no surprise, but this time he is surely alarmed because the terrorist dared to paint a target on him. He is in pure hostility mode because that is how he operates. He is overly emotional, engages in divide and conquer tactics like the terrorist and makes no bones about how much he hates not just his political rivals, but also his allies too. He earns to revive the Ottoman caliphate so that he can take over the West and the Arab world. He is an absolute PR nightmare for anyone who wants to show an example of a liberal Muslim government, which Turkey used to be held up as the example the MENA countries should follow, but now is hardly any better. The only time I remembered he tried to present himself as a paragon compared - which is hard to do when you are jailing journalists and critics - except during the Jamal Khashoggi affair. For one, trying to pretend like you are a better human rights example than Saudi Arabia really isn’t that hard to achieve since they are just Islamic North Korea. For another, people have rightfully pointed out that he is full of shit and he was merely using that for personal agenda.

But Erdogan is a dictator so of course he wants his critics silenced and his opinions don’t earn any serious merit in the discussion. What really is concerning is the kind of discourse we will see in the Western world. Journalists have either consciously or not laid the blame at the feet of Donald Trump, Candace Owens, Pewdiepie, Christians, Jews, memelords, guns and others for supposedly radicalizing this individual. It’s ironic he said denounces Trump and conservatism in his manifesto, but since the public will be discouraged from reading it out of fear of radicalizing themselves, it creates an convenient opportunity they can paint a monster that must be put down.

This is dangerous not only because it validates the far-right’s concerns but also helps no one but further alienate those outside of the fight politically. Lets consider who will be marginalized if the far-left engages in a literal crusade to defend Islam by any means necessary. The first ones to get silenced would be the online memelords that post harmless memes simply because the terrorist used a lot of memes like the Remove Kebab song in his massacre footage, which has been deleted from Youtube as we speak.

Then there are historians like Iniciativa Condor, Real Crusades History and myself that are personally fascinated by the Crusades, the Reconquista and the Great Turkish War. Because the terrorist now used several references like the Battle of Tours, the Battle of Vienna, Skanderbeg, the Russo-Turkish War and many others (though ironically not Vlad the Impaler), I imagined we will be ostracized when discussing such subjects in the open out of fear of another Christchurch. In fact, I’ve been warned by personal relatives that I shouldn’t be vocal about it anymore.

And then on a more serious scale... There are critics of Islam as a religion, specially of Muslim background. Regardless if atheistic or religious, these people were already under enough scrutiny in their home countries who do everything to suppress criticism of Islam even secular societies like Indonesia and Turkey, the former in particular exploits its law Article 301 about “insulting Turkishness” which is misused to arrest dissidents. There is a former Muslim Youtuber I am subscribed, the Apostate Prophet who while deeply denouncing the attack, received messages asking if he was happy about Muslims being killed. What kind of fucked up perspective is this where criticism of Islam is equated with sanctioning the death of Muslims?

youtube

Now on the worst case of all. Consider that there is an actual epidemic of rape that liberals have turned an blind eye on Europe because it means tackling a very uncomfortable topic which goes contrary to what works in their agenda.

If what happens on Europe is bad, then its infinitely worse what is happening around the world, specially in the Middle-East where Christians are facing an actual genocide by jihadists and fundamentalists which has been going on for years now, but we have only started paying attention now that the Middle-East began to spill into the West. Furthermore, this attack will certainly result in retaliation since they have found less excuse for. Remember the Regensburg lecture by Pope Benedict when he quoted the Byzantine Emperor Manuel Palailogos for criticizing Muhammed and the entire Islamic world went apeshit with Iraq in particular killing Assyrians in retaliation as if they had anything to do with it. Just because of an controversial statement by the Pope.

Don’t get me wrong, I am not leaving the alt-righters celebrating this atrocity in their echo chambers off the hook either. I’ve seen how static /pol/ users were at seeing the footage of him shooting up innocents, advocating for more terrorist attacks to be called out, trolling users who said innocents shouldn’t be targeted or those accusing the terrorist of being a Mossad agent or a Shia Muslim. Its somewhat surprising you see: /pol/ hates Muslims too they think Jewish people are much, much worse (something which the shooter didn’t do). Hell I heard the Saudi Royal Family is in fact Jewish behind close doors. Consider these are the kind of people who are also in love with Bashar al Assad who portrays himself as the secular side of the Syrian Civil War that protects minorities when in fact this is also a ruse.

Similarly, for all their bitching about Western civilization falling, they are unsympathetic to the plight of Christians around the world because they are non-white and follow a “Semitic religion”. Not a single word about Asia Bibi being on death row, the persecution of Copts in Egypt or explosion of churches in They have trivialized the word of genocide by comparing low birth-rates with actual fucking persecution, exiling, destruction of heritage that minorities suffer in the Middle-East. Also speaking as a Brazilian even one fascinated with Western heritage, they’d still advocate my death because I am non-white (I hate using the term “POC” because its patronizing) and they’d want us to stay in their shitty lane.

Its frustrating enough that the far-left has a monopoly on social media and journalism (this isn’t up for debate, the purge of NPC memes is evidence of that) and the internet is basically owned by them. Now imagine if they push down even harder? Or Erdogan’s comments will end up pushing someone to actually try to assassinate him (unlikely considering Kurds haven’t been pushed hard enough to consider assassinating him despite all the things they have done to their people, a foreigner will likely have even less motivation for doing so), but I don’t think that man will go down peacefully as he expects. The whole point of this massacre was to literally divide the world into left-wing and right-wing, with the shooter expecting that whites begin genociding foreigners regardless of religion (he simply chose a mosque because it was too obvious, he denounces Latinos and Indians who are majority Catholic and Hindu respectively). I’d argue that in addition to being a national socialist and a fascist, I think he is an anarchist too - because for a guy committed to such a cause, he did a lot of harm to it by killing children and filming it. Nobody sane will advocate for this, only the tiny, tiny minority in /pol/ that agree with his actions, and even they don’t have a back bone to follow his footsteps.

Everything the terrorist wanted he is getting because of the emotionally driven responses that people are making as such I call for moderation, quit the dick measuring game that you call a culture war and try to find a common ground before anything else.

