|An Antifa flash mob|
Month: June 2018 Page 1 of 2
|A Democrat, or the MSM?|
The liberals and leftists whose malice for Trump and his supporters knows no bounds, haven’t yet reached the rock bottom essence of their souls, and confine themselves to harassing and yelling at their victims in their homes, at restaurants and movie theaters, and screaming at them and menacing them, but the time is coming when they will take physical action. They will not adopt the Antifa route, and wear masks and hoods – not yet.
The arrested development of a Trump hater.
|Ben Turpin: an early Democrat?|
It doesn’t matter to liberals that something can be proved as right. Right and wrong are not admissible concepts as opposites in the liberal universe. Things are supposed to be what they want thingsg to be. Or that they imagine things ideally ought to be regardless of the evidence. Incontestability to liberals is purely subjective, a matter of opinion. “To you, water flows downhill; to us it’s a lateral move. Besides, who’s to say what‘s up or down? Flat or round?” It’s a ‘broader issue’ that matters, not the facts of an issue, not the evidence of your senses. It’s how things are not, that should be the paramount issue, not as they are.
|An ideal, a celebration|
Mad Maxi of the Super Rant, looking to God
|What difference does it make?|
The Fǘhrer of American youth.
|The fix was in.|
|Can I do this, and not get a crown?|
If you think this is purely satire and an exaggeration, think again: look what happened to Britain. Britain is not longer “Great.” It is “Britanistan.”
|You’ll never get rid of me!! I’m President!|
|Peter Strzok. Did not “stop” Trump.|
|A Muslim fashion plate.|
The first main topic of Melanie
Phillips’ talk from February is how journalism has not only discarded
objectivity but become its enemy, and how the MSM and in particular the BBC and
the Guardian have cordoned off the idea that their Progressive and cultural
Marxism are question – proof and unassailable and therefore are rocks of truth. Environmentalism, cultural diversity, the
“derangement” of Donald Trump, the evil of guns, and man himself, are all coded
by Progressive yard sticks of truth or falseness. Melanie Phillips, a British
journalist, speaks from experience in the journalistic trenches.
concepts refer to facts of reality and are not a matter of “faith” or of man’s
arbitrary choice, there is observing the fact that an axiomatic concept cannot
be escaped, that it is implicit in all a way to ascertain whether a given
concept is axiomatic or not: one ascertains it by knowledge, that it has to be
accepted and used even in the process of any attempt to deny it.
modern philosophers declare that axioms are a matter of arbitrary choice, and
proceed to choose complex, derivative concepts as the alleged axioms of their
alleged reasoning, one can observe that their statements imply and depend on
“existence,” “consciousness,” “identity,” which they profess to negate, but
which are smuggled into their arguments in the form of unacknowledged, “stolen”
concepts. (pp. 56-57)
isn’t necessarily true for me.” If truth is arbitrary, then an automobile is
the same as the pumpkin carriage from Cinderella.
The basic and logical conclusion is
that no truth exists for either party. The nonexistence of reality is
Are there two realities? Is there an unlimited “diversity” of realities? Are
they all “real”? But reality can’t be “real,” say the moderns and the
journalists, since our multitude of realities are subjective.
concept, which means that the idea being denied is used to help negate it,
that is, it is used to invalidate it.
Truth means, according to Merriam-Webster:
being in accordance with the actual state of
dreams come true
: being that which is the case rather than what is manifest or assumed
true dimension of the problem
journalists, has less substance than a dandelion puff. It’s all in your mind. A
“dream.” Or, “transcendental,” evendentiary facts cannot be employed because
they are fictitious, or without substance, beyond human cognition, which is
deceptive. Thus said Immanuel Kant. Immanuel Kant, preceded
by Plato, is the father of today’s
mare’s nest of irrationality and all the fake news you can put on your
plate. When you attempt to read what Kant said about how men know (or don’t
know), you’ll encounter a sailor’s knot of rationalizations more complex than the
knot needed to tie up the QE2 to a dock. Kant’s mental gymnastics have had more
influence than is realized. Phillips reiterates the current “consensus” that
there is no objective truth in the MSM. That a lie has as a better anchor in
reality than a truth. That is the insoluble belief of the enemies of
objectivity. That an asserted “lietruth” is beyond challenge. Some things are
the preferred “truth” than the fact-based truth. Israel is evil, prima facie. So is Donald Trump. And
climate change denial. And deniers. And all the other hobgoblins of the left.
reality but whose authors were blind to the truth or indifferent to it, and preferred
the fiction, even though it had been shown that the stories were fiction or lies.
