You are currently browsing the category archive for the ‘cultural hegemony’ category.

Noam Chomsky nails it in a short video – which might be part of a larger interview, I don’t know. (only 8 minutes long – watch the whole thing, no fluff)

Trump acts as a distraction, a continuous loud and 24/7 craziness circus act that is purposefully fueled by the elite-owned media, while elite politicians (and the financial/industrial/military complex) destroy anything that benefits the people in the US and ravage nations abroad, in the background of the media circus .

And the American populace falls hook, line, and sinker for it.

Meanwhile in our little corner of the world, the fight goes on…

 

Advertisements

“News for homosexual pigs” (euphemistically called “Gay Star News”) has article playing down homosexual sexual harassment. Some guy  – that I had to look who it is – is asking *** in a friendly manner, no less *** for homosexual pigs not to sexually harass so much other men.

The lessons gay men can learn from ‘handsy’ Kevin Spacey

OPINION: Let this be a cautionary tale to grabby gay men, says Jeremy Helligar*

[*according to quick search on google: “Jeremy Helligar is a journalist, author, pop culturist and world traveler from New York City”]

Excerpts:

Guy Pearce on working with ‘handsy’ Spacey

Last week, his L.A. Confidential co-star Guy Pearce entered the discussion, offering vague but telling details about what it was like to work with Spacey on the Oscar-winning 1997 film.

‘Tough one to talk about at the moment. Amazing actor. Incredible actor. Slightly difficult time with Kevin, yeah,’ he told Australian presenter Andrew Denton on last week’s episode of Interview.

‘He’s a handsy guy,’ Pearce continued, adding, ‘Thankfully I was 29, and not 14.’

==============

…gay men need to take The Fall of Kevin Spacey as a cautionary tale. #MeToo isn’t just about women and powerful straight men. It’s about men fighting off ‘handsy’ men, too.

Terry Crews’ recent lawsuit against Adam Venit, the talent agent who the linebacker-turned-actor says grabbed his genitals at a party in 2016, presents a scenario that’s not uncommon in gay bars, in gay clubs, and even on gay dates.

======

Too many gay men think nothing of being ‘handsy’

I’ve encountered many gay men who had no standards at all, men who got too handsy in public and in private. I have my own bonafide #MeToo story, one that involved a straight white doctor who left a lifelong mark on my psyche, much like Rapp says Spacey did to him.

Aside from a grope-y encounter with a drunken man in a Buenos Aires nightclub a decade ago, my experiences with gay men have been less extreme, for the most part.

Still, the cumulative effect of all the handsy ones who have littered my path and the ones who just walk up to me and stroke me, grab me, or kiss me, has been just as defeating. I often wonder what they’d think if men treated their sisters the way they themselves treat other men, like mere pieces of meat to be carelessly handled and devoured.

Being horny is not an excuse. And even if I kiss a man, that’s not an invitation for him to immediately grab my crotch or try to pull down my pants.

Slow down, boys. If you’re not a teenager, there are no excuses for so-called (by Morrissey) pathetic attempts at courtship. Pay attention to signals. Ask, if they’re unclear. Don’t make the same mistakes that Kevin Spacey allegedly made, the ones so many men, gay and straight, have made.

And for God’s sake, keep you hands off your colleagues’ butts!

We can do better. We must do better.

=============================================================

=============================================================

The West is such a sexually violent sewer. This is 2018! We have an article in a newspaper for pigs of human beings – homosexuals and bisexuals – where a guy actually makes a plea for this scum of people not to grab *** so much *** their colleagues’ butts, private parts, and body parts – in other words – can’t you just sexually assault other people a little less?

This is what telling turds of people that homosexuality is normal does to them. LGBT pigs, liberals, including liberal doctors and psychologists who promote a homosexual agenda are all responsible for this violence. And nothing can undo the harm and the violence that homosexuals and bisexuals do in society. Nothing.

 

 

I’m very happy to see some gains for Dylan Farrow.

(“The low buzz of controversy that’s hummed beneath the filmmaker’s career for 25 years is becoming a roar.”)

As I have written here before, I believe her. And more people do too now, and the awareness of her case and story and the problems regarding the problematic investigations, the disappearance of evidence, the behind-the-scenes manipulations by Woody, and the fact that she was wrongly disbelieved simply because Allen is one of the biggest names in Hollywood is all being rethinked by some people, who are also asking themselves if she isn’t telling the truth and going up against an enormously powerful but nevertheless guilty pervert.

