Sunday, May 31, 2015



"Sexist" to advise modesty?

A Pennsylvania High School has been slammed for using degrading and sexist language in a letter warning graduating seniors to wear appropriate dress to an awards ceremony.

Biglerville High School, just north of Gettysburg, caused an uproar when it issued a letter advising female students to 'choose modest attire' and keep 'the girls' - a euphemism for breasts - covered and supported.

The startling letter also stated: 'Please remember as you select an outfit for the awards assembly that we don't want to be looking at sausage rolls. As you get dressed, remember that you can't put 10 pounds of mud in a five-pound sack.'  [Probable translation:  Fatties should not wear tight clothes]

While the school, which has about 500 students, warned female students against tight clothing, it only advised boys to wear nice clothes and avoid low-hanging pants.

Former Principal Richard Sterner, who retired earlier this school year, told Daily Mail Online that he had apologized to his students on Wednesday during graduation practice.

SOURCE





Australia: Must not show ferals as feral

Mt. Druitt is a Sydney suburb with a very low rating on socio-economic status:  Much welfare dependency and crime

The bosses behind the controversial program, Struggle Street, will be asked to defend the show at federal parliament on Wednesday.  SBS CEO Michael Ebeid will be questioned about how the show was funded in a Senate Estimates hearing.

Mr Ebeid's parliamentary appearance comes after Labor MP Ed Husic said the show treated people in Mt Druitt, a suburb in Sydney's west, as 'comedic fodder'. 

'They were treated as simple comedic fodder by SBS, there to be denigrated and demeaned and all for one purpose and one purpose only: to boost ratings,' Mr Husic said, according to the AAP.

Mr Husic's comments were backed up by Labor Senator Sam Dastyari, who will be one of the people to question Mr Ebeid, according to News Corp Australia.

The documentary was heavily criticised when it aired, however it also proved a ratings winner for the network with almost 2 million people tuning in to watch it over the two weeks it aired.

Some families who appear in the series believe were been unfairly depicted.  Ashley and Peta Kennedy decided to take part in the SBS three-part series because they wanted to show viewers how they ended up doing it tough - instead they feel they have been portrayed as 'bogans'.

The couple are unemployed and have 10 kids and 18 grandchildren between them.

SOURCE

Friday, May 29, 2015


Must not diss fat

Fashion label Lilly Pulitzer has been blasted by customers after an image of the company's headquarters was published, which showed two fat-shaming cartoons posted on the walls of an office.

The image, which was featured in an online piece by New York Magazine entitled 'Inside Lilly Pulitzer's Pink-and-Green Headquarters' and shows two hand-drawn cartoons, both of which include drawings of plus-size women, pinned up on the wall of an employee's office.

One cartoon, which featured a picture of a blonde woman in a vest and jeans, read: 'Just another day of…Fat, White, and Hideous. You should probably just kill yourself…'

The second, which included an image of a woman in a string bikini, read: 'Put it down carb face.'

New York Magazine reportedly added a caption to the image on its website, which now reads: 'This image shows the personal illustrations of an employee not pictured in this story.'

Unsurprisingly, the image has sparked fury on social media, with dozens of people taking to Twitter to slam the offensive cartoons.

A spokesperson for the company apologized for any offence caused by the image, which remains on New York Magazine's website, noting that, as a 'female-dominated' company, it encourages individual employees to decorate their office spaces as they choose.

She added however that the images pictured in the feature do not reflect the label's values.  'These illustrations were the work of one individual and were posted in her personal work area,' the statement explained. 

SOURCE




A bad pun

"Seize" as a pun on "seizure"

A campaign launched by two charities to raise awareness of epilepsy has sparked outrage, with even controversial TV pundit Katie Hopkins branding it 'crass'.

The two causes, Epilepsy Society and Young Epilepsy, joined forces with high street store River Island to create a limited edition re-usable shopping bag bearing the slogan 'Seize the Day'.

Around 10,000 bags were distributed to customers last week, to mark National Epilepsy Week, which ended on Saturday.

While the bags were designed and made by River Island, a spokeswoman for the Epilepsy Society said the concept and slogan were the work of the two charities.

Defending the campaign, she said the slogan was intended as an 'empowering message'.

SOURCE



Thursday, May 28, 2015



Australian company under fire for 'deaf shaming' after calling hearing aids ugly

A Victorian company has come under fire for an ad that called hearing aids 'ugly' and pictured a woman with a prawn on her ear.

Victorian Hearing apologised after members of the deaf community labelled the advertisement 'awful', 'upsetting' and 'degrading'.

The ad for 'invisible' hearing aids was posted to Facebook and was met with outrage by hearing impaired Australians and the parents of hearing impaired children, with people from as far as the U.S. also complaining.

In a statement the company apologised for the ad causing offence but sought to justify the artwork and message.

'Victorian Hearing sincerely apologizes if our current invisible hearing solution add was hurtful, it was certainly not our intention,' the company said.

'However, we are fighting a war with a large population of Australians (1 in 5) who refuse to seek hearing amplification because they are embarrassed.

'Victorian Hearing has, for many years, advertised BTE and traditional hearing aids without any success in helping this large group of people, so we tried something out of the box.

The company went on to claim that the ad had helped 'many who would have never stepped foot inside an audiology clinic as they were not aware of all options available'.

SOURCE



The Luft-wafer: Ice cream cone named after Adolf Hitler on sale in India sparks anger in Germany

Adolf Hitler is not generally condemned in Asia.  In much of Asia he is admired as a strong leader

Even for the most dedicated of ice cream lovers this sweet treat may prove a little hard to swallow.  Unbelievably a brand of ice cream cone is readily available in India which is named after Hitler.