#rants #terrorism

0 notes

supertrendingnewsarticles · 5 years ago

Link

This article was co-published with Responsible Statecraft.A former NBC executive who founded one of the earliest—and more successful—fake news websites quietly assumed a leadership role at The Epoch Times as the news outlet ramped up its pro-Trump messaging after the 2016 election.Epoch’s influential role as a Trump-friendly media outlet coincided with access to Trump allies seeking friendly interviews, uncritical coverage of the administration’s policies, and a venue to advance the White House’s militant anti-Beijing and hyper-nationalist messages.That change in direction—which included a flood of omnipresent YouTube ads costing at least $1 million, and a ban from Facebook for violating the platform’s rules about political advertising—appears to have occurred alongside the 2017 arrival of a new vice president at The Epoch Times, Chris Kitze, and huge jumps in the paper’s revenue from $3.8 million in 2016 to $8.1 million in 2017 and $12.4 million in 2018. Kitze, who now manages a cryptocurrency hedge fund, was listed as a member of the six-person board of the The Epoch Times Association, the nonprofit that operates The Epoch Times, as a vice president in 2017 and 2018 tax documents. But Kitze’s ties to The Epoch Times go back much further than 2017 and point to a mutually beneficial relationship. Since 2010, Kitze’s company, BeforeItsNews.com, an early fake news site that promoted conspiracy theories about then-president Barack Obama and offered extensive coverage of Trump’s insurgent candidacy in 2016, promoted Falun Gong—a spiritual movement that is persecuted by the Chinese government and has the stated goal of destroying the Chinese Communist Party (CCP)—and The Epoch Times; meanwhile, Falun Gong-linked media properties quietly promoted Kitze’s other business ventures, including Unseen, an encrypted messaging platform.Captain Trump Steers America Toward Iceberg of InsanityChris Kitze’s career spans countless internet ventures and well-timed exits from companies across two tech bubbles. His LinkedIn profile shows an impressive career starting in 1991 with the founding of Acris Media, a company selling clipart on CD-ROMs, a stint as the VP of Marketing at the early search engine Lycos from 1995 to 1996 (“I led the Lycos marketing team through one of the first internet IPOs,” says Kitze on LinkedIn) and founding and serving as chairman of free-website company Xoom.com, leading to a merger with NBC Internet (NBCi).Kitze served as CEO of NBCi, NBC’s initiative to create an NBC controlled internet portal and landing page, from 1999 to 2000. Kitze’s post-NBC activities include serving as CEO of Yaga, a filesharing network, serving as chairman of Wine.com before pivoting his attention to a number of blockchain- and cryptocurrency-related companies five years ago.Kitze’s public resume contains at least two noticeable omissions: the 2008 formation of BeforeItsNews.com and Kitze’s appointment as a VP at The Epoch Times and membership on the paper’s board starting in 2017.BeforeItsNews.com appears to have begun operations in early 2009, shortly after Obama’s inauguration and, at launch, directly attacked the news media’s treatment of Obama, referencing then-MSNBC-pundit Chris Matthew’s March 2008 comment about how “I felt this thrill going up my leg” when Obama spoke.BeforeItsNews.com’s “about” page read:> Something strange happened during the 2008 U.S. election. The news media came down with a bad case of amnesia — they forgot exactly what it was they were supposed to be doing. Instead of asking critical questions of those running for office, they went out of their way to "get a tingle up their leg" for some candidates, or to ignore the constitutional requirements of the political office.> > We wanted to present a point of view that didn't seem to exist in the mainstream media. One that is hopeful, yet realistic, based on the natural law of truth, compassion and tolerance.What that meant in practice was the rapid production of enormous quantities of user contributed news articles, wide dissemination on social media, and no editorial oversight or fact-checking.The website encourages anyone to contribute articles, advertising itself as a “news utility—an internet platform that enables the hosting and distribution of any kind of news, worldwide.“It will get out through all the major search engines,” says the current “about” page.Conspiracy theories about Obama’s birth certificate, UFOs, the New World Order, and imminent economic and societal collapse all made the front page of BeforeItsNews.com.A 2017 Guardian article on Facebook’s failures to address the dissemination of fake news on its platform specifically mentioned Kitze and BeforeItsNews.com:> Chris Kitze, who runs BeforeItsNews.com, said that although he allows users to post any content without fact-checking, he hasn’t noticed Facebook tagging any of his site’s articles as fake news. That includes a recent piece debunked by Snopes claiming to include leaked photos showing how Obama practiced Islam in the White House.> > “A lot of people think Obama is Muslim. That’s what it plays on. Is it real? I don’t know,” he said. “The fact is a lot of people thought it was real or it reflects their sentiment.”Alongside publishing a steady flow of factually questionable content, Kitze, BeforeItsNews.com, and Epoch appear to have enjoyed a thriving relationship with over 20,000 Epoch Times articles appearing on the site between 2010 and 2012.Kitze’s involvement with Falun Gong was detailed in an Epoch Times article published in June 2012, in which he described coming across Falun Gong practitioners in New York’s Times Square in 2005 and, remembering that encounter, educating himself in the movement and practicing its meditation techniques two years later.The group’s persecution in China—the Chinese government banned Falun Gong and prohibits practice of the movement’s exercises in public and the dissemination of its written material—and freedom of participating in an activity defying the Chinese government clearly resonated with Kitze.The Epoch Times explained that Kitze was drawn to Falun Gong’s openness and participants’ voluntary decision to practice and study the movement. “Kitze said this may be why the Chinese communist regime was so afraid of Falun Gong that it launched a brutal campaign of hate and persecution against some 100 million practitioners, starting a decade ago in the country where the practice originated” said The Epoch Times. “Because it’s in your heart and mind—that’s something no government could ever control, that’s one reason why a totalitarian regime would oppose it,” Kitze told the paper.Matthew Tullar, who served as director of circulation at The Epoch Times from 2012 to 2014 and director of sales and marketing from 2015 to 2016, recalled Kitze speaking to Epoch advertising salespeople at a 2012 San Francisco seminar. “While I was already familiar with the fact that the Chinese Communist Party was officially persecuting Some [sic] 100 million Falun Gong practitioners in China and that the leftist media [...] was strangely ignoring this story, even to this day, that included over 75 Communist government hospitals busy murdering thousands of these people every year since the early two thousands, to harvest and sell their body parts to U.S. and other world customers,” wrote Tullar in an email. “Mr. Kitze was the first business guy I had ever met that was dedicating a significant part of his business profits and effort to exposing these facts. He struck me as a kind and genuine person who cared about his fellow man,” said Tullar. “While my understanding of and experience with him was limited, I was nonetheless inspired by his effort and compassion. And his presentation turned out to be useful as well.”The Hedge Fund Man Behind Pro-Trump Media’s New War on ChinaThe Epoch Times has always maintained a hawkish editorial tone towards China but that line took on a more overtly partisan and focused U.S. political message over the course of the Trump presidency, pushing a steady onslaught of articles and videos labeling the novel coronavirus “CCP Virus” and advancing a series of thinly reported or unsubstantiated theories about vast Chinese government cover-ups to hide the origins of COVID-19.Busted: Pentagon Contractors’ Report on ‘Wuhan Lab’ Origins of Virus Is BogusThe paper’s editorial board even went so far as to claim, “If someone is unfortunately infected with the CCP virus, we suggest that he or she sincerely says ‘down with the CCP.’ Maybe a miracle will happen.”“Staying away from the CCP and condemning the CCP can help any individual, organization, or country alleviate or even avoid attacks of the CCP virus,” the ed board added. “They may then embrace a wonderful future.”Over the course of the Trump presidency, Epoch emerged as a prolific pro-Trump media outlet.When Facebook banned the Epoch Media Group from buying ads in August 2019, it later said the news outlet spent over $9 million on ads, including approximately 11,000 pro-Trump Facebook advertisements, more than any other organization other than the Trump campaign.Epoch denied the ads were purchased by The Epoch Times but Facebook said Epoch evaded the company’s transparency rules for political advertising and “repeatedly violated a number of our policies, including our policies against coordinated inauthentic behavior, spam and misrepresentation, to name just a few.”Epoch’s pivot toward Trump appears to have coincided with the ramp up of BeforeItsNews.com’s drumbeat of pro-Trump articles, and Kitze’s conspiracy theories.“[BeforeItsNews] was one of the first news websites to really cover Donald Trump and his candidacy in a serious manner and, you know, we took him seriously,” Kitze told a conspiracy oriented podcast, The Common Sense Show, in July 2016. “We didn’t think he was just some flash in the pan.”In 2017, the alliance between Kitze and Epoch became official, when Kitze joined Epoch’s board as a vice president in 2017—an association that is listed nowhere on Epoch’s website, Kitze’s online social media profiles, or in a 2018 profile on him in the newspaper. His continued promotion of disproven or baseless conspiracy theories is seemingly in contradiction with Epoch’s “dedicat[ion] to truthful reporting.”Meanwhile, Kitze kept elevating the strangest of right-wing conspiracy theories. In a 2018 appearance on the Common Sense Show, Kitze referenced the alleged “organ harvesting” of Falun Gong practitioners in China, explaining that he believed they were also being used for “satanic” ritual purposes “as we’ve just seen in the U.S. with all the Pizzagate things.”Kitze’s reference to Pizzagate is particularly jarring as it came a year and a half after a man with an assault rifle was arrested outside a pizza restaurant in Washington D.C. attempting to investigate online conspiracy claims that a pedophile ring was operating in the restaurant’s basement with the help of Bill and Hillary Clinton.Kitze went on to echo a largely debunked assertion made by the Trump administration about child trafficking on the U.S.-Mexico border, saying:> All these kids coming across the border, these ones all the Democrats were up in arms about, you know, ‘how can you separate the families?’. Fifty-percent of them aren’t even with their family. They’re being trafficked and God knows where these poor kids are going to end up.In 2019, Kitze appeared on the same show to discuss, among other topics, a conspiracy theory involving the Clintons selling “all of the U.S. secrets” to China. “The Clintons had asked for $1 trillion but [the Chinese] got a deal and only had to pay the Clintons $900 billion,” said Kitze, referencing reporting in The Epoch Times Chinese language edition.Since forming BeforeItsNews, Kitze focused heavily on privacy-related products, including Unseen, a now shuttered secure messaging platform, and founding the cryptocurrency Flashcoin, both of which were featured in a glowing 2018 profile in The Epoch Times that made no reference to his role as an officer in the organization.Kitze also serves as chairman of the Alphabit Fund, a Dubai and Cayman Islands based cryptocurrency fund aiming to raise $300 million that Reuters described in 2018 as “one of the world’s largest digital currency funds.”Epoch Times Advertiser Deletes Facebook Page After Hacking InquiriesAlphabit’s co-founder and managing director, Saeed Al Darmaki, worked for over eight years at Abu Dhabi’s sovereign wealth fund, Abu Dhabi Investment Authority, raising questions about whether Alphabit has state backing. Kitze did not respond to a request for comment about the investors in Alphabit, his responsibilities as a vice president at Epoch or his current relationship with BeforeItsNews.Epoch, for its part, offered incomplete and contradictory answers about Kitze’s role at the news organization.Dr. Dana Cheng, a spokesperson for The Epoch Times, responded to questions about Kitze’s involvement, saying, “Mr. Kitze had limited involvement with The Epoch Times more than 7 years ago,” adding, “There is no relationship between The Epoch Times and any of Mr. Kitze’s endeavors, including beforeitsnews."Cheng appeared to contradict her statement about Kitze’s involvement with Epoch more than seven years ago when questioned about his appearance on tax filings in the 2017 and 2018 tax years. “Yes, he was a board member in 2017 and 2018, with minimal involvement,” said Cheng, adding, “He is not a board member nor a VP now.”Read more at The Daily Beast.Got a tip? Send it to The Daily Beast hereGet our top stories in your inbox every day. Sign up now!Daily Beast Membership: Beast Inside goes deeper on the stories that matter to you. Learn more.