Dylan Farrow on speaking out against Woody Allen: “I thought things would change”

https://www.vox.com/culture/2018/1/7/16859962/dylan-farrow-woody-allen-golden-globes-2018-metoo-timesup

She recently tweeted: It’s Sunday. Four years ago, at the Globes in 2014, Woody Allen was awarded the Cecil B. DeMille award for lifetime achievement. Four years ago I decided enough was enough and wrote an open letter detailing the abuse I sustained at the hands of Woody Allen. /1 I thought it would make a difference. I thought things would change. I learned quickly (and painfully) that my optimism was misplaced. His time wasn’t up. /2

Dylan Farrow, along with her brother Ronan, has continued to speak out against Allen, most recently in a December 7 LA Times op-ed entitled “Why has the #MeToo revolution spared Woody Allen?”

=========================

You can see that this is a very divisive case that polarizes people just by reading the comments to every article that comes out on her case. Vox had a very good article with a long recap and recent developments on people’s perceptions of the case:

Why Woody Allen hasn’t been toppled by the #MeToo reckoning — yet

One of the reasons that people are easily polarized, and that the above article doesn’t mention is that the overwhelming majority of the people are never going to read in-depth all that happened with the case – all the documents, all the testimonies published, all the articles, all the comments, etc. And this makes a huge difference. If you just read one or two articles – which is the most most people will ever do – there is so little information. It’s like a jury that doesn’t sit through an entire trial, but just is given a few paragraphs of information and is then asked to make a decision. Of course, it’s going to be biased or a big guess – even if in the right direction.

======================

“Dylan linked her argument to the way that Weinstein and other powerful sexual assaulters in Hollywood had been protected:”

Although the culture seems to be shifting rapidly, my allegation is apparently still just too complicated, too difficult, too “dangerous,” to use Lively’s term, to confront.

The truth is hard to deny but easy to ignore. It breaks my heart when women and men I admire work with Allen, then refuse to answer questions about it. It meant the world to me when Ellen Page said she regretted working with Allen, and when actresses Jessica Chastain and Susan Sarandon told the world why they never would.

It isn’t just power that allows men accused of sexual abuse to keep their careers and their secrets. It is also our collective choice to see simple situations as complicated and obvious conclusions as a matter of “who can say”? The system worked for Harvey Weinstein for decades. It works for Woody Allen still.

====================

Indeed. Many people who say they are against child abuse and sexual violence are in actuality, frauds. They are never taken to task on their beliefs and attitudes that support these violence systems.

 

Amazingly someone has – for the first time that I am aware at least – written an article about how sexually violent homosexual and bisexual pigs are  that has been published in a major paper -and this, in a “gay bar – that is, a bar for turds of men who have a perverted attraction to other men.

========================

How does Harvey Weinstein happen? Visit a gay bar with me.

Take a trip with me. Imagine being gay, or queer, at a club, or a bar, with the lights turned down, the fog machines blowing. It’s around midnight. People are drunk or getting there. The groping starts. Shirts come off. Hands trace down backs and starts cupping butt cheeks.

Rarely is consent obtained or given beforehand. Occasionally crotches are groped. Occasionally quite aggressively. Some people let it happen. Some welcome it. Sometimes a joke is uttered by one of the parties: “Haha, I can’t help myself.” And sometimes people pull away. Sometimes they slap hands away. Sometimes friends step in.

But almost never are there consequences for this. There are no fights. No complaints to bouncers or a security guard. I have never seen anyone get kicked out of a bar for being too handsy. The same people are there, the next week, testing boundaries, stepping up the ladder of predatory behavior.

Marc Ambinder is a member of USA TODAY’s Board of Contributors and journalist-in-residence at the Center for Ethics and the Rule of Law at the University of Pennsylvania.

=======================

See? Normal for garbage of people. Normal for liberals. Normal for turds of LGBT people.

And true – I have never seen any complaints. How deformed must be the mind of a person for them to think this is normal? Well, once a person thinks homosexuality is normal, notice that thinking assault and harassment and violence are normal are just around the corner, if they weren’t there to begin with and the basis for them thinking that so many other perversions are normal.