(minute 43.07, 33.48, 39.56, 43.1) The
managers of the newspaper releasing the stories will say that it doesn’t matter
if the children are really dead or alive, or that they were just dolls smeared
with ketchup, because what mattered was the “broader truth.” Phillips said that
they don’t care about the truth. In another story, a top reporter described in
detail Muslim women in a truck, supposedly prisoners of the Serbs; it was revealed
that the reporter never saw the incident and had just made up the story.
event showed the child, slumped on the ground, peeking out between his fingers.
He was not dead. The “death” was staged by HAMAS. In the act of stealing a
concept, the BBC and the Guardian, and in general the MSM, promote a “broader
truth.” But if they were consistent in their fallacy, they would concede that
their preferred “truth” is equally imaginary – or subjective – and not based on
fact, broad or not.
it is claimed, is a Western tool and the sibling, say the reality deniers, of
Western colonialism, racism, and oppression, etc.; along with objectivity,
logic is derogated and demoted as a means of human cognition. To resort to
logic, to prove the insanity of modern journalism, is to reveal to the
modernists one’s inherent and biased stupidity. Cognitive “harmony” does not exist between
reader s and viewers, and modern journalism.
just how corrupt modern journalism is today and explains how maniacally the MSM
is devoted to its fact-barren emotionalism, and how deeply grounded in
non-reality to “profession” is.
is actually Doc Brown’s DeLorean
do you know it isn’t?
does “actually” really mean?
from June 14th, from Indiana, about an orchestra
teacher who was forced to resign because he would not submit to his
school’s policy of pretending that A is not A:
have so far refused to publicly discuss the policies they put into place at the
beginning of 2018 that John Kluge says led to his resignation in
May. Brownsburg Community School Corporation, the district that employed
Kluge, put out a
transgender policy document in January instructing staff to call students
by their chosen names and pronouns once they are so designated on school
records. Kluge opted instead to address students by their last names to avoid
either referring to his apparently several transgender students with pronouns
and names of the opposite sex, or offending them by not doing as they wished
despite its contradiction of reality….
religious beliefs have absolutely no place in a public high school. I think
what he believes is morally just conflicts with what not only I believe, [but]
what my parents believe, what my psychiatrist, therapist and doctor believe and
the school board believe are morally just,” said student Aidyn Sucec.
Kluge’s beliefs are not merely moral, but also scientific. Scientifically,
there are only two sexes. “Gender” is a linguistic term for a non-physical
is an example of the “trickle down” (or perhaps the avalanche) effect into the culture of cultural Marxism
and the disintegration of academia. So is the article author’s journalistic aside
that gender is
a “non-physical” concept. One’s sex is governed by the physical facts of one’s
biological make-up – not by linguistics – not by how one feels about one’s sex, or by a “non-physical” concept , that is, by
one’s “feeling.” But, in today’s “anything goes” culture, the student’s
statement is more important than Kluge’s beliefs; the student’s assertions or
beliefs have a place in high schools, not the teacher’s. Emotions
are treated as tools of cognition. The field
of linguistic studies is in as chaotic a state as is epistemology.
in dirty pants, or having an Islamophic seizure, or Carr the globalist floor
walker will sentence you to a night in the box. Or more
months or years, so you can get your mind right, and “tolerant” and submissive.
I refer to the arrest
and instant imprisonment of Tommy Robinson, on May 25th, without so
much as a show trial – public or secret – for thirteen months in a prison allegedly
housing a low population of Muslim prisoners who could nevertheless plot his murder.
U.S., has a history of such exercises of state power. I touch on bills of
attainder in my article, “Magna
the Dustbin” from May 29th, but will elaborate on the subject
charged with violating the terms of a prior arrest in Luton, for filming
members of a grooming rape gang outside the Canterbury courthouse.
Overall, Prime Minister Theresa May just wanted to shut him up about the
grooming gangs her government had failed to combat lest she and her government
be accused of racism and bigotry; most of the victims were white British girls
and the rapists were Pakistani; Islamic racism was permitted for “diversity’s”
sake. It leaves open the unasked question: So, who were the racists?
prohibits bills of attainder:
act that singles out an individual or group for The Bill of Attainder Clause
was intended not as a narrow, technical….prohibition, but rather as an
implementation of the separation of powers, a general safeguard against
legislative exercise of the judicial function or more simply – trial by
legislature.” U.S. v. Brown, 381 U.S. 437, 440 (1965).