It’s difficult to fathom what the Nazi leader may have in common with the crunchy snack, but Hitler’s name is splashed across boxes of the tasteless delicacy which is hawked across the country.

Meanwhile the cold eyes of the killer stare out at ice cream customers from the side of the packaging.

In some instances he appears in cartoon form in a Swastika-shaped top hat with a jaunty red bowtie, which is somewhat at odds with his furious expression.

Other more sombre packages depict him in full military regalia with almost photographic realism, looking very out of place next to an ice cream that's almost as big as he is.

A lack of Holocaust education in India means that people on the sub-continent know little about the Nazi leader, and consequently Hitler-themed pubs and restaurants are not viewed with outrage.

News of the Hitler ice cream cones provoked a furious response on websites calling for the brand to be withdrawn.  One spectator in Berlin, said: ‘There is taste and there is tastelessness. The people of India should be made aware of the terrible crimes committed by him.’

German newspaper Bild labelled the ice cream cones a ‘macabre publicity stunt’, while several Twitter users branded them ‘tasteless!’

SOURCE


Wednesday, May 27, 2015


There's no privacy anymore

People should be allowed to say what they want in private conversations but text messages and emails are no longer private -- as the guys below found out.  Most whites have been browbeaten  into not saying publicly what they think about blacks and Hispanics but it's getting to the point where people cannot say disapproved things even in private

San Francisco Police Chief Greg Suhr will recommend that six officers under his command be fired after prosecutors said they exchanged racist and homophobic text messages, police officials told BuzzFeed News.

Another two officers have resigned as of Friday afternoon, said Officer Albie Esparza, of the San Francisco Police Department.
The texts, uncovered during a federal criminal investigation of a lieutenant in the San Francisco Police Department, has sparked a review of more than 3,000 criminal cases handled by officers linked to the messages, officials said.

Fourteen officers in total are believed to have exchanged the texts. All were removed from “public contact” duties when Chief Suhr was made aware of the investigation, Esparaza told BuzzFeed News.
The San Francisco Police Department is also conducting its own investigation of the cases handled by the police officers, Esparza said.

SOURCE

The actual texts at issue are here

In Nazi times, expressing "incorrect" views in Germany was very dangerous so German anti-Nazis consoled themselves with the saying that Die Gedanken sind frei (Thoughts are free).  America is getting pretty close to the same situation.


Die Gedanken sind frei is actually an ancient German song, often sung by students.  See below:






Must not say "woo, woo, woo"

"woo, woo, woo" being an approximation of a native American war-cry

When Congresswoman Loretta Sanchez spoke to a group at the Democratic convention in Anaheim about a previous meeting she made this comment and gesture that is raising some questions.

The candidate was explaining how she recently received an invitation from someone with the Indian American caucus.

"I'm going to his office, thinking I'm going to meet with ... " Sanchez said on video just before clapping her hand in front of her mouth and making a whooping cry sound.

She appeared to be making a joke about the difference between Indian-Americans and Native Americans.

The man who filmed Sanchez said several people in the room described the comments as insensitive and undemocratic.  "I was shocked and appalled that she'd make the disparaging comments about Native Americans that way," said Uduak-Joe Ntuke of Long Beach.

Sanchez's opponent, California Attorney General Kamala Harris, said she was also shocked. "You know, I don't know what to say to that," Harris said. "That's shocking."

SOURCE

I think she was just trying to make clear which sort of Indian she was referring to



Tuesday, May 26, 2015



NY Fashionistas all in a dither about China

They want to wear something Chinese-themed to honor a Chinese occasion but fear they might be accused of "cultural appropriation" or some such nonsense.  But missing out on a chance to dress up is a disaster to a fashionista. All those colorful silks etc that they would like to wear!

On Monday, dozens upon dozens of celebrities and the designers who dress them will walk the red carpet into the Metropolitan Museum of Art to fete the opening of the Costume Institute's next exhibit, "China: Through the Looking Glass." The event — which this year counts Jennifer Lawrence, Jessica Chastain, Blake Lively, Anne Hathaway and Kim Kardashian among its hosts — is often referred to as “fashion’s biggest night," but many observers are wary to see how guests will interpret — or misinterpret — that theme.

In a Jezebel article headlined “2015 Met Gala Will Probably Be an Asian-Themed Shitshow,” Kara Brown writes, “The fact that the core idea behind the theme is how Chinese aesthetics have influenced other designers is troubling because that influence is often culturally insensitive or downright racist." She adds, “I simply do not trust the majority of Met Gala attendees to handle this theme with tact and respect." Over at Bustle, Maxine Builder echoed her concerns, writing, "To be culturally sensitive and to do this theme justice require an ability to take the time to understand the culture, and I’m concerned that no one will do that kind of research.”

SOURCE





NY: Must not mention that blacks tend to live in inner cities

Henrietta Town Supervisor Jack Moore is under fire amid allegations that he made racist remarks in a town building last month, referring to African-Americans as "city cousins."

Henrietta Democratic Committee town leader Simeon Banister is demanding that Moore, a Republican, resign, calling his comments from April 10 "racist and reprehensible." And Monroe County Republican Chairman Bill Reilich, who is also the Greece town supervisor, said he thinks Moore should step down.

Moore acknowledges making the comments. He said they were not intended to be racist but adds, "I can see how they were taken that way."

Moore's voice was taped by a Department of Public Works employee on April 10. In audio obtained and first reported by WHAM-TV (Channel 13), Moore is heard criticizing the Affordable Care Act and says, "You don't know about cousins in the city? We get all kinds of them, they bus them out here, OK?"