I’ve had the disgusting personal experience of talking to a POS of a liberal woman – the mother of an 18 yr old (if I remember correctly) who took her son to a “gay bar,” since she loves “gays” and thinks “gay bars” are fun, and as they were entering the bar, a gay pig grabbed her son’s head forcefully and violently smacked his lips on the teen’s lips – right in front of her. She just laughed completely – and told her son “not to be upset” because these were “just gays being gays”. And she continued laughing recalling the whole episode.

How demented is that? I was so shocked and disgusted I couldn’t even speak. What was I going to say? If I had opened my mouth I would have attacked that woman in so many ways…

But for a pervert, nothing is perverted – everything is normal. The very own mother witnesses her son being assaulted by a gay pig and she stands there laughing. Now that’s a liberal for you.

These people are like a cancer in society.

 

Well, one good thing coming out of the Weinstein scandal + metoo + Hollywood/other industries harassment scandal is that some people started investigating homosexual/bisexual pigs – at least when the perp is ultra famous – such as Kevin Spacey.

And now here is another one:

Male Models Say Mario Testino and Bruce Weber Sexually Exploited Them

New York Times article – they seem to have talked to a lot of people. The reported testimonies sound credible. And additional factor going in the direction of credible is the NYT itself – I mean you cannot get more homosexual fanatic than this crap of a newspaper.

“The men recalled, with remarkable consistency, private sessions with Mr. Weber in which he asked them to undress and led them through breathing and “energy” exercises. Models were asked to breathe and to touch both themselves and Mr. Weber, moving their hands wherever they felt their “energy.” Often, Mr. Weber guided their hands with his own.”

“I remember him putting his fingers in my mouth, and him grabbing my privates,” said the model Robyn Sinclair. “We never had sex or anything, but a lot of things happened. A lot of touching. A lot of molestation.”

After Weinstein Scandal, a Plan to Protect Models OCT. 23, 2017
In accounts going back to the mid-1990s, 13 male assistants and models who have worked with the photographer Mario Testino, a favorite of the English royal family and Vogue, told The Times that he subjected them to sexual advances that in some cases included groping and masturbation.

+

“He was a sexual predator,” said Ryan Locke, who succeeded Mr. Fedele with Gucci.

Mr. Locke said that when he told other models that he was going to meet Mr. Testino, “everyone started making these jokes — they said he was notorious, and ‘tighten your belt.’”

==============

And one thing to note here is how liberals – who have the mind of pigs regarding sexuality – are all so cozy with sexual harassment and assault. But what are they going to think if they think homosexuality and porn and promiscuity and prostitution are normal? Instead of being disgusted with all these things plus the sexual harassment – they joke and laugh.

And this is why I think it’s important for people to take note that thinking that homosexuality is normal is always part of a larger package of an ideology that supports and facilitates sexual violence and harassment.

==============

“Former assistants said that Mr. Testino had a pattern of hiring young, usually heterosexual men and subjecting them to increasingly aggressive advances.”

===============

See what turds of people homosexuals and bisexuals are? They love perversity and demeaning people and destroying anything that is healthy about sex.

““He shuts the door and locks it. Then he crawls on the bed, climbs on top of me and says, ‘I’m the girl, you’re the boy.’ I went at him, like, you better get away. I threw the towel on him, put my clothes on and walked out,” Mr. Locke said.”

““I was often made to feel uncomfortable on shoots, asked to massage Mario in front of other assistants, models and fashion editors.”

“One night after a dinner, Mr. Tillman said the photographer grabbed him on the street and tried to kiss him. A few weeks later, while on a business trip, Mr. Tillman met Mr. Testino in his hotel room. Mr. Testino demanded that the assistant roll him a joint, then threw him down on a bed, climbed on top of him and pinned down his arms, Mr. Tillman said. Mr. Testino’s brother came into the room and made the photographer get off Mr. Tillman.” “I was scared,” he said of the hotel room experience. “I didn’t know what was going to happen.”

Taber, a model who worked with Mr. Testino for much of the late ’90s and early 2000s (he used only his first name professionally), described Mr. Testino as a friend until he stuck his hand down the back of Taber’s pants, and showed up at his hotel room asking for sex. “He was a mentor who took it a step too far,” he said.