Constitution are not of the broad, general nature of the Due Process Clause,
but refer to rather precise legal terms which had a meaning under English law
at the time the Constitution was adopted. A bill of attainder was a
legislative act that singled out one or more persons and imposed punishment on
them, without benefit of trial. Such actions were regarded as odious by
the framers of the Constitution because it was the traditional role of a court,
judging an individual case, to impose punishment.” William H. Rehnquist, The
Supreme Court, page 166.
ex post facto laws, and laws impairing the obligations of contracts, are
contrary to the first principles of the social compact, and to every principle
of sound legislation. … The sober people of America are weary of the
fluctuating policy which has directed the public councils. They have seen
with regret and indignation that sudden changes and legislative interferences,
in cases affecting personal rights, become jobs in the hands of enterprising
and influential speculators, and snares to the more-industrious and
less-informed part of the community.” James Madison, Federalist Number 44, 1788.
Constitution is partly based on the English Magna
Carta, from 1215, three of whose clauses expressly forbid King John, the
barons, or their successors from arresting and jailing a man without trial or
shall place a man on trial upon his own unsupported statement, without
producing credible witnesses to the truth of it.
or stripped of his rights or possessions, or outlawed or exiled, or deprived of
his standing in any way, nor will we proceed with force against him, or send
others to do so, except by the lawful judgment of his equals or by the law of
sell, to no one deny or delay right, or justice.
recent and outstanding instance of a bill of attainder victimizing anyone in
the U.S. is highlighted by the arrest
of Nakoula Basseley Nakoula, who made
the YouTube “anti-Islam” film “The
Innocence of Muslims.” The L.A. Times reported in 2012:
anti-Islamic video “Innocence of Muslims” that has sparked violence across the
globe faces up to three years in federal prison after being arrested Thursday
for alleged probation violations.
recommended a 24-month term for Nakoula Basseley Nakoula, prosecutors said in
court. He faces a maximum of three years in prison if found to have violated
and ordered back to jail during an usual hearing. The hearing occurred
amid high security, with the public only allowed to watch through a
video feed in a separate courthouse blocks away. Before his arrest Thursday,
Nakoula and his family had been in hiding, and his attorney said he had received
threats to his safety.
globe, the MSM quite literally shouted in joy that the film caused anti-American
riots in the Mideast. “How dare anyone make a film that insults Mohammad, the
holy icon and prophet of one of the world’s greatest religions?”
Nakoula’s film was blamed for the rioting in Egypt and for the Benghazi attack,
but Hillary Clinton and Obama back-pedaled on that finger-pointing assertion. Susan Rice, the national
security advisor then, however, repeated the lie in a succession of talk shows.
Perhaps now, as a board member of Netflix,
she can endorse an Obama made film about how “peaceful” Islam is. Nakoula was
arrested and imprisoned on a fabrication, and by a silent and unstated bill of
attainder about a YouTube video no
one had even heard of until the Benghazi attack.
rights as a Briton have clearly been nullified. The “peace” that was breached
outside the Leeds courthouse was purely fictitious; the three months from his
previous but suspended offence were arbitrarily added to lend credibility to
the sanction of his arrest. Then the issue
got lost and jumbled in legal
Forums poster noted:
restricted on what comments it can make and what it can report about an alleged
crime while a trial is in progress, on the basis that it might prejudice the
jury. Trials have collapsed due to media outlets breaking this rule and
newspaper editors have faced prosecutions over it (don’t know if they’ve ever
actually gone to prison – but definitely there have been very large fines).
Seems that the point is Robinson blatantly broke that law (and after already
having a suspended sentence). And I don’t think he was making some general
protest against the sub-judice rule in general, so it seems fair enough that
the same law should apply as does in every other case.
Personally I wonder if it isn’t, perhaps, an increasingly non-viable law when
‘the media’ is far more than a couple of well-regulated and easily-controlled
TV stations and newspapers and news is entirely international. Seems like it
might be a bit of a lost cause.
But even the US seems to acknowledge there’s an issue when it sequestrates
entire juries to try and stop them hearing news and comment on a high-profile
case, as in the OJ trial (though googling it it seems that while it used to be
far more common the US has mostly given up doing that…except one report said
it’s happening right now with the Cosby trial – what would happen to someone
who used nefarious means to try and communicate case-related information with
the jurors in that case?).
with the Robinson arrest and the assertion that his live-streaming the groomer
rape trail – during which he was not in the courtroom and was outside and out
of earshot of the judge, defendants, and the jury – and then of the decreed
blanket news blackout of his arrest and of the trial itself, I recall the 1995 O.J. Simpson
trial whose progress was blasted in the newspapers and the media almost daily
until the acquittal verdict was announced.
to allow any video cameras into the courtroom was among the first issues Judge
Ito had to decide, ultimately ruling that live camera coverage was warranted.
Ito would be later criticized for this decision by other legal professionals.