When a town employee asks about the health care law, Moore says, "This Obamacare, I think that's how we're going to pay for your cousins in the city.'

After overhearing Moore's comments from another room, 36-year town employee Donald Youngman decided to file a complaint with the Henrietta Board of Ethics.

SOURCE


Monday, May 25, 2015


Completely nuts

The animal rights group PETA made an official complaint that sheep on an outback [Australian] property were sworn at by a cursing shearer on an outback property in far western NSW.

The allegation by the People for the Ethical Treatment for Animals was investigated by the RSPCA after an 'undercover' PETA operative secretly filmed footage of a worker in a shearing shed using bad language during a live shearing session.

The RSPCA did not pursue the swearing claims because PETA's footage was inadmissable in court as it had been filmed without permission on private property, and because the claims of cruelty 'came down to one person's word against another'.

Ken Turner, who operates Boorungie Station with his wife Vivien, said the PETA complaint suggests that sheep understand English and he didn't know you could offend sheep with rude words.

But he had no complaints from his herd, a bemused Mr Turner told Macquarie Radio saying, 'none of them actually told me they were offended'.

SOURCE




Even posting a PICTURE of a gun can lose you your job

Stick a fork in us. We are done. Political correctness has finally corrupted rational thought and common sense to the point that garden variety sports trash talk is a firing offense.

Consider the case of Chad Shanks. He was hired to grow the Houston Rockets’ social media presence. By all accounts, Shanks had done a good job, posting edgy viral content and pregame and postgame interviews with players and coaches on various social media channels. He helped grow the Rockets Twitter following to upwards of 682,500 followers.

But on Tuesday he sent out a tweet from the official account at the end of a series-clinching win against the Dallas Mavericks that the Rockets deemed “in very poor taste,” and he was summarily, unceremoniously fired.

The fatal tweet was directed at the Mavericks and featured emojis, or cartoon-like characters, of a gun aimed at a horse, accompanied by this text: “Shhhh. Just close your eyes. It will all be over soon.”  The metaphor here is hardly obscure: The ailing Mavs are a dying horse, better off put out of its misery.

Let’s be clear: Shanks wasn’t threatening anyone. There is no actual horse in a barn somewhere that should fear for its life.

It was friendly trash talk. And had Shanks not used a gun emoji, I’m certain no one would have even noticed.

But because it’s 2015 and we have made finding offense a major industry — and a particularly lucrative one when guns are involved — Shanks was suddenly advocating “violence toward animals.” In the days after, he found himself in the supremely preposterous position of having to tell the Houston Chronicle that he “didn’t mean to advocate violence toward animals.”

SOURCE

Sunday, May 24, 2015



Must not even hint that a woman is fat

A suggestion that a British footballer could do better than his current girlfriend arouses great ire



An Australian sports betting website sent a misogynistic tweet about the girlfriend of young Manchester United star James Wilson, causing an angry backlash on social media.

The Odds Checker Au Twitter account posted a photo on Thursday afternoon of the footballer holding hands with his partner.

'Sure she's a lovely girl but someone needs to remind James Wilson he's a pro footballer. Start abusing this privilege,' Odds Checker Au tweeted.

The post was published at about 2pm on Thursday and sparked a series of angry tweets from disgusted Twitter followers.

'@OddscheckerAu This is so rude I can't believe anyone thought it was OK to post it. You are garbage people. Disgusting,' Petra Starke wrote.  'Delete this, then seriously reprimand whoever ok'd it. @OddscheckerAu,' Jay tweeted.

The Odds Checker Au tweet has since been taken down and was replaced with an apology.  'Apologies for the offence caused by our earlier Tweet - it's now been deleted,' Odds Checker Au wrote.

Wilson, 19, is a striker for Manchester United after joining the team in July 2012.

Odds Checker, an online betting odds comparison service, is part of British company Sky Betting and Gaming.

SOURCE



Semi-covered picture of a man incorrect



A mother has slammed an explicit advertisement campaign after her foster child became distressed at the reminder of sexual abuse she had suffered.

The Melbourne mother, who wished to remain anonymous, had been shopping with her 12-year-old foster daughter at a Knox shopping centre when they were confronted by The Body Shop's latest advertisement for its' hemp soap range.

The promotion, which has been displayed in shopfronts and splashed over the company's website and social media, features a black and white photograph of a man's naked torso holding a rope with a green leaf-shaped soap covering his genitals.

The slogan along the advertisement reads: 'Get Your Hands on the Good Stuff'.

Penning an email to The Body Shop last Tuesday, the outraged mother has called for the 'vivid, gritty and out of character' campaign to be banned after causing distress on her foster daughter.

The mother told Daily Mail Australia the poster was displayed on 'such a huge scale and in such a prominent position' that the pair had no choice to avoid it.

In response to the email, The Body Shop claims the image and caption was intended to be 'light-hearted and humorous'.... 'Our communication has always been different, provocative, plain talking and irreverent - That’s our personality as a brand.

SOURCE



Friday, May 22, 2015



Outrage after Google Maps search for 'N****r House' directs users to the White House

Google was forced to suspend its Map Maker editing tool this month after users started abusing the service by adding what many considered to be amusing images.

But the latest addition has caused outrage after racist search terms started directing users to The White House.

It is believed a label was added to the Washington address for the term 'n***a house' or 'n****r house' using the service - but this has not been confirmed and it is not known how long the label has been live.