“Sexual harassment was a constant reality,” said Roman Barrett, an assistant to Mr. Testino in the late ’90s who said the photographer rubbed up against his leg with an erection and masturbated in front of him.

“He misbehaved in hotel rooms, the backs of cars and on first-class flights,” he said. “Then things would go back to normal, and that made you feel gaslighted.”

Another assistant to Mr. Testino, a decade later, said he had his pants pulled down and buttocks fondled while on the job. Yet another said that Mr. Testino masturbated on him during a business trip. Both were granted anonymity because they feared career repercussions.

Even those who worked for Mr. Testino without experiencing the most direct harassment were affected. “I saw him with his hands down people’s pants at least 10 times,” said Thomas Hargreave, a shoot producer who worked frequently with Mr. Testino between 2008 and 2016. “Mario behaved often as if it was all a big joke. But it wasn’t funny. And the guys being placed in these situations wouldn’t know how to react. They would look at me, like, ‘What’s going on? How do I deal with this?’ It was terrible.”

============================

I think that the last part also strikes at one of the horrible aspects of sexual harassment. It can be so profoundly damaging and disconcerting at the psycho-emotional level, even though in many situations, there is no physical violence. And this is something people must take note of.

The article also talks about that many victims are afraid to come forward because they fear retaliation. Which is why sexual harassment is such a cancer in society. Because powerful people almost always have the power to retaliate against victims who come forward.

And now for the million dollar question – how many liberals are going to shun this homosexual POS now that he has been denounced? My bet is on three. The remaining hundreds of millions of homosexual-loving pigs will continue kissing his behind.

I had stopped blogging, but I wanted to break the “fast” due to the Weinstein scandal.

This was my first reaction when the scandal broke: I’m very happy with it! I wake up with a smile on my face to read the articles and out-pour of testimonies and accusations and revelations about the rot of sexual harassment and violence in Hollywood and in society in general. Not to mention that most or all perpetrators involved so far in the Weinstein scandal are, wait for it, liberals!

You know, the people who think homosexuality, pornography, and promiscuity are normal – and who show themselves to be the personification of evil when it comes to their ethics and greed and immorality.

And not only that, these are the people who will malign to death any social conservative. We all know that if I applied for a job with these garbage of liberals, whether they are the victims or the perpetrators, and I disclosed my ethical and healthy views against homosexuality, pornography, and promiscuity, they would brand me a “bigot” and a “hater” and would deny me the job, preferring to give it instead to someone who has the same sexual sewer in their mind as they do.

And what is the result?

Violence. A society where homosexuality, porn, and promiscuity have been normalized cannot be anything else than a very sexually violent society.

Continue shining the light on the violent liberal sewer that is Hollywood. Including the pedophilia problem.

What I find striking is the many ways that Americans are conditioned like Nazi Germans. On the one hand, in their discourse, they insist on following the law (and by “law”, they mean American laws!). So much so that when there is a law that would prevent American secret agencies from breaking laws regarding American citizens, that is, the national sphere of laws, these agencies must find a way to break the law secretely or to bypass the law through justifications, or to take advantage of legal loopholes, for example, all these secret courts and decisions for mass surveillance. In other words, they allege to the populace that they are “following the law” while behaving in a criminal way. But they must pretend to follow the “rule of law”.

On the other hand, Americans clearly state that they will break all laws in every other country if they want, for purposes of “national security”, “spying”, etc. In other words, the attitude is that they can disregard the rule of law completely once the sphere moves from internal to external. Yes, they justify acting in a criminal way internationally by pretending it’s to “catch bad guys”, but still they believe they are entitled to be criminals as they please. Internally they must pretend to be “following the law”, externally, no pretense is necessary.

It’s very Nazi.