Dershowitz said that he believed that Ito, along with others related to the
case such Clark, Fuhrman, and Kaelin, was influenced to some degree by the
media presence and related publicity. The trial was covered in 2,237 news
segments from 1994 through 1997. Ito was also criticized for allowing the trial
to become a media circus and not doing enough to regulate the court proceedings
as well as he could have.
ironic thing is that:
and Goldman families filed a civil
lawsuit against Simpson. On February 4, 1997, the jury unanimously found
Simpson responsible for both deaths.
The families were awarded compensatory and punitive damages totaling $33.5 million
($51.1 million in 2017 dollars), but have received only a small portion of
was found “not guilty” of the murders, but was found “responsible” for the
deaths, as well? Go figure. Perhaps “guilty” and “responsible” have widely divergent
definitions per Merriam-Webster
in legalese and on the planet Vulcan. Or between the U.S. and Britain. As the
two justice systems stand now, fewer people in the U.S. will be arrested and
incarcerated on trumped up “islamophobic” charges than in Britain. In Britain,
a bill of attainder, under Theresa May, may be enacted without a legislative mandate.
must make sure you put the clean sheet of “sensitivity” on top – or else.
And no loud talking!
not tune in to evaluate the intellectual content of the contestants, but
because the girls were drop dead gorgeous, unctuously curved in all the right
places, but unfortunately and as a rule inarticulate and banal in their dreams
and aspirations. It usually had something to do with public service or helping
mankind or was a fillip of political virtue signaling.
eye candy. On June 5th, the head of the pageant signaled her
has announced an end to the swimsuit portion of its competition and the
practice of judging contestants specifically on their outward appearance. Breitbart
who was crowned Miss America in 1989, made the announcement of the new
direction on Tuesday’s broadcast of Good Morning America, CNBC reported.
pageant “Miss America 2.0,” Carlson said, “We’re not going to judge you on your appearance
because we are interested in what makes you you.”
head of the pageant’s board of directors, added that many contestants expressed
criticism of the swimsuit and evening gown portion of the pageant in this day
of a heightened awareness of sexual harassment.
verbally signaling their “social justice.” This had nothing to do with Islam,
although Carlson’s announcement was preceded by Sadiq Khan’s decree that
swimsuits will no longer be advertised on public transportation. The
Daily Caller reported, June 13th the London mayor has proclaimed
it is haram to look beach worthy.
mayor, announced Monday that “body shaming” advertisements will no longer be
allowed in London’s public transport. No more sexy advertising that proclaims that
being drop dead gorgeous in a bikini is halal.
London’s first Muslim mayor, announced Monday that “body shaming”
advertisements will no longer be allowed in London’s public transport.
father of two teenage girls, I am extremely concerned about this kind of
advertising which can demean people, particularly women, and make them ashamed
of their bodies. It is high time it came to an end,” Khan said.
on the Tube or bus, into unrealistic expectations surrounding their bodies and
I want to send a clear message to the advertising industry about this.”
|Allure? Or revulsion?|
on Change.org opposing an advertisement with women in a bikini
that asked “are you beach body ready?” The petition said, “Protein World is
directly targeting individuals, aiming to make them feel physically inferior to
the unrealistic body image of the bronzed model, in order to sell their
the British city of Birmingham were spray painted over. Birmingham has a high Muslim population.
in “burkinis” have beach ready
figures. In Islam, displaying an attractive figure – or uncovered wrist or
ankle – is haram, and
an invitation to rape. It is “exposed
meat” for Muslim men.
Sufi Muslims raring to go the beach to drool over “exposed
the 17th and 18th centuries the ideal feminine profile
tended to be chunky (as can be seen in many artworks), as opposed to todays’ well-proportioned
|Mythology? Or a Social Construct?|
discussion of feminine beauty would be complete without academia’s two cent s worth. Campus Reform reported on June
6th about a new sophomore course at the Hobart
and William Smith Colleges in upstate New York:
Objectivity, Meritocracy, and Other Social Constructions” is a
sophomore-level course taught by Kendralin
Freeman and Jason
Rodriguez, who are sociology and anthropology professors, respectively.
history and ongoing manifestations of ‘white mythologies’—long-standing, often
implicit views about the place of White, male, Euro-American subjects as the
norm,” explains the course
description, which adds that students will also “explore how systematic
logics that position ‘the West’ and ‘whiteness’ as the ideal manifest through
such social constructions as objectivity, meritocracy, and race.”
it to academia and numerous intellectuals to gum up the concept in men’s minds
in the name of “social justice.” Beauty
through the ages has usually –but not entirely – been defined by white males, from
art to literature to architecture to the feminine form. Beauty in
academia, one supposes, is now a “white mythology” and a “social construct.” Or
perhaps a Marxist “deconstruction.” Leave it to academia and numerous intellectuals
to gum up the concept in men’s minds, bequeathing them the hair shirt of subjectivity and the
endless nattering of the MSM..