It will also happen when searching for 'n****r house' and 'n****r king' - but these only zoom in automatically to the White House if the map is already centred in or around Washington.

The problems with Map Maker began when fan site Cult of Android spotted an image of a large Android urinating on an Apple logo at coordinates 33°30'52.5"N 73°03'33.2"E. Shortly after its discovery, the image went viral and other eagle-eyed Maps users began searching for similar additions.

The suspension of Map Maker is temporary.

At the time the announcement was made, Google's Pavithra Kanakarajan posted: 'The most recent incident was particularly troubling and unfortunate - a strong user in our community chose to go and create a large scale prank on the Map.

'As a consequence, we suspended auto-approval and user moderation across the globe, till we figure out ways to add more intelligent mechanisms to prevent such incidents.'

SOURCE

If you prohibit certain things, that will make some people keen to use them.




UK: Must not compare homosexual rights to ISIS

Coleen Nolan has sparked widespread controversy after clumsily comparing gay rights to supporting ISIS during a discussion on Loose Women.

She made the comments during a panel discussion on the recent gay cake row in Northern Ireland.

Nolan’s statements, in which she made a jumbled attempt to defend the rights of businesses to refuse clients because of their beliefs, have now sparked outrage on social media.

Coleen provoked the backlash when she compared a hypothetical situation in which an ISIS supporter asked for an ISIS cake from a baker with the recent controversy over gay rights in Northern Ireland.

‘What if somebody walked in and said: “Right, I want a cake and I want the whole Islamic State on it – and how I support it, and how I support them killing our people. Because it is a business do they have to make it?” she asked.

Many have called for the agony aunt and TV personality to resign while others have simply demanded an apology.

SOURCE


Thursday, May 21, 2015



Purdue commits to free speech

Interesting to see if they really do

On a weekend overshadowed by graduation ceremonies and tuition freezes, Purdue University adopted a new free speech code modeled on the “Chicago principles” of free speech.

The “Commitment to Freedom of Expression,” a policy adopted Friday by the Purdue University Board of Trustees, permits speech that’s “unwelcome, disagreeable or even deeply offensive” — language that’s identical to a measure first approved by the University of Chicago in January.

“Our commitment to open inquiry is not new, but adopting these principles provides a clear signal of our pledge to live by this commitment and these standards,” chairman Tom Spurgeon said in a university news release.

“As we’ve said before, a university violates its special mission if it fails to protect free and open debate. No one can expect his views to be free from vigorous challenge, but all must feel completely safe in speaking out.”

SOURCE





Muslim  hate in a London university

Incitement to violence is not generally protected speech

The university equality officer at the centre of a racism and sexism row could lose her job after she allegedly tweeted a hashtag 'kill all white men'.

Bahar Mustafa, 27, student union Welfare and Diversity Officer at Goldsmiths University in London, was accused of discrimination after she told white people and men 'not to come' to a meeting she was organising to discuss 'diversifying the curriculum'.

Now students have launched a petition calling for her to be removed from the post, saying she has 'made students feel intimidated', been 'unprofessional in her public conduct' and 'encouraged or expressed hatred based on an individual’s race, gender, or social position'.

A similar petition on the public change.org site, which says she should be expelled has more than 2,700 online signatures, although another one backing her has been signed by nearly 1,300 people.

The students union petition, which closes on May 26, calls for a vote of no confidence in Ms Mustafa and claims she used hashtags including #killallwhitemen, as well as calling someone 'white trash' on Twitter.   

Ms Mustafa's ban on white people and men from the meeting was made public last month.

SOURCE


Wednesday, May 20, 2015



1000 words



With apologies to Orwell






YouTube and Google win lawsuit in free speech battle over anti-Muslim film

YouTube should not have been forced to take down an anti-Muslim film that sparked violence in the Middle East and death threats to actors, a federal appeals court ruled Monday in a victory for free speech advocates.

The ninth US circuit court of appeal sided with Google, which owns YouTube, after free speech advocates urged the court to overturn a 2-1 decision by three of its judges. The three judges had ordered YouTube to take down the video.

Actress Cindy Lee Garcia wanted Innocence of Muslims removed from the site after receiving death threats. Her lawyer argued she had a copyright claim to the low-budget film because she believed she was acting in a different production.

Google argued Garcia had no claim to the film because the film-maker wrote the dialogue, managed the production and dubbed over her lines.

It wasn’t immediately clear if or when the video would be reposted on YouTube. A Google spokesman did not immediately respond to an email seeking comment.

The film inspired rioting by those who considered it blasphemous to the prophet Muhammad, and President Barack Obama and other world leaders asked Google to take it down.

Google, which said those requests amounted to censorship, was joined by an unusual alliance of filmmakers, other internet companies and prominent news media organizations that didn’t want the court to alter copyright law or infringe on first amendment rights.

SOURCE



Tuesday, May 19, 2015




UK: Must not portray elderly people as infirm

Even though the signs are placed where the infirm elderly are likely to be



Since it was introduced in 1981, the ‘Elderly People’ road sign has got on people’s nerves. The winner of a children’s competition, it shows an aged couple hobbling across the road.

Last year, the Government’s tsar for the elderly, Dr Ros Altmann, said the sign should be banned altogether because it puts off employers from hiring people over 50.

Now a series of designers has been commissioned to produce a cheerier series of options.

Margaret Calvert, responsible for many of our road signs — including ‘Men at Work’ and ‘Children Crossing’ but not the elderly people — has come up with a sprightlier couple, jauntily crossing the road, hand in hand.

Calvert, born in 1936, says the ‘Children Crossing’ sign was inspired by herself as a girl. Her new elderly people sign is based on her as a pensioner.