See this article from National Review for a clear example:

 

Fred Fleitz March 7, 2017 3:06 PM @fredfleitz
According to press reports, WikiLeaks today released thousands of highly classified CIA documents on methods the CIA allegedly is using to conduct cyber warfare. If these documents are legitimate, this illegal release will ruin cyber programs worth billions of dollars that the CIA was using to do battle with America’s enemies, especially terrorist groups.
The CIA officer who took the law into his or her hands to release this material justified this release by claiming this data “urgently need to be debated in public, including whether the CIA’s hacking capabilities exceed its mandated powers and the problem of public oversight of the agency.” The source also said he or she “wishes to initiate a public debate about the security, creation, use, proliferation and democratic control of cyberweapons.”
What nonsense. If the traitor truly believed this program violated U.S. law or endangered the privacy rights of America, there are numerous legal avenues he or she could have used, including the CIA inspector general and the House and Senate intelligence committees. CIA officers take an oath to protect classified national-security information. Such a massive illegal disclosure in violation of the CIA secrecy oath is not an act of courage or whistleblowing, it was “a Snowden” — an act of cowardice by a disgruntled individual who never should have been hired by the CIA.
This disturbing development raises three urgent questions about mismanagement of the CIA during the Obama administration. Why did CIA have a cyber-warfare office at all? I noted in a December 2016 NRO article that there are cyber-warfare offices in four separate intelligence agencies. I suspect this is because different intelligence agencies all wanted to cash in on funding opportunities on a high-profile topic. Such overlap is getting worse and make U.S. intelligence more bureaucratic and less efficient. The new leaker may very well have been hired as a result of CIA Director Brennan’s decision to lower standards for CIA hiring because he wanted to create a more diverse CIA workforce and Brennan rushed to staff his new cyber office. I wrote about this in Investor’s Business Daily in 2015. It also reportedly has been difficult for the U.S. government to find personnel to staff cyber offices who can meet the agency’s usual security requirements. This probably is why Edward Snowden was hired despite his lack of a college degree and how he was able to increase his access to classified material and move between intelligence agencies despite his poor performance. …
A couple of points to note:
If these documents are legitimate, this illegal release will ruin cyber programs…
See the emphasis on the release being illegal, and not the fact that all these activities that the dump discloses are illegal around the world.
Then:
If the traitor truly believed this program violated U.S. law or endangered the privacy rights of America, there are numerous legal avenues he or she could have used, including the CIA inspector general and the House and Senate intelligence committees.
The pretense that corrupt secret agencies and politicians who deliberately state they can commit any crime they want in any country is the person to go-to in case there is a legal problem is downright funny. But still, there is the insistence on the lie that the US functions based on legitimate government officials.
programs worth billions of dollars that the CIA was using to do battle with America’s enemies, especially terrorist groups.
In other words, people that the CIA/Deep State wants to persecute without any regard to the rule of law anywhere, and who, by the history of the US, are usually the people fighting for basic human rights, health care and education, and democracy, in countries ruled by US-sponsored dictators.
I noted in a December 2016 NRO article that there are cyber-warfare offices in four separate intelligence agencies. I suspect this is because different intelligence agencies all wanted to cash in on funding opportunities on a high-profile topic. Such overlap is getting worse and make U.S. intelligence more bureaucratic and less efficient.
But this is what happens when you have a country of greedy and corrupt individuals in a monstrous capitalist system. Everyone wants to take part of the graft. Corruption grows because it meets no resistance, only like-minded individuals.
And why four different cyber-warfare offices? Well, unlike the author, the first and foremost one, I would say, is the greed – imagine just how much public money you can be given on a silver platter, without ever having to behave ethically or show results of any kind?  And then there is the mafia aspect. These people have all understood they are above the law since the American public is content to look the other way. The public is happy with a sham of an oversight. So multiple offices means they each work for a “mafia” head, having to answer to that political/elite faction only. It’s like ancient Rome.
Finally:
Heads should roll over this leak.
But, notice, not over the entire criminal activity of the CIA and other military and secret agencies.
American capitalism – corrupt to the core.

 

 

I haven’t seen the garbage of people who think homosexuality is normal demand answers from Milo on this: Which pedophiles did Milo expose? What are their full names? And what is the full name of the priest he says abused him? Let’s hear the stories.

Here’s betting a hundred quid, as they say over the pond, that no names will ever be produced, nothing that could identify anyone. Just totally made-up claims.

BTW, The Federalist, of all people!, actually published a good article, “good” as far as today’s sick American society standard goes, about homosexuality and child/teen abuse.

Excerpts:

“In the gay world,” Milo said later, “some of the most important, enriching and incredibly, you know, life-affirming, important, shaping relationships very often between younger boys and older men, they can be hugely positive experiences for those young boys.” “Provided they’re consensual,” he added, “provided they’re consensual.”