from Yahoo News - Latest News & Headlines https://ift.tt/2yAZFPN

#Blogger #World News

0 notes

teeky185 · 5 years ago

Link

from Yahoo News - Latest News & Headlines https://ift.tt/2yAZFPN

#latest news #Yahoo News - Latest News & Headlines

0 notes

morningusa · 5 years ago

Link

from Yahoo News - Latest News & Headlines

#News #Blogger

0 notes

beautytipsfor · 5 years ago

Text

This NBC Executive Became a Conspiracy King and a Pro-Trump Media Boss

from Yahoo News - Latest News & Headlines https://ift.tt/2yAZFPN via Beauty Tips

from Blogger https://ift.tt/2XxACWb

#Blogger

0 notes

orendrasingh · 5 years ago

Link

from Yahoo News - Latest News & Headlines https://ift.tt/2yAZFPN

#OS #Blogger

0 notes

newsnigeria · 5 years ago

Text

Check out New Post published on Ọmọ Oòduà

New Post has been published on http://ooduarere.com/news-from-nigeria/world-news/boris-johnson-brexit-deep-state/

Boris Johnson, Brexit and the Deep State

by Nick Griffin for Ooduarere viaThe Saker Blog

Nick Griffin, a life-long opponent of the European Union and former Member of the European Parliament, explains why – after three years of believing that the rulers of Britain would block Brexit, he now believes it is more likely than not to be delivered.

Are the British people really going to get Brexit? For years, the answer given by well-informed realists has had to be ‘No!’ The UK’s ruling elite was so thoroughly Europhile that they would do whatever it took to block the will of the British people, and Brussels would go along with this deceit, just as they did when the French, the Dutch and the Irish were sold out to the EU by their own masters.

But today I’m going to tell you that it is now more likely than not that Brexit WILL happen. Indeed, assuming the new Boris Johnson regime manages to cling on to power, or is forced into a general election in which Johnson reaches some sort of deal with Nigel Farage, it is now virtually guaranteed.

Of course, there is a faint possibility that the whole Johnson business is a giant game of three-dimensional chess, and that he’s running an elaborate scam with no intention of getting Britain out. But, realistically, if that was the plan, there would be absolutely no purpose in delaying such a betrayal, still less in raising so many expectations.

To encourage and then dash such hopes would be ludicrously self-defeating, so we have to assume that Johnson and Co are serious and that – barring a series of events outside of their control, they WILL deliver Brexit.

So what has changed? Has the Europhile British elite suddenly had a change of heart and decided to do the decent thing by the people who pay their inflated salaries?

Of course not. Leopards don’t change their spots. But, in the case of the UK elite, it was always divided into two leopards, with very different spots. One of them, for years now the stronger animal, was blue with yellow, spots – a thoroughly European beast.

The colours of the, until recently, smaller animal are harder to discern. At first glance, they could be seen to resemble the American flag although, of course, that’s just part of the camouflage. Look closer and the thing’s coat actually looks more like a mass of intertwined dollar signs and Israeli flags!

Even within the USA, opinion has been divided on Britain’s membership of the European Union. Obama, for example, more or less ordered the Brits to vote to Remain – a factor in the decision of quite a few of them to vote to Leave! The neo-cons, by contrast, have become much more hostile to Brussels – particularly since the EU started to display alarming degrees of sympathy for the Palestinians.

It wasn’t always like that. During the Cold War, the US elite was more or less unanimously in favour of British membership of the EU, which right from the start was consistently promoted by the CIA as a block to balance the Soviet Union.

When the Communist regime collapsed in 1989, the US power elite gradually shifted its position on the EU. It moved from fervent support to a sort of agnostic, nothing to do with us boredom. But then it gradually became clear that the European Union was steadily becoming the pawn of the German industrial complex.

Even worse, the Germans were beginning to cosy up to Russia. Within just a few years, the combination of German manufacturing, the European market and Russia’s raw materials were clearly presenting a future threat to the global hegemony of Wall Street, the Federal Reserve and the American military-industrial complex.

On top of this, the in-built liberal-socialist majority within the EU was making it an increasingly large stumbling block to the globalist privatisation free-for-all favoured by the ultra-capitalist ideology promoted by the extremely influential followers of Ayn Rand.

Franco-German moves to create a European Army were seen as a challenge to NATO and to its Stateside leadership, and only served to strengthen the arguments of the anti-EU faction within the US elite.

All this led a significant section of the US Deep state to move towards hostility to the European Union, and to put in place measures to undermine it. From about 2008, this included the relentless media promotion (and, no doubt, funding) of dissident, Euro-sceptic political movements, particularly UKIP in Britain and the Five Star Movement in Italy.

Extremely well-funded globalist and neo-con think tanks, particularly the Henry Jackson Society and the London-based Policy Exchange, began to organise. Their mission – to lay the theoretical groundwork for a globalist, economically liberal, Atlanticist faction within British politics to challenge the pro-EU majority.

To cut a long story short, that faction has just grabbed control of the British ship of state! The Europhile elite have not changed their minds, the highly honed survival instinct of the British Conservative party, which has made it the oldest political party in the world, has simply handed the reins of power to a different bunch of politicians, in hock to a different foreign power. The UK just lurched even further out of the orbit of the Brussels bureaucrats and even closer to the Anglo-Zionist Empire.

Johnson and his gang really do appear committed to delivering Brexit, but before those who voted for it in the first place get too excited, it has to be said that, in delivering the letter of what the people voted for, this bunch will go on to drive a coach and horses through the spirit of that vote.

Because the British people voted Brexit fundamentally in a collective cry of anger and pain over being turned into marginalised outsiders in their own country. Brussels rule was conflated not just with losing our traditional weights and measures, but with the destruction of the old industries – fishing, coal, steel, ship-building – and the devastation of the working class communities that relied on them.

And, of course, with mass immigration, including that from former British colonies in the Third World, an influx which if anything was slowed down by the more recent arrival of generally far more assimilable East Europeans, courtesy of the EU.

On top of that was all the unease of millions of normal people over the political elite’s Gaderene rush to embrace social ultra-liberalism, in particular dripping wet law and order policies and a mania for LGBTQ+ triumphalism. Relentless newspaper headlines about crackpot rulings by the European Court of Justice led to ‘Europe’ getting the blame for a breakdown in law and order and in traditional justice.

Finally, with the majority of the political class urging people to vote to Remain, voting to Leave became a way of punishing the political elite, not just in Brussels, but in Westminster as well.

And yet, looking at the new Boris Johnson cabinet, and listening to his first few speeches as new Prime Minister, it is already all too clear that, while we are going to get Brexit, it certainly will not be the Brexit that the majority of Brits thought they were voting for!

To illustrate this, let’s take a brief, non-exhaustive look at some of the key players in the Johnson regime.

Let’s start with the man himself, noting the speed with which he spoke out about his pride in his partial Turkish Muslim and east European Jewish ancestry and the way in which, if ‘Islamophobia’ or ‘anti-Semitism’ rear their heads, he automatically finds himself thinking in terms of those ancestral loyalties, rather than what is good for Britain – as the British people are surely entitled to insist on in their Prime Minister.

Then, in one of his final campaign speeches, Johnson told the LGBT+ Conservatives (the tautology neatly sums up the state of the party and, more generally, Britain’s ruling political and media classes) that he has their back:

“I will continue to champion LGBT+ equality, get tough on hate crime and ensure that we break down barriers to a fairer society,” Johnson said, according to the group.

“We must do more to ensure that trans rights are protected and those who identify as trans or intersex are able to live their lives with dignity,” he continued, noting that he was one of the first senior party leaders to support same-sex marriage.

Following his meeting with the queen to officially accept the premiership, Johnson specifically mentioned the LGBTQ+ community in his speech outside No. 10 Downing Street.

“[The U.K.’s] brand and political personality is admired and even loved around the world for our inventiveness, for our humour, for our universities, our scientists, our armed forces, our diplomacy for the equalities on which we insist — whether race or gender or LGBT …….. and for the values we stand for around the world,” he said

Once upon a time, British political leaders justified going to war by speaking of making the world safe for democracy. Boris Johnson started his premiership by committing Britain to a global struggle to make the world safe for buggery!

Nor is this fixation with LGBTQ+ new. Although the never-satisfied ‘gay’ lobby is whining about a couple of throwaway ‘homophobic comments’ he made decades ago, Johnson voted in 2003 to repeal Section 28 of the Local Government Act of 1988, by which Margaret Thatcher prohibited local authorities from “promoting homosexuality” or “pretended family relationships.”

This vote opened the door to the indoctrination of school-children with homosexual propaganda. Johnson also voted for civil partnerships for homosexuals and attacked the institution of marriage as ‘bourgeois convention’.

Johnson has also wasted no time reiterating his support for an amnesty for huge numbers of illegal immigrants and boasting of sharing the views of pro-immigration Labour party MPs. Ominously, he has also refused to pledge even to attempt to stick to the upper limits on immigration promised – but of course not delivered – by his predecessor Theresa May.

With Brexit making it harder for Poles and Hungarians to come to Britain, it is already clear from Johnson’s waffle about making the UK ‘open’ and ‘welcoming immigrants’, that, far from stopping immigration as millions of voters expected, Johnson’s Brexit will merely swap Polish immigrants for more Pakistanis, Bulgarians for Botswanans.

Johnson probably will set Britain free from Brussels, but he is also openly committed to speeding up the process by which the duly ‘liberated’ Brits are replaced in their own country by a further flood of immigrants. And the social liberals posing as Johnson’s fake conservatives will urge the stupid Brits to suck it up and celebrate their added diversity.

We’ve already seen the start of this process in Johnson creating what he refers to as a “cabinet for modern Britain” – wording that The Guardian’s Kehinde Andrews rightly described as a “euphemism for non-white”.

Leading Johnson’s Great Replacement charge will be Home Secretary Priti Patel, who has spoken gushingly of how the new government will “ continue to push for a dynamic, global Britain that is outward looking ……Our vision is for a truly global country – one where we welcome the brightest and best, where we are more outward facing, and where we decide who comes here based on what they have to offer.”

The Brits can’t say they weren’t warned. Because capitalism demands not just cheap labour, but also an endless supply of new consumers. Even the worse educated and least assimilable featherless biped on the planet thus has plenty to offer big business. The door is going to open wide to them all.

Patel was forced to resign two years ago after holding secret meetings with Israeli ministers. The meetings included a visit to an Israeli army field hospital in the occupied Golan Heights, where wounded Al Qaeda and ISIS fighters were patched up and sent back to continue fighting against the pro-Christian government in Syria. Patel asked officials within her department to look into whether British aid money could be funneled into this medical centre.

The same dangerous obsequiousness to Israel has also been shown by Johnson’s new Chancellor, Sajid Javid. Two years after becoming MP, Javid told the Conservative Friends of Israel annual lunch that as a British born Muslim if he had to go and live in the Middle East, he would not go to a Muslim majority country: “There is only one place I could possibly go. Israel. The only nation in the Middle East that shares the same democratic values as Britain”.

He is talking, let us remind ourselves, about the last openly racist state on the planet, whose supporters around the world insist on the right of Jews to have their own exclusive homeland, at the very same time as denouncing any attempt by any white nation to restrict immigration or preserve traditional ethnic identities as ‘neo-Nazi’. And the state which has done more than any other –except Saudi Arabia, Turkey and Barak Obama’s White House – to fund, arm and aid the Islamist head-cutters at war in Syria.

In her resignation letter Patel admitted she “fell below the high standards that are expected of a Secretary of State.” Not for the first time! In the past she has been criticised for taking trips to Bahrain funded by that country’s repression Salafist regime, and attending a conference in Washington paid for by the Henry Jackson society.

As already noted, the Henry Jackson operation is one of the best-funded and most dangerous of all the trans-Atlantic neo-con think tanks. It constantly agitates for hostility to Russia, Iraq-war style meddling in the Middle East on behalf of Eretz Israel and Big Oil, and for a poisonous mixture of ultra-right-wing economics and social liberalism – including the privatisation of national assets and the promotion of LGBTQ+ agendas at the expense of traditional values.

The same sort of poison is promoted in Britain by the closely connected Policy Exchange think-tank. This was founded by Michael Gove, who Johnson just appointed as Chancellor of the Duchy of Lancaster, in many ways his political Chief of Staff in parliament.

Gove’s counterpart within the government itself is Munira Mirza, who Johnson just appointed Director of the Number 10 Policy Unit. She was previously Development Director at Policy Exchange and also worked on a range of its publications, including Living Apart Together: British Muslims and the paradox of multiculturalism.

As with all the other material coming out of the Johnson camp about multi-culturalism, this argued that the chief problem with Islam is that it hinders ‘integration’ – i.e. the process by which traditional British cultural and ethnic identity is replaced by the ultimate corporate dream of an atomised mass of rootless, identical consumers. And by which the traditional values once upheld by Christians and now defended mainly by Muslims are to be replaced by the anti-morality of the LGBTQ+ brigade and corporations greedy for pink pounds and rainbow dollars.

As with so many neo-cons on both sides of the Pond, Mirza started off as a Trotskyite. She was a member of the Revolutionary Communist Party. When it was dissolved in 1987 she followed other key comrades into the Living Marxism operation and then Spiked magazine, which has very successfully operated a policy of entryism into what passes for politica thought in Britain. Her Wiki entry quotes an article in the London Review of Books which noted that “Many of Munira’s ex party members have become influential in Conservative or Eurosceptic circles since the dissolution of their party, whilst remaining closely associated with each other’s endeavours.”

This includes the former party leader Frank Furedi, whose wife Ann is one of Britain’s most powerful abortionists. Strange ‘conservatives’ indeed! But, there again, one reading of these ‘ex’-Trotskyites’ new-found fondness for ultra-right-wing economics and privatisation is that the resulting exploitation and public anger will lead to the revolutionary crisis that eluded them when they were all wearing Che T-shirts in the late sixties! Or perhaps, it just pays better!

Coming back closer to Johnson, his campaign chief was Gavin Williamson. When Defence Secretary, Williamson was a notorious hawk against Russia and China, and for greater UK involvement in the Middle East. He also spoke out vigorously against Britain’s continued participation in Galileo, the global navigation satellite system created by the European Union. He is one of those pushing for a new UK system, compatible with the American GPS, and fully integrated with Five Eyes, the intelligence alliance between Australia, Canada, New Zealand, the United States and the UK. As with all such manoeuvres, it is hard to see where money gives way to ideology and power-politics and, of course, they are hopelessly entangled.

It is Williamson who has given one of the clearest glimpses into the Atlanticist obsession of the new regime: “Tthe cornerstone of European security is not the European Union, it is Nato. Let’s be absolutely clear. Our involvement in Nato is going to be there, long, enduring and for many, many defence secretaries after me.”

Another part of the Anglo-American elite can also be seen when you turn over another stone in the Johnson camp.

.Andrew Griffith, the new chief business adviser to Number 10 is a former Rothschild investment banker who joined Rupert Murdoch’s Sky in 1999, and became finance chief for the group in 2008.

Johnson has been spending up to 13 hours a day at Griffith’s lavish £9.5m townhouse,

A Johnson campaign source said Griffith had kindly opened up his home to let members of the transition team meet there. If paying the piper leads to the donor calling the tune, how much more power accrues to the Rothschild/Murdoch man providing the dancers with a 9.5 million pound house?

Finally, we just have time to consider Johnson’s new Chief Whip, Mark Spencer. Taking the new regime’s enthusiasm for LGBTQ+ issues towards its logical liberal intolerant end, he has said that Christian teachers who dare to voice opposition to same-sex marriage should be subject to ‘Extremism Disruption Orders’. In other words, legislation brought in supposedly to stop Islamist hate-preachers recruiting terrorists is to be used against Christians who stand by the teachings of the Bible!

So, yes, we can now expect Brexit from Johnson. But Britain is also going to get more mass immigration. And ruthless demonization of anyone who dares oppose it. More LGBTQ+ propaganda for children – and ruthless repression of anyone who dares oppose it.

More pressure for British participation in neo-con, Zionist and Salafist wars in Syria, Iran and Yemen. More insane and dangerous sabre-rattling against traditionalist and Christian Russia.

And more looting of what remains of Britain’s common wealth by the privatisation vultures. Finishing off the monetisation of the NHS is sure to surface as a great ambition for this corporate puppet regime sooner rather than later. Almost certainly a couple of months before Johnson delivers Brexit and obliterates Jeremy Corbyn in a snap general election.

It remains to be seen whether the globalist kleptomaniacs behind the new regime will also find a way to turn the removal of EU subsidies into an opportunity to arrange a massive transfer of farmland in Britain from farmers, workers’ pension funds and the old landed aristocracy and into the hands of global corporations. If that’s on the agenda too, remember where you heard it first!

All the above presupposes, of course, that the juvenile and utterly irresponsible anti-Russian, anti-Iranian and anti-Chinese sabre-rattling – of which the Johnson regime is as guilty as its predecessors – doesn’t actually start World War Three. Because, if it does, there’ll be nothing left to privatise and loot except the last tin of beans in the irradiated rubble.

Don’t get me wrong: This is not to condemn Brexit. The British people voted for it, and its delivery will be a Good Thing (not least because it has added, and will continue to add, to the instability in the EU which has disrupted the efforts of its bureaucratic rulers to maintain a firmly anti-Russian line, and because, however imperfect, Brexit is a blow for national sovereignty against a particularly nasty little imperial project.

All of us who, one way or another, helped set in motion or advance the process which defeated the pro-EU whores who had sold Britain to Brussels can be rightly proud of having done their bit to break the claws of the largest leopard in the London-based elite.

But you can also be sure that the British majority are going to be mightily disappointed with the new Johnson regime leopard and how Brexit turns out. They voted to restore the old Britain, particularly the Old England. What they will get instead is an even faster dissolution than we saw under EU rule.

They voted against ‘political correctness gone mad’ and in a bid to cling on to traditional values. What they will get is a quasi-Trotskyite cultural Marxist regime – all the more destructive for having the label ‘conservative’ – which grinds their faces – and especially the faces of their children and grandchildren – in LGBTQ+ filth.

They voted Brexit hoping to stop immigration. Instead, the next ten years will see an absolutely swamping change in Britain’s demographics, as the dying early Baby Boomers are replaced with Johnson’s ‘New Britons’ from all corners of the world.

They voted to kick out a Brussels Occupation Government. What they will get instead is a New York Occupation Government. Which is a polite way of putting it, for there is in fact really nothing American about America’s neocons.

“Meet the new boss. Same as the old boss”, is how the Who put it. But it was all summed up even better by the great English visionary William Morris, in A Dream of John Ball, his revolutionary classic about the very first English Peasants’ Revolt against an alien elite:

“I pondered all these things, and how men fight and lose the battle, and the thing that they fought for comes about in spite of their defeat, and when it comes turns out not to be what they meant, and other men have to fight for what they meant under another name.”

#u.k

0 notes

mychristopherstokes66world · 5 years ago

Link

The government has become the enemy of the people. No one can deny that they are colluding with social media to censor everyone on the internet. Both parties are calling for unconstitutional gun control measures from bump stocks to silencers to Red Flag Laws. How long are we going to pretend that our government serves the people? Or that the people really have any say? I for one will not abide tyrants and have every intention in engaging in open rebellion against Jews, pedos and traitors. They are clamping down hard on free speech, gun rights, going after "hate crimes" and pushing the idea that whites are domestic terrorists. Day of the Rope draws nigh. http://bit.ly/2JWUqOh You can call for violence and revolution as much as you want with ZERO legal culpability in the US. http://bit.ly/1B8OCb1 What this means: Unless your speech directly inspires some one to commit a violent crime in your immediate vicinity immediately after expressing your speech AND this was your intent, you are 100% protected. Here, let's try it out: You can even directly threaten some one online: Don't be afraid of being put on a 'list'. We are all on the list already. See: mass surveillance. They are just trying to intimidate you. Look at the legal precedents and firmly exercise your rights. Who are our symbols or important figures? I've made a small list but we should add more. We need to develop a year-round schedule of events and people to remind the public of what we are fighting for. Ted Kaczynski Brenton Tarrant Seth Rich Aaron Swartz Reddit founder Marvin Heemeyer The Killdozer Julian Assange Gary Webb We must win the infowar before we can fight the race war. A fuckton of people have woken up the the Jewish agenda but we still need more to reach that oh-so-essential critical mass. We also need to start getting organized IRL in "friend groups" that meet and train and discuss tactics. Don't openly call yourselves militias or white nationalists but work towards those ends regardless. Symbols: Tricorn hat Revolutionary Figures New Figures: Ted Kaczynski Brenton Tarrant Seth Rich Aaron Swartz Reddit founder Marvin Heemeyer The Killdozer Juliana Assange Gary Webb Terry A. Davis Symbolic events Waco Ruby Ridge POSSIBLE ALLIES: Amish Japanese Hindu Indians Mormons Ethnic Europeans THE ENEMY: Jews Pedos Traitors Muslims Jews Chinese Socialists Should Terry A Davis be considered? I believe he holds a special place in this Pantheon. He is the most Chaotic of the bunch.

the revolution you speak of is already underway - there is no putting it back into the box - there are tens of millions of people that have “nothing left to lose” they’re fukin pissed and ready to kill - they’re not rednecks but 18 - 35 yr old’s who have lost hope - they work at wal mart and ready lubes and starbucks who spend 1/2 their income to degenerate hypocrite boomer landlords who will feel the full wrath of their anger - sonif yer legit pray for a carrington event - it will make it much easier with the comm system down...

I have but one lamp by which my feet are guided; and that is the lamp of experience. I know of no way of judging of the future but by the past. And judging by the past, I wish to know what there has been in the conduct of the British ministry for the last ten years, to justify those hopes with which gentlemen have been pleased to solace themselves, and the House? Is it that insidious smile with which our petition has been lately received? Trust it not, sir; it will prove a snare to your feet. Suffer not yourselves to be betrayed with a kiss. Ask yourselves how this gracious reception of our petition comports with these war-like preparations which cover our waters and darken our land. Are fleets and armies necessary to a work of love and reconciliation? Have we shown ourselves so unwilling to be reconciled, that force must be called in to win back our love? Let us not deceive ourselves, sir. These are the implements of war and subjugation; the last arguments to which kings resort. I ask, gentlemen, sir, what means this martial array, if its purpose be not to force us to submission? Can gentlemen assign any other possible motive for it? Has Great Britain any enemy, in this quarter of the world, to call for all this accumulation of navies and armies? No, sir, she has none. They are meant for us; they can be meant for no other. They are sent over to bind and rivet upon us those chains which the British ministry have been so long forging. And what have we to oppose to them? Shall we try argument? Sir, we have been trying that for the last ten years. Have we anything new to offer upon the subject? Nothing. We have held the subject up in every light of which it is capable; but it has been all in vain. Shall we resort to entreaty and humble supplication? What terms shall we find which have not been already exhausted? Let us not, I beseech you, sir, deceive ourselves. Sir, we have done everything that could be done, to avert the storm which is now coming on. We have petitioned; we have remonstrated; we have supplicated; we have prostrated ourselves before the throne, and have implored its interposition to arrest the tyrannical hands of the ministry and Parliament. Our petitions have been slighted; our remonstrances have produced additional violence and insult; our supplications have been disregarded; and we have been spurned, with contempt, from the foot of the throne. In vain, after these things, may we indulge the fond hope of peace and reconciliation. There is no longer any room for hope. If we wish to be free2 if we mean to preserve inviolate those inestimable privileges for which we have been so long contending2if we mean not basely to abandon the noble struggle in which we have been so long engaged, and which we have pledged ourselves never to abandon until the glorious object of our contest shall be obtained, we must fight! I repeat it, sir, we must fight! An appeal to arms and to the God of Hosts is all that is left us! They tell us, sir, that we are weak; unable to cope with so formidable an adversary. But when shall we be stronger? Will it be the next week, or the next year? Will it be when we are totally disarmed, and when a British guard shall be stationed in every house? hall we gather strength by irresolution and inaction? Shall we acquire the means of effectual resistance, by lying supinely on our backs, and hugging the delusive phantom of hope, until our enemies shall have bound us hand and foot? Sir, we are not weak if we make a proper use of those means which the God of nature hath placed in our power. Three millions of people, armed in the holy cause of liberty, and in such a country as that which we possess, are invincible by any force which our enemy can send against us. The battle, sir, is not to the strong alone; it is to the vigilant, the active, the brave. Besides, sir, we have no election. If we were base enough to desire it, it is now too late to retire from the contest. There is no retreat but in submission and slavery! Our chains are forged! Their clanking may be heard on the plains of Boston! The war is inevitableand let it come! I repeat it, sir, let it come. It is in vain, sir, to extenuate the matter. Gentlemen may cry, Peace, Peace but there is no peace. The war is actually begun! The next gale that sweeps from the north will bring to our ears the clash of resounding arms! Our brethren are already in the field! Why stand we here idle? What is it that gentlemen wish? What would they have? Is life so dear, or peace so sweet, as to be purchased at the price of chains and slavery? Forbid it, Almighty God! I know not what course others may take; but as for me, give me liberty or give me death! The truth and violence, but it MUST be in that order. Most importantly though, whites need to start viewing each other as blood-brothers and allies. (((Individualism))) has poisoned out society and eroded community bonds. This damage must be healed but I'm not exactly sure how other than pointing at a common enemy. We need to start organizing into small, unofficial militia groups with similar agendas. Jews are so powerful today because they ENJOY working together to cause mayhem and to further their own wealth and power. Jews almost never betray each other and seem to have evolved to mob together to get what they want collectively. It's literally instinct for them. We must emulate this to an extent but with waging an actual war rather than the soft-power games that kikes excel at. Also, JOIN THE MILITARY. We need lot's of allies embedded within the armed forces, because without their help we will never win.

I think you doth glow too much. But just in case you don't, you need to be realistic. The few hundred people here and the 'tards with their own militias are way too small to accomplish anything before getting mowed down by the national guard. You can't do it like this. You have to start with a militia, start in small towns where people see this kiked bullshit and grow yourself a movement. How did the revolution succeed? With wide support, like over 60%. You have like 0.6% and want to take down a heavily funded and well oiled machine. You can't. Build an "SJW" like movement and then we can talk.

We are going to take this seriously and go step by step. Create a list of grievances, a list of enemies, and discuss ways to move forward in ending Tyranny in the United States. We need a calendar of events to draw peoples attention and give us reason to make noise constantly. Ebba Aukerlund Waco Ruby Ridge Seth Rich Otoya Yamaguchi

We need the minds before the power goes out. That's why we need to start propaganda now. Detail who the problem is, what crimes they have committed, start a public discussion and demand change. We need another name for this besides Open Insurrection... so we can talk about it on other forums Organize and train in your local community. But don't just prepare for the day of the rope. If you bunker up with MRE's and guns you will be called a cult and the swat team will descend upon you. The proper course of action is to nominally engage with society as it is, while changing the communities you occupy. This doesn't mean riots or protests, it means starting projects to improve neighborhoods, and following through on them. The ONLY way to avoid being false flagged is to present yourselves consistently as above reproach. But the only way to cause bigger reverbrations is to be seen as better men. This means you and your lads must relentlessly pursue intellectual and physical supremacy. To be /fit/ and /lit/, one and all. By happy coincidence, lifting together and deb8ing each other will foster comeraderie, trust, and solidarity. THE WAY TO TAKE BACK OUR LAND IS INCH BY FUCKING INCH. This is my whitepill, and I hope it's yours as well, anons\\ word from the editor the only way to do this is to red pill as many as we can.. once people know what is going on no one will stand for it and they will all stand up... we have the right to take our country back remember that we can do this with out fighting or anyone getting hurt.. why destroy all we built https://thedevilman666.blogspot.com/https://www.facebook.com/groups/qanonreports https://twitter.com/CIACLOWN1 https://www.bitchute.com/channel/ciaclown16661/

#CIA CLOWN #RED PILL #REDPILL #ANON #HONKHONK

0 notes

republicstandard · 7 years ago

Text

A Perverse Future Awaits Ireland After Abortion Referendum

Ronald Reagan infamously claimed back in the 80’s that if fascism ever came to America, it would come dressed as liberalism. His claim was not only insightful but ominously accurate. This past week has been heart-wrenching for myself and many other Irish people, and it is now with a very deep sense of foreboding that I look to the future of life in Ireland – a country I no longer recognize.

Of course, one of the key factors I am referring to is the result of the recent Irish referendum on abortion which was carried with a 2 to 1 majority in favor of killing fetuses on demand; an actual landslide win, with 66.4% voting to repeal the Eighth Amendment protecting the rights of the unborn. Yes, legislation will now be drafted to limit abortion to 13 weeks, though bearing in mind the trajectory that Ireland has placed itself on, this limit will no doubt be extended to 24 weeks as is the case in the UK. If such liberal utopias such as the UK allow for the killing of the unborn up to 24 weeks then Ireland will be sure to follow suit. I can already hear the clamoring of the ecstatic pink-haired Social Justice Warriors demanding that Ireland embrace progressiveness while all those who even question the ethical merits will be, as per usual, shot down with the slanderous labels meant not just to silence dissent but to quash any and all opposition to the prevailing narrative – Bigot, Fascist, Nazi, etc. etc.

Ireland has now been so subsumed by the liberal agenda that the only outcome will be the eventual instillation of an authoritarian police state to quell any dissenting voices; if we are following the slippery liberal path trodden by the UK, and all the evidence now points to such, then a similar 1984-style dystopia will also be chosen as the means of ensuring stasis in Ireland. The enforcement of the UK ‘hate speech’ laws which amount to no more than forced silencing of anyone who questions the accepted narrative, is the future I now see for Ireland.

Which brings me to the other reason why this past week has deeply saddened me. Tommy Robinson’s arrest might not neatly tie in with the Irish abortion referendum, but if you have followed me so far, then I think you know where I am going with this. Tommy’s "crime" of reporting outside a court on a Muslim rape gang in Leeds would once upon a time have been hailed as essential investigative journalism; the duty bound obligation to report on every parent's worst nightmare. However, in multicultural, ‘diversity is our strength’ present-day UK, such reporting now results in a 13-month prison sentence with all recourse to due process ignored. Not only was the prevention of establishing a defense on Tommy’s part a great injustice, but the blanket ban on reporting on the arrest, imposed by the UK government on its own media, just further evidence of the measures that need to be taken in order to maintain a dystopian nightmare.

I am reminded of a section from Orwell’s 1984, where a scapegoat hate figure has to be created so that society can vent all its frustrations on him rather than on the government, micromanaging its every thought and action:

Winston’s hatred was not turned against Goldstein at all, but, on the contrary, against Big Brother, the Party, and the Thought Police; and at such moments his heart went out to the lonely, derided heretic on the screen, sole guardian of truth and sanity in a world of lies. And yet the very next instant he was at one with the people about him, and all that was said of Goldstein seemed to him to be true.

Of course, you just need to replace the character of Goldstein with Tommy Robinson to see what the UK government was hoping to possibly achieve with his arrest. Of course, there is no need to mention the radical ideology of those arrested in the child grooming scandal that Tommy was trying valiantly to report on; something that the Sharia-compliant mainstream media in the UK is reluctant to do.

So again, if anything is a further indication of where Ireland is heading then bear in mind that the cultural replacement of ethnic Irish people in Ireland will now take place a lot sooner than the projected 2050 mark when Irish people were originally expected to become a minority in their own country. Eurostat data in 2015 demonstrated that the fertility rate in Ireland was 1.92. I think we can now safely expect that now to dramatically drop in the coming years. The ecstatic response of the Irish mainstream media and of Irish people in general to the result of the abortion referendum on such public platforms as Twitter is actually quite frightening; I really need to keep reminding myself that their champagne-swilling party celebrations (I kid you not) are to toast the future deaths of thousands of Irish children.

Ireland's fertility rate is destined to now take a dramatic nose dive while the progressive liberal Irish policy is to then fill the shortfall in the Irish workforce with people who mainly support an ideology that is not only at variance with western values, but is hellbent on the destruction of such values; an ideology though, that sanctifies the importance of large families. There will be nowhere to turn to when the diversity clash becomes a hot war. Again, I need only cite the example of Tommy Robinson.

To conclude, I am not optimistic about Ireland’s future or the way it has been used in recent years as a Petri dish of sorts to see how a society that once embraced conservative, traditional family values could be turned on its head with just the right amount of social engineering. The abortion referendum, like the same-sex referendum that preceded it, is just another indicator of the perverse path this country has chosen. Most tragically, I will watch with trepidation as the slow removal of basic human rights such as freedom of speech and freedom of assembly are curtailed and the sinister enforcement of ‘thought crimes’ begins.

As the Irish prime minister (Taoiseach) hailed the result of the abortion referendum, regarding it as "a historic day for Ireland", I am again reminded not only of the Reagan reference I mentioned at the outset, but a further line from Orwell’s classic which exemplifies the drastic measures a society must take to shorn its identity for the sake of maintaining perversity:

The sacred principles of Ingsoc. Newspeak, doublethink, the mutability of the past.

This nightmare is heralded not by the boot of the stormtrooper, but the applause of the indoctrinated masses for the extermination of the unborn.

Thank you for reading Republic Standard. We publish this magazine and the Freebird Forum because we believe in free speech. Make a donation towards our running costs by clicking here.

The Republic Standard Web Shop is now open! Every piece of merchandise you buy is a victory against the nerds.

from Republic Standard | Conservative Thought & Culture Magazine https://ift.tt/2L0Ytpd via IFTTT

#IFTTT #Republic Standard | Conservative Thought & Culture Magazine

0 notes

teachanarchy · 8 years ago

Link

A post about an often overlooked role that speech and expression play in human interactions.

For the past few months the internet has been a buzz with fights and arguments over the concept of Free Speech. Its been quite varied and heated. Recently Libcom.org was the site of a textual slapfight with another blog, and while I don’t really think the position they offered is useful or even consistent really it did get me thinking.

The blog at one point stated there is a difference between speech and acts, the example given was that it is justified and correct to fight the British Union Fascists (BUF) because they represented a paramilitary threat (debatable) rather than just an ideological one. This isn’t a unique distinction liberals who favour maximum speech rights for all do often give a concession to physical defence against unambiguous violence. But the problem is that speech in itself can and often is a form of violence as well.

This happens in a number of ways but one of the most common is the tactic of outing someone. Outing is most commonly associated with queer individuals and Milo Yiannopoulos himself a recent lightning rod for this argument outed a Trans student at a University in Milwaukee, and is believed to have planned on doing the same to undocumented students on the campus of the University of Berkley.

Quote:

"When you have a room full of people that are just laughing at you as if you're some freak of nature, like you have some kind of mental illness—which is how he described me—it's like, I don't even know how to describe it, but it was way too much,"

Now in this particular case the harassment remained verbal, but it could very easily have had a darker ending, in 2015 21 people were murdered for being transgender in the United States.[1]

In March of this year there have been seven recorded murders of Transgender individuals recorded in the United States.[2]

There’s also been an increase in hate crimes recorded with Transgender people being disproportionately targeted.

Quote:

“In its 2014 report, the FBI recognized 1,248 victims of hate crimes targeted due to their sexual orientation (18.6 percent of all hate crimes reported) and 109 victims of hate crimes targeted due to their gender identity (1.8 percent of all hate crimes reported). The National Coalition of Anti-Violence Programs (NCAVP) reported that 2015 saw a 20% increase in the number of hate violence-related homicides of LGBTQ and HIV-affected people - noting that people of color and transgender people are disproportionally targeted. NCAVP reported that 62% of all LGBTQ homicide victims were people of color, and 54% of homicide victims were transgender women of color.”

[3]

But this isn’t a situation unique to LGBTQ people, on the contrary it’s a fairly common tactic that can be used against any group and often is.

In El Salvador Roberto D'Aubuisson (pictured) the leader of the extreme right wing ARENA party used to give televised speeches exposing people he claimed to be communist terrorists. In addition to naming them would show photographs of them so they could be recognized. Once outed if they didn’t escape (either abroad or to the underground) they would disappear. Their bodies would usually be found some days later showing signs of torture and mutilation.

Quote:

D'Aubuisson denounced union leaders, priests, academics, peasant organizers, students, professionals, government officials, and Christian Democrats. Among those he named was Archbishop Oscar Romero, whom he told, "You still have time to change your ways." He also attacked Mario Zamora, a leading Christian Democrat and member of the government who—like others identified in the broadcasts—was assassinated in a matter of weeks. “

[4]

Now obviously the Salvadoran civil war is an extreme case but it does demonstrate how speech can be used as a systemic tool of terror. And the only thing that makes it extreme is the circumstances, denouncing political enemies both real and imagined in the hopes or knowledge that fellow supporters will take care of the problem for you is very common.

This was how Mcarthyism and the Second Red Scare worked. Once someone was denounced as a suspected Red they were fair game for state harassment and investigations, employers would fire them and they could be publicly harassed and victimised. The once denounced the only way for a victim to save themselves from further attacks was to publicly cooperate with HUAC and denounce others.

And you don’t have to rely on state backing to pull of this off the Fascists have made use of this for decades. First they have an annoying habit of describing everyone and everything in opposition to them or they just don’t like as Jewish. Now this tendency is often cited as justification to write them off as loons, but there is method to the madness. By denouncing someone as Jewish, or a Zionist or a Globalist they’re telling their base to ignore what their targets are saying. And at the same time egging on local Fascists to attack them because they’re not just dissidents they’re actively part of the vast conspiracy against the nation or the white race etc.

For examples I’m spoiled for choice. Indeed so common is this practice that it actually found me. I uploaded a video by Johnathan Meades to youtube about architecture during the Nazi regime. Now I expected some backlash but I was caught by surprise how much vitriol a documentary on urban planning and statues would cause. Most of the negative comments were revolved around Meades being a Jew and a liar, or just a Jew with the implication being that as a Jew he’s lying. One commenter mentioned that Meades mother was Jewish, which she was though she had a deathbed conversion to Anglcanism and Meades himself is an outspoken atheist.

The reaction to this revelation caught me by surprise; it was like a smoking gun to these people. The fact that this man has a connection to Judaism was all the vindication they needed, the holocaust is a lie, because that smug liberal on the screen has a Jewish mother. Like I said is easy to dismiss these people, but unfortunately they are still quite capable of considerable organized violence.

The White Nationalist website Stormfront is suspected of being used as a platform for the occasional violent crime up to and including murder.[5]

In April 2013 Italian users of the site were arrested for publishing a list of names and encouraging violence against the people named.

Quote:

“The blacklist included: Turin Archbishop Cesare Nosiglia; Riccardo Pacifici, the President of the Jewish Community in Rome; Adel Smith, the President of the Muslim Union of Italy; the Mayor of Padua, Flavio Zanonto; several members of the judiciary; and journalist Gad Lerner, a Jew, and veteran TV talkshow host Maurizio Constanzo. According to media reports, those on the list were targeted because of their support for immigrants. Also listed were then House Speaker Gianfranco Fini and then Minister for International Cooperation and Integration Andrea Riccardi, who have both spoken out about citizenship rights for immigrant children.”

[6]

And it’s not just this one website there are others like Red Watch. Red Watch is a catalogue of supposed communists with identifying information. When I was 16 a friend of mine an inoffensive wooly liberal was listed on the site with his photo and then address. Yes someone put a teenager on a database used to target people.

Now nothing had happened to him thankfully at the time and he and his family moved out of the area, (though now that I think about it that could just mean someone attacked the house when other people were living there) though the potential consequences can be serious. In 2006 (the same year my friend told me he was on Red Watch) another person recorded on the site was stabbed.

Quote:

“What McFadden did not realise at the time was that he was not being punched but stabbed. "I think it went on for a couple of minutes before I managed to get the door closed. I turned round and my daughter was screaming. It was only then, as I put my hand to my face and felt the blood, that I realised what had happened."[

Oh and my speculation on my friends danger wasn’t completely unfounded, far right types are active in my area, in 2013 a couple of them attacked the local Mosque with petrol bombs, and the Synagogue has reported severe vandalism on several occasions.[8]

Now there is more to this topic but it’s already getting quite long so I’ll wrap up. I can anticipate some of the counter argument, that these are all violent acts and should be opposed, but that’s the rub. Every example I’ve cited was started and required the use of speech. The only way to stop sites like stormfront and redwatch from exposing hundreds to potential assault and murder is to shut them down. The only way to stop a politician inciting attacks on the marginalized or a right wing zealot exposing queer and migrant students to harassment is to remove their platforms for example causing so much disruption that no venue will knowingly host such people. It isn’t sufficient to attack and neutralise the ones who carry out the attacks, more will take their place so long as the infrastructure remains intact. But we can’t take effective action against any of this without infringing on another’s freedoms of speech and expression.

___________________________________________________________________________________

1. http://www.hrc.org/resources/violence-against-the-transgender-community-in-2016

2. http://www.thedailybeast.com/articles/2017/03/04/why-have-there-been-so-many-trans-murders-this-year.html

3. http://www.glaad.org/reference/hatecrimes

4. http://libcom.org/library/behind-death-squads-exclusive-report-us-role-el-salvadors-official-terror

5. https://www.splcenter.org/20140401/white-homicide-worldwide

6. http://www.gazzettadelsud.it/news/english/41782/Four-race-crime-convictions-for-neo-Nazi-website.html

7. https://www.theguardian.com/technology/2006/oct/04/news.g2

8. http://www.bbc.com/news/uk-england-25469555

#fascism #free speech #repression #violence #politics #queer #trans

0 notes

ds4design · 8 years ago

Text

What I Heard From Trump Supporters

After the election, I decided to talk to 100 Trump voters from around the country. I went to the middle of the country, the middle of the state, and talked to many online.

This was a surprisingly interesting and helpful experience—I highly recommend it. With three exceptions, I found something to like about everyone I talked to (though many of the things they said I strongly disagreed with). Although it shouldn’t have surprised me given the voting data, I was definitely surprised by the diversity of the people I spoke to—I did not expect to talk to so many Muslims, Mexicans, Black people, and women in the course of this project.

Almost everyone I asked was willing to talk to me, but almost none of them wanted me to use their names—even people from very red states were worried about getting “targeted by those people in Silicon Valley if they knew I voted for him”. One person in Silicon Valley even asked me to sign a confidentiality agreement before she would talk to me, as she worried she’d lose her job if people at her company knew she was a strong Trump supporter.

I wanted to understand what Trump voters liked and didn’t like about the president, what they were nervous about, what they thought about the left’s response so far, and most importantly, what would convince them not to vote for him in the future.

Obviously, this is not a poll, and not ‘data’. But I think narratives are really important.