Another offering, based on Morecambe and Wise, comes from creative consultant David Worthington, while graphic designer Jason Godfrey suggested a sign based on pills and tablets.

‘The old road sign shows a silhouette of two extremely decrepit old people crossing a road. But older people aren’t like that any more.

'Mick Jagger is 71, Billy Connolly’s 72, Judi Dench is 80 and Dame Helen Mirren is the face of L’OrĂ©al at 69. People are living longer and older age needs rebranding, ideally using wit and humour.’

SOURCE





Mural of beaver getting fed is incorrect



Two artists have sparked outrage after painting a mural of a young woman feeding a beaver on the side of an adult bookstore - with some fearing the drawing will 'attract children and pedophiles'.

Jesse Smith and Miguel Del Cuadro started working on the bright, cartoon-style artwork at the request of Alison Barber - the owner of Taboo bookstore in Richmond, Virginia - last Friday.

Eight days on, they have used up 20 gallons of paint and 75 cans of spray-paint on the unfinished mural, which features a female dressed in a top and a short skirt feeding a purple beaver an apple.

However, both they and Ms Barber have recently come under fire from locals, some of whom claim the painting could attract children to the store, especially because the woman 'looks like a little girl'.

'It is beautifully done, but I believe it will attract children to an area that may have pedophiles or the like. I believe [it] sets a dangerous precedent, and I wonder if others are uncomfortable by it.'

Some social media users also expressed concern over the artwork - which is a reference to either the act of sexual intercourse or female masturbation - with one writing on Reddit: 'So frightening.'

Taboo bookstore, one of three high-end adult bookstores owned by Ms Barber, is situated at 5100 Midlothian Turnpike. Its location is less than a 15-minute walk from George Wythe High School.

Ms Barber told the network that she had wanted something 'bright, friendly and happy' painting on the side of her store - and 'ironically, something that was not going to cause a stir or a fuss at all'.  But he joked: 'There's no such thing as bad publicity I guess haha.'

And although some residents' and social media users' have voiced concern over the painting - which is expected to be completed in the next couple of days - others have spoken out in defense of it.

One wrote on Fark the artwork was 'provocative without being sleazy'. Another joked: 'This mural is ridiculous. From my years of research, I know beavers prefer cucumbers, carrots, or zucchini.'

SOURCE



Monday, May 18, 2015



'I Can't Bake That Cake Because It Would Offend Muslims'

Last week, Rush Limbaugh wondered rhetorically, “Where do we draw the line?” when it comes to offending Muslims. Is it drawing cartoons or is it advocating same-sex marriage? Expanding on that idea Monday, Limbaugh proposed something for American bakers facing gay fascists: “My idea for you is quite simple. …

Let’s say that you own the ABC wedding cake bakery. The only thing you do is you bake wedding cakes. And as such, militant gay activists target your bakery. They’re gonna take you out, they’re gonna take you down, they’re gonna walk in there, they’re gonna tell you they’re gonna get married, and of all the bakeries in the world, yours has been recommended to them because that’s all you do, therefore you must be better than anybody else at baking wedding cakes.

Instead of telling the gay couple that you refuse to bake the cake for their wedding because you disapprove of homosexuality, you should now say you are not going to bake a cake for the gay wedding because you fear Muslim backlash. Or, due to your respect of Islam, you cannot bake a cake for a gay wedding. See how that flies.”

Indeed, it would at least be entertaining to watch the Left contort in knots trying to get around the results of their own “logic.”

SOURCE




Should speech critical of Islam be banned on campus?

Muslims say it should but law professor Volokh says that would violate the 1st Amendment

Huffington Post (Alexandra Svokos) reports that conservative firebrand David Horowitz spoke at the University of North Carolina, and said (among other things) that “the Muslim Students Association and Students for Justice in Palestine are associated with terrorist organizations” and “intend to ‘kill the Jews, to push them into the sea.'”

Muslim students spoke out against those statements, and “began an online campaign called #NotSafeUNC to show how they have felt discriminated against on and around campus.”

What I found noteworthy, though, was the statement from Ibrahim Hooper, the spokesman for the Council on American-Islamic Relations:

"[Anti-Muslim speakers] create a hostile learning environment for Muslim and Arab-American students, and that’s what they’re designed to do. … They’re designed to demonize Muslim and Arab students"

“Hostile learning environment,” of course, isn’t just a general term of condemnation — it’s not just calling something “offensive” or “insulting” or even “hate speech.” Rather, a “hostile learning environment” (also known as a “hostile educational environment”) is a legal term of art, referring to something that violates Title VI of the Civil Rights Act or other bans on discrimination in education. Many campus speech and conduct codes, including UNC’s, ban speech or conduct that creates a “hostile environment.” The federal government has stated that speech that creates a hostile environment based on national origin is barred by Title VI. Indeed, CAIR has in the past called for the federal government to investigate allegations of a hostile learning environment.

So the statement is suggesting that, in CAIR’s view, “anti-Muslim speakers” may already violate campus speech codes, and that universities may be under a legal obligation (under Title VI) to exclude such speakers.

Now I think that a public university’s exclusion of anti-Muslim speakers — or, more broadly, speakers that are harshly critical of Islam generally or certain strands in particular — would violate the First Amendment, and Title VI cannot constitutionally be interpreted to require universities (public or private) to exclude such speakers. There is no “hostile learning environment” exception to the First Amendment, and I think cases striking down campus speech codes support that position.