During a different interview, with Joe Rogan, Milo talked approvingly of an alleged sexual encounter he had with a priest when Milo was around 14 years old. Milo also described attending Hollywood “boat parties” and “house parties,” where he saw things that “beggar belief.” As Milo put it: “some of the boys at [these parties] were very young. Very young.” Later, he reiterated for the third time: “There were some very young boys around at that time.” In spite of Rogan’s prompting, Milo refused to name anyone at these parties.

But wait: the perversity does not stop there. In a 2006 audio clip that resurfaced in the midst of the Milo debacle, Star Trek alumnus and liberal activist George Takei, who, like Milo, is gay, spoke fondly with radio host Howard Stern (and co-host Robin Quivers) about his sexual experience as a 13-year-old boy with an “eighteen or nineteen” year-old camp counselor.

At one point Stern asked Takei: “Were you molested in a sense, because you were 13?” Takei replied: “No, no…I thought he was pretty attractive.” Stern and Quivers seem captivated and delighted by the story. Quivers prompts Takei for details—“Ahh! Was he gazing into your eyes the whole time? Was he saying anything?”—while Stern cracks wise: “Who wants a hand job without kissing?” Takei describes the experience: “It was both wonderful and scary and kind of intimidating, and delightful.”

Reflect on that for a moment: two adults were listening to a third adult describe an instance of genuine child sexual abuse, and were both happy and jocular about it.

There are two deeply appalling aspects to these sordid interviews. The first is the possibility that, as Milo put it, sexual relationships between young boys and adult gay men occur “very often.” At the Huffington Post last week, “gay conservative” Chad Felix Greene described his own experiences in this regard, having his first sexual encounters with adult men at age 14. As Greene put it, reflecting on the negative effect such behavior has had on his life and the need to stop this “generational pattern of abuse”: “As much as the LGBT world seems to ignore [older gay men having sex with young teenage boys], it seems fairly universal and unfortunately not time-bound to a period when young gay men had fewer options.”

Nevertheless, these revelations are unnerving and profoundly troubling, and the implications of these revelations are terrible, especially combined with many years of research showing disproportionately high rates of child sexual abuse against young gay males. Should we not consider the possibility that something both brutal and endemic is going on here, and that we’re simply ignoring it?

Yet there is another, even more troubling idea at work here: the possibility that these stories have been around for a long time, that many people have known about them for a long time, yet nobody has done anything about it, or even cared.

Consider: Milo’s interview with Rogan took place in September 2015, nearly 17 months ago. His statements on the livestream occurred more than a year ago, in January 2016. Yet his remarks and beliefs did not come to wide attention or constitute a scandal until very recently, when they were publicized by a conservative group opposed to his appearance at the Conservative Political Action Conference.

If a grown male celebrity had spoken approvingly of having sex with 13-year-old girls, including having attended a party where “very young girls” were being used for sex, the reaction would have been swift and ruthless. It would not have taken the man in question more than a year to suffer any consequences, as it did for Milo.

Takei’s own tacit approval of child sex, meanwhile, has been on record for more than a decade, and he has suffered no professional or personal fallout for it.

Author: Daniel Payne is a senior contributor at The Federalist. He currently runs the blog Trial of the Century, and lives in Virginia.

 

 

Well, you know something is official if it happens on Facebook. And so here it is: the Bible has been declared hate speech and banned from Facebook – at least temporarily.

=================

Facebook Suspends Christian Homeschool Mom’s Account Over Posts Citing Bible on Homosexuality

Elizabeth Johnston, an Ohio homeschooling mother of 10 who runs the popular conservative blog “The Activist Mommy,” told The Christian Post on Tuesday that Facebook suspended her account earlier this month because she wrote about how Leviticus condemns homosexuality as “detestable” and an “abomination.”

Johnston said the comment in question was posted over six months ago in a long thread of comments that was in response to another Facebook user who claimed that Christians are hypocrites for condemning homosexuality but being willing to eat shellfish and pork.

The post was removed on Feb. 9 and Johnston’s public “The Activist Mommy” Facebook page, which has over 76,000 followers, was frozen for a period of three days. She was alerted that her comment on homosexuality was removed because “it doesn’t follow the Facebook Community Standards.”