Here’s what I heard.

The TL;DR quote is this:

“You all can defeat Trump next time, but not if you keep mocking us, refusing to listen to us, and cutting us out. It’s Republicans, not Democrats, who will take Trump down.”

What do you like about Trump?

“He is not politically correct.”

Note: This sentiment came up a lot, probably in at least a third of the conversations I had.

“He says true but unpopular things. If you can’t talk about problems, you can’t fix them.”

“I'm a Jewish libertarian who's [sic] grandparents were Holocaust survivors. Over the last few years the mainstream left has resorted to name-calling and character assassination, instead of debate, any time their positions are questioned. This atmosphere became extremely oppressive and threatening to people, like myself, who disagreed with many of Obama's policies over the past several years. Intelligent debate has become rare.”

“It's a lot like political discussion was in Soviet Union, actually. I think the inability to acknowledge obvious truths, and the ever-increasing scope of these restrictions makes it particularly frustrating. And personally, for whatever reason, I find inability to have more subtle discussion very frustrating--things are not white or black, but you can't talk about greys since the politically correct answer is white.”

“He is anti-abortion.” Note: This sentiment came up a lot. A number of people I spoke to said they didn’t care about anything else he did and would always vote for whichever candidate was more anti-abortion.

“I like that he puts the interests of Americans first. American policy needs to be made from a position of how Americans benefit from it, as that is the role of government.”

“He is anti-immigration.” Note: This sentiment came up a lot. The most surprising takeaway for me how little it seemed to be driven by economic concerns, and how much it was driven by fears about “losing our culture”, “safety”, “community”, and a general Us-vs.-Them mentality.

“He will preserve our culture. Preservation of culture is considered good in most cases. What’s wrong with preserving the good parts of American culture?”

“He’s not Hillary Clinton.”

“I’m Mexican. I support the wall. The people who have stayed have destroyed Mexico, and now they want to get out and cause damage here. We need to protect our borders, but now any policy is like that is called racist. Trump was the first person willing to say that out loud.”

“I am socially very liberal. I am fiscally very conservative. I don't feel I have a party--never have. I grew up in a more socially conservative time and picked the "lesser of two evils" during elections. Now, the more socially liberal side supports bigger governments, more aid and support and that money has to come from somewhere. I see what's deducted from my check each week. I'm OK with never being rich but I'd like more security and that doesn't come from more government spending.”

“We need borders at every level of our society.”

“I’m willing to postpone some further social justice progress, which doesn’t really result in loss of life, in favor of less foreign policy involvement, the opposite of which does."

“Brown people are always the out-crowd. I think subconsciously, part of the reason I supported him was a way to be in the in-crowd for once.”

What don’t you like about him?

“The way he talks about women is despicable.”

“Everything about his style. We only voted for him because this election was too important to worry about style.”

“I don’t like most things about him. The way it worked is we got to choose one of two terrible options.”

“I think our nation needs Trumpism to survive long term, and to me that supersedes almost every other reservation I have. My issue is with Trump himself--I think he's the wrong vessel for his movement, but he's all we've got so I'm behind him.”

“I think the rollout of the immigration executive order is emblematic of a clusterfuck, to be completely frank.”

“I now believe the Muslim ban actually makes us less safe.”

“Isolationism and protectionism at this point is insane. We've done that before.”

“I, too, worry about the dishonesty. His relationship with Russia, his relationship with women. His relationship with questionable financial matters. These all worry me and were they to continue I would lose all respect.”

“He continually plays into a character that he has created to rile his fan base. Accepting anti-semitism, white nationalism, or hate emanating unnecessarily, creates a vacuum of fear on social media, on television, and around the dinner table. Even though the policies may be similar to that of any recent Republican President, the behavior to act so immaturely sets a bad example for children and undercuts many cultural norms, which more than anything causes disruption to our sociological foundations.”

“I hate that he discredits the press all the time. That seems to forebode great evil.”

What are you nervous about with Trump as president?

“The thing I’m most worried about is war, and that he could destroy the whole world. I think I may have underestimated that risk, because he is more of an alpha strongman that I realized when I voted for him. Otherwise I still like him.” Note: Most people weren’t that worried about war. More frequent comments were along these lines:

“I know he’s taking strong positions on certain foreign issues, but I feel in negotiations you need to do things to move the needle and when a whole country is watching its hard to keep a poker face, but at least his business track record overall gives us reason to believe ultimately stability will prevail.”

and

“He’s crazy, but it’s a tactic to get other nations not to mess with us.”

“I worry he will drive us apart as a nation. I believed him when he said that would stop with the campaign, but I haven’t seen signs of it so far.”

“I am nervous that his mental health is actually bad.”

“I worry he is actually going to roll back social change we’ve fought so hard for. But I hope not.”

What do you think about the left’s response so far?

“You need to give us an opportunity to admit we may have been wrong without saying we’re bad people. I am already thinking I made a mistake, but I feel ostracized from my community.”

“The left is more intolerant than the right.” Note: This concept came up a lot, with real animosity in otherwise pleasant conversations.

“Stop calling us racists. Stop calling us idiots. We aren’t. Listen to us when we try to tell you why we aren’t. Oh, and stop making fun of us.”

“I’d love to see one-tenth of the outrage about the state of our lives out here that you have for Muslims from another country. You have no idea what our lives are like.”

“I’m so tired of hearing about white privilege. I’m white, but way less privileged than a black person from your world. I have no hope my life will ever get any better.”

“I am tired of feeling silenced and demonized. We have mostly the same goals, and different opinions about how to get there. Maybe I’m wrong, maybe you’re wrong. But enough with calling all of us the devil for wanting to try Trump. I hate Hillary and think she wants to destroy the country of us but I don’t demonize her supporters.”

“I’m angry that they’re so outraged now, but were never outraged over an existing terrible system.”

“The attacks against Trump have taught me something about myself. I have defended him and said things I really didn't believe or support because I was put in a defensive position. Protesters may have pushed many people in this direction BUT it is ultimately our responsibility and must stop.”

“I'd like to also add that the demonization of Trump by calling him and his supporters: Nazis, KKK, white supremacists, fascists, etc. works very well in entrenching Trump supporters on his side. These attacks are counter-factual and in my opinion very helpful to Trump.”

“So far his election has driven our nation apart. So far I see most of the divisiveness coming from the left. Shame on them. I don't see it quite as bad as during Nixon's era but we are truly headed in that direction. I could not speak with my parents during that time because political division would intrude. This Thanksgiving and holiday season were as close as I've felt to that in 40 years. We are increasingly polarized. It doesn't seem to be strictly generational, though that exists. There is an east coast-west coast, rural vs. urban, racial, and gender division forming now. It has the potential to be devastating.”

“The amount of violent attacks and economic attacks perpetrated by the left are troublesome. My wife and I recently moved to the Bay Area. I was expecting a place which was a welcoming meritocracy of ideas. Instead, I found a place where everyone constantly watches everyone else for any thoughtcrime.”

“Silicon Valley is incredibly unwelcoming to alternative points of view. Your curiosity, if it is sincere, is the very rare exception to the rule.”

“There is something hypocritical about the left saying the are uniters not dividers, they are inclusive and then excluding half the population with comments on intelligence and irrelevance in the modern world.”

What would convince you not to vote for him again?

“War would be unforgivable.”

“If the Russia thing were true, I’d turn against him. Why don’t y’all focus on that instead of his tweets?”

“Give us a better option, and we’ll be happy. But it needs to be a moderate—Sanders won’t win.”

“I’ll happily vote for someone else. There’s a lot I hate about Trump. But our lives are basically destroyed, and he was the first person to talk about fixing that.”

“Generally hard to say. Extreme corruption would do it.”

Second person in the same conversation: “I don’t care if he’s corrupt. Y’all voted for Hillary and she was the most corrupt candidate of all time.”

“Another worry is an escalation of overreaches between him and the left that culminates in the breakdown of our system of law. I'd hold him responsible for that.”

“If he were to get the US involved in a major military conflict (I think the odds of this have actually decreased versus Hillary, but I'm willing to be proven wrong). If he were to substantially increase the cost of doing business (by increasing regulation or taxes for instance).”

“I'm socially very liberal. If he were to do something like restart a war on drugs, try to restrict rights of LGBT, or make first trimester abortions difficult or dangerous, I'd rethink my position. I think these type of things are extremely unlikely though, especially with an election a few years away the country as a whole becoming more socially liberal.”

“I think if 2008 happened again (further into Trump's tenure, so that causation can be shown, hypothetically), the base would evaporate.”

“Based on Trump's history before politics I don't believe he is racist, sexist, homophobic or bigoted. If that were true it would supersede everything else since it would be even worse for individual liberty and freedom than any freedom of speech restrictions or increases in government size proposed by the Democratic Party.”

0 notes