But I thought that it was worth noting that CAIR’s view is different: CAIR seems to think that the force of law — and of campus speech codes — should indeed be used to exclude anti-Muslim speakers from university campuses.

Sunday, May 17, 2015



Must not mention Muslims

A headteacher who racially abused staff and said 'If we have any more Muslims in here it's going to start looking like Al Jazeera' while checking CVs has been sacked by a school.

Anupe Hanch, 49, who was in charge of Gearies Junior School, in Ilford, Essex, for seven years, also asked a pupil 'Do you want to become a paedophile?' and said she wanted to 'chop off' the head of one of her colleagues, a hearing was told.

In July 2010 she locked the assistant headteacher in her office for three hours and a year later got another staff member to place the jobs section of the Times Education Supplement on the assistant head's desk every Friday.

Ms Hanch denied the allegations but a National College for Teaching and Leadership panel found them to be proven.

She was found guilty of unacceptable professional conduct after the panel spent two weeks hearing evidence from witnesses.

A report published after the inquiry said Ms Hanch made racist remarks over Muslim colleagues taking the religious holiday of Eid off in September 2010.

The teacher said she was trying to encourage staff and children not to take religious holidays.

The panel determined on the basis of probabilities the allegation was proven saying it 'did not find the racist nature of the alleged comment to be completely contrary to the nature of Ms Hanch, as she had suggested'.

She also insulted a Polish colleague and said she would like to 'chop off' the head of another staff member and 'see her walking around headless', the hearing was told.

When reviewing CVs for a job, Ms Hanch said: 'If we have any more Muslims in here it's going to start looking like Al Jazeera', according to the report.

Other allegations the panel found proven were that Ms Hanch referred to one pupil as 'a devil' and said 'I'm going to have to break down 5,000 years of Islam to get through to her' when a staff member asked for time off to volunteer at the 2012 London Olympics.

SOURCE



No free speech in Muslim Bangladesh

A MASKED gang wielding machetes hacked a blogger to death in Bangladesh on Tuesday — the third deadly attack since February.
Ananta Bijoy Das was murdered in broad daylight as he headed to work at a local bank in the city of Sylhet, police said.

A group of four masked men attacked him with machetes around 8:30am on a busy street in the country’s fifth biggest city, before melting back into the crowd.

Police would not comment on a motive for the brutal attack. However fellow writers say he was on a ‘hit list’ drawn up by militants behind a spate of killings including fellow blogger Avijit Roy — a Bangladeshi-born US citizen who was hacked to death in the capital Dhaka in February.

Head of a Bangladeshi bloggers’ association, Imran Sarker said Das was an atheist who regularly blogged for Mukto-Mona, a website that used to be run by Roy.

“We condemn this heinous killing. It once again confirms our fear that there is a culture of impunity in Bangladesh. Anyone can now get away with killing a progressive free thinker,” Mr Sarker said.

Police chief Hasan said they are investigating an announcement by an unknown group called Ansar Al-Islam who said on Twitter that al-Qaeda in the Indian Subcontinent was responsible for Das’s murder and warned of more to come.

The group has already claimed responsibility for the deadly attack on Roy on February 26 in which his wife was badly injured. An Islamic extremist has been arrested over his murder.

Debasish Debu, a friend of recently killed blogger Das, said the 33-year-old banker was an editor of a quarterly magazine called Jukti (Logic) and headed the Sylhet-based Science and Rationalist Council.

According to the Mukto-Mona site, Das won the publication’s annual Rationalist Award in 2006 for his “deep and courageous interest in spreading secular and humanist ideals and messages”.

SOURCE


Friday, May 15, 2015



Must not call someone fat

Pink wore a pretty but voluminous gown for the 2015 BMI Music Awards that covered her from neck to toe - but the singer insists she isn't 'covering up' because she doesn't like the way her body looks.

The Try hitmaker, 35, says she refuses to be bullied about her weight.  'I think people have gotten it wrong. They think their opinion matters and holds weight, and I don't know where or why they're giving themselves so much credit, you know? So I thought it was important for me to remind them that I don't care,' she told Entertainment Tonight.

Pink was responding to a question about why she came down hard on her Twitter followers who suggested she's put on weight after she wore a black dress with a plunging neckline to the John Wayne 30th Annual Odyssey Ball last month.

'I don't take well to bullying. I never have. I'm not a person that will be bullied. I'm not a person that will stand by watching other people bullied,' she said.  'I'm raising a girl. I am a girl. I have feelings. People think I take no s**t and I'm tough, tougher than nails, but I'm a human being.'

SOURCE

Her sweeping criticisms of George Bush are fine, though.  Leftists can dish it out but can't take it.



No, there’s no “hate speech” exception to the First Amendment

By UCLA law professor Eugene Volokh

I keep hearing about a supposed “hate speech” exception to the First Amendment, or statements such as, “This isn’t free speech, it’s hate speech,” or “When does free speech stop and hate speech begin?” But there is no hate speech exception to the First Amendment. Hateful ideas (whatever exactly that might mean) are just as protected under the First Amendment as other ideas. One is as free to condemn Islam — or Muslims, or Jews, or blacks, or whites, or illegal aliens, or native-born citizens — as one is to condemn capitalism or Socialism or Democrats or Republicans.

To be sure, there are some kinds of speech that are unprotected by the First Amendment. But those narrow exceptions have nothing to do with “hate speech” in any conventionally used sense of the term. For instance, there is an exception for “fighting words” — face-to-face personal insults addressed to a specific person, of the sort that are likely to start an immediate fight.

But this exception isn’t limited to racial or religious insults, nor does it cover all racially or religiously offensive statements. Indeed, when the City of St. Paul tried to specifically punish bigoted fighting words, the Supreme Court held that this selective prohibition was unconstitutional (R.A.V. v. City of St. Paul (1992)), even though a broad ban on all fighting words would indeed be permissible. (And, notwithstanding CNN anchor Chris Cuomo’s Tweet that “hate speech is excluded from protection,” and his later claims that by “hate speech” he means “fighting words,” the fighting words exception is not generally labeled a “hate speech” exception, and isn’t coextensive with any established definition of “hate speech” that I know of.)

The same is true of the other narrow exceptions, such as for true threats of illegal conduct or incitement intended to and likely to produce imminent illegal conduct (i.e., illegal conduct in the next few hours or maybe days, as opposed to some illegal conduct some time in the future). Indeed, threatening to kill someone because he’s black (or white), or intentionally inciting someone to a likely and immediate attack on someone because he’s Muslim (or Christian or Jewish), can be made a crime. But this isn’t because it’s “hate speech”; it’s because it’s illegal to make true threats and incite imminent crimes against anyone and for any reason, for instance because they are police officers or capitalists or just someone who is sleeping with the speaker’s ex-girlfriend.

The Supreme Court did, in Beauharnais v. Illinois (1952), uphold a “group libel” law that outlawed statements that expose racial or religious groups to contempt or hatred, unless the speaker could show that the statements were true, and were said with “good motives” and for “justifiable ends.” But this too was treated by the Court as just a special case of a broader First Amendment exception — the one for libel generally. And  Beauharnais is widely understood to no longer be good law, given the Court’s restrictions on the libel exception.

More here



Thursday, May 14, 2015



Is "special needs" now a bad expression?

Police launched a 'disability hate crime' investigation after a headteacher said one of her pupils had 'special needs'.

Janet Felkin, who runs Blatchington Mill School in Hove, East Sussex, had to fight the discrimination claims after a parent complained that the autistic student would find the term offensive.

After six months of having the probe hanging over her, while the local council and the Department of Education got involved, she has now been found to have no case to answer.

The term 'special needs' is believed to have been used at a governors' meeting and in the meeting's minutes, which were later taken down from the school's website.

A parent-governor complained that the 'highly intelligent' student, who falls under the autistic spectrum, would be offended by the description.

But after no action was taken against her this week, Mrs Felkin branded the complaints 'vexatious'.

SOURCE




UK: Must not notice women's bodies

Nightclub bosses have been forced to apologise after advertising for waitresses with 'athletic physiques' and asking applicants to include a 'full body shots' with their CV.

The job advert, which also called for potential candidates to provide service with a smile, was posted by Pryzm nightclub in Kingston-upon-Thames, Surrey.

The notice, which was uploaded on Monday to the club's Facebook page and removed after less than 24 hours, stated: 'We are looking for VIP Hostess / Waitresses to join our team.

'The applicant must have great customers (sic) service skills, provide service with a smile, be hard working & be of athletic physique.  'In return you will receive great basic pay plus commission payments.

Accompanying the advert is a video - now deleted - shows a hostess bringing bottles of champagne - complete with burning candles either side - to a VIP table at the club.

Local job-hunter Samantha Cooke, 21, said she saw the ad and was 'disgusted'.  She said: 'I've been to Pryzm a few times clubbing and thought it might be a nice place to work, but when I saw the advert I was disgusted - they just want someone with a body the lads can ogle.

'I'm not just a body and nightclubs should have got rid of their meat market mentality in this day and age.'

Another local, Graham Livingstone, 41, said: 'It's pretty obvious they want a young woman with a nice body - it's just it's not very PC to say that these days.'

Another, calling themselves Smithy456 and writing online before the ad was removed on Facebook, wrote: 'How disgusting - what a bunch of creeps at Pryzm!!!' 

A spokeswoman for Luminar, which owns Pryzm - which has clubs in Brighton, Bristol, Cardiff and Leeds as well as Kingston-upon-Thames, said: 'We are an equal opportunities employer and apologise unreservedly for any offence this post may have caused.

 SOURCE




Wednesday, May 13, 2015



Topless outrage

I used to think that prudery went out with the '60s but we now seem to live in an era when people moan about everything and anything



A bus company has prompted outrage by using an advert which shows topless models holding up signs saying 'Ride me all day for £3'.

New Adventure Travel Ltd (NAT), based in Cardiff, excitedly took to Twitter this morning to promote the new provocative adverts which have been emblazoned across the back of ten new buses.

One advert shows a dark-haired woman posing in a sultry manner with the suggestive sign, while another shows the same sign being held by a topless male model.

But the campaign backfired when passengers condemned the company for being 'unacceptable' and 'insulting'. Others accused the company of 'promoting sexism and rape culture'.

Singer Charlotte Church even waded into the debate, saying the signs were 'atrocious'.

SOURCE






Federal Agency to Regulate Christmas Lights

On a hot day in Washington, D.C., a federal agency issued 11 pages of new regulations on Christmas lights and other holiday decorations, calling certain products “a substantial product hazard.”

“The Consumer Product Safety Commission … is issuing a final rule to specify that seasonal and decorative lighting products that do not contain any one of three readily observable characteristics (minimum wire size, sufficient strain relief or overcurrent protection), as addressed in a voluntary standard, are deemed a substantial product hazard under the Consumer Product Safety Act,” the Consumer Product Safety Commission said on Monday in its new rule.

A voluntary standard, which created safety guidelines for companies that manufacture Christmas lights, was created by Underwriters Laboratories in the 1990s. Underwriters Laboratories is a non-governmental party that provides safety-related guidance to a wide range of industries.

The Consumer Product Safety Commission has now taken those standards and imposed them as official, enforceable regulations.

Products found in violation of any of the imposed safety characteristics can now be stopped at ports or otherwise prevented from distribution without testing.

If Christmas lights are not made in accordance with these standards, the agency said consumers can be “seriously injured or killed by electrical shocks or fires.”

In its justification, the Consumer Product Safety Commission cited 258 deaths that have occurred as a result of dangerous holiday lights since 1980.

The vast majority of those deaths occurred before 1994, prior to when Underwriters Laboratories issued its voluntary standard for the industry.

Since the voluntary standard was put into place, that number has sharply declined.

In 2014, no deaths were attributed to being caused by Christmas lights. In 2015, the agency cited one death caused by holiday decorations.

Critics argued the rule “represents government waste, government overreach, or would result in a ‘waste of money,’” but the commission disagreed, citing its mission to protect consumers from “unreasonable” risks of injury or death.

Diane Katz, a research fellow in regulatory policy at The Heritage Foundation, disagrees.  “This is regulating for the convenience and power of regulators—not for public safety.”

The rule takes effect on June 3.

SOURCE


Tuesday, May 12, 2015



Member of British anti-imigrant party banned from teaching for Muslim jibe

A teacher who told a class of teenage girls that he was ‘allergic’ to Muslims and they ‘worshipped the devil’ will be banned from the profession for life this week.

Self-styled cleric the Rev Robert West, who stood for the British National Party in the General Election, made the comments during a discussion on the use of cavalry in the Crusades.

When a pupil said she was allergic to horses, Mr West replied: ‘I’m allergic to Mohammedans.’

And he told another class at Walton Girls High School in Grantham, Lincolnshire: ‘Muslims worship the devil.’

Andrew Colman of the National College for Teaching and Leadership said his remarks were ‘unacceptable’.

West will be banned by the Department for Education this week.

SOURCE

I think it's not unreasonable to see Islam as the religion of the Devil.  Any religion that loves death or leads to parents rejoicing when their children blow themselves up is surely of the  Devil -- however you conceive  of the Devil.  Whether he is a man in a red suit with horns and a tail, a fallen spirit being, or simply the evil side of human nature hardly matters.  In all cases Islam is clearly anti-life and only the Devil or his disciples could rejoice in that.


Satirical owner of BBQ restaurant in trouble over mention of race

The owner of a Colorado barbecue joint has spoken out, after the restaurant was harshly criticized online for its scheduled 'White Appreciation Day' next month.

Rubbin' Buttz BBQ and Country Cafe is going to give white patrons on June 11th ten percent off.

Commenters on the Milliken restaurant's Facebook page have claimed that Rubbin' Buttz is offering a racist deal. Its Yelp page has also received a heap of negative one-star reviews, ever since the scheduled event was first revealed in a KUSA report last week.

Restaurant co-owner Edgar Antillon told Daily Mail Online that Rubbin' Buttz was evacuated on Friday after a bomb threat had been called in.

Addressing critics, Antillon said 'I think they should actually know what the day is really about.'

Co-owner: Edgar Antillon, who co-owns Rubbin' Buttz BBQ, is also a concealed carry activist. He has said 'We wanted to emphasize white appreciation because there's a lack of that'

The discount, he explained, was 'making a joke about the need of us having Black History Month and Hispanic Heritage Month, and understanding what we want to accomplish is eliminate the need for that.'

'We're all Americans,' he said. 'We're all from one country whether we were born here or not.'

SOURCE

Monday, May 11, 2015


Not allowed to teach monogamy in some Australian schools

ANGLICAN church leaders have slammed an “unprecedented” interference by the Department of Education after it banned three books used by the church’s scripture teachers on the basis they promoted only monogamous heterosexual relationships.

Scripture teachers were told this week they were not allowed to use books called Teen Sex By The Book by Patricia Weerakoon, You: An Introduction by Michael Jensen, and A Sneaking Suspicion by John Dickson because the texts violated departmental policy.

The texts were used in Special Religious Education (SRE) classes at state schools — classes parents choose to send their children to.

Castle Hill Liberal MP Ray Williams, whose electorate covers much of Sydney’s “bible belt”, said he was requesting an urgent explanation on the book ban from Education Minister Adrian Piccoli.

“Several Anglican leaders in my community have contacted me today saying they are completely shocked at the heavy-handed, reactionary response of the department by demanding these books be removed,” he said.

“I believe the principle of a ‘one partner’ relationship is a fundamental value upheld by society, regardless of whether people are religious or not.”

Mr Piccoli said he had asked the department to review the decision to ban the books: “Department officials will meet with SRE providers to discuss the issue.’’

SOURCE



Must not offend pigs

Is there no end to this nonsense?

They are supposed to be at the forefront of fighting disease and saving lives all over the world.

But in an astonishing example of political correctness, World Health Organisation officials have called for terms such as swine flu, bird flu and monkey pox to be banned – in order to protect animals from needless slaughter.

Other conditions – including German measles and Spanish flu – will also be outlawed because they might upset people from those countries.

Last night experts said the proposal would turn the Geneva-based WHO into an international laughing stock. The organisation was recently criticised for its failure to react quickly to the ebola outbreak in West Africa.

WHO – a UN body to which Britain contributes £35 million a year – says the aim of the new guidelines is to minimise the ‘negative impact’ of such terms as German measles or Lyme disease on travel, tourism or animal welfare.

It also wants to avoid offending ‘cultural, social, national, regional, professional or ethnic