“Someone had commented underneath one of my videos and were commenting under the thread and said something about how Old Testament law prohibits the eating of pork — one of the homosexuals’ favorite arguments to make. I responded with just scriptural commentary and that is considered ‘hate speech’ by Facebook,” Johnston explained. “It was just very intellectual and it was just a commentary on what the Bible says. There was no name calling or anything like that.”

After her account was unfrozen on Feb. 12, Johnston said that she re-posted her thoughts on the Bible’s condemnation of homosexuality only to have Facebook remove the post again and freeze her account for an additional seven days.

“Last Sunday, I posted something about the ban, explaining to my followers where I had been the last three days and reposted the screenshot and wrote #FacebookCensorship,” Johnston said. “That ticked them off and they didn’t like that at all. It was going viral. Just within a few hours, they had banned me again and they were going to make it more painful.”
Facebook has yet to provide a concrete reason as for why Johnston’s posts were removed and her account was suspended. But the organization’s community standards explain that Facebook removes various forms of “hate speech” — a term LGBT activists have used to label traditional biblical teachings on homosexuality.

The community standards state: “Facebook removes hate speech, which includes content that directly attacks people based on their: race, ethnicity, national origin, religious affiliation, sexual orientation, sex, gender, or gender identity, or serious disabilities or diseases.”

Johnston’s post only cited Scripture and did not directly attack any person.

The Ohio mother contended that with the way the Facebook algorithm is set up is that all that is needed for her account to be frozen is for liberal trolls and LGBT activists to report her account.

This is not the first time that Facebook has tried to censor somebody who posted about their opposition to the LGBT movement.

Good article on TAC:

The Wholesale Failure of American Foreign Policy

How long will the people permit it?

 

 

The contemporary mission of the US armed forces is to make military contractors rich. As an addendum the foreign policy elite use the military to scare the world into political alignment with the US. How did this happen? The American people flat out don’t care and therefore the media just goes along with the corrupt government on this endless gravy train. At no time has it been more true that “war is a racket” as Gen. Smedley Butler noted long ago. In my view, the National Security State is our largest unit of organized crime.

[Amen.]

This comment is actually priceless in the bolded parts:

TG says:

Ah, but Hillary Clinton is ‘qualified’ to be president, and Donald Trump is ‘unqualified.’ Why? Because Clinton has been deemed ‘qualified’ by the New York Times, and she has been engaged with echo-chamber think tanks for decades that keep telling her how great she is, and she has been mucking about in government for over two decades, and anyhow she’s a woman. So even though Trump says a lot of sensible things, and has a track record of (mostly) succeeding with large complex projects in a very competitive business environment (and even when he fails he knows how to cut his losses), and he appears to care more about the national interest than selling out for personal gain, obviously we can’t vote for him, because racism.

[ 🙂 Well, since Trump is running on a Republican ticket, he’ll just end up being another neo-con just like Hillary. The fools wanting to vote for him are just as clueless as the Hillary fans.]

Karl R Kaiser says:

It’s only a failure if you believe the government’s STATED strategic purposes.

But if the purpose of our foreign policy is to enrich the military industry, bankers, oil barons, and opium importers, to empower Israel, and to frighten Americans into accepting a paramilitary surveillance state, then voila, American foreign policy is an unqualified success.

Douglas K. says:

I echo other comments here. Current policy is a failure only if you’re concerned about American lives, civil liberties, security, prestige, international reputation, military preparedness … stuff like that. You know, the metrics of success that normal people use.

But if the actual goal is to maintain permanent low-level foreign and domestic threats to justify continued massive military expenditures and the perpetual expansion of the security state, then it’s all working perfectly. The “war on terror” is like the “war on drugs” in that the point is to fight it forever, not to win. After all, the money is in the fighting. “Victory” — perpetually undefined and therefore unachievable — would end the gravy train.

Anarcissie says:

The US leadership/elite/ruling class decided that it had to rule the world, to make the world safe for itself and its interests, back during World War 2, and created a system to do that. It is now generally referred to as ’empire’. All arrangements eventually come to an end, and we are now coming to the end of this particular arrangement. It might be objectively possible for our leaders to try to work up a new arrangement, but my guess is that in their sentimental attachment to power and glory, they will just keep doing the same things until some catastrophe brings the sad game to an end. The present election seems to bear out this pessimistic view.

Enter your email address to follow this blog and receive notifications of new posts by email.

Advertisements
%d bloggers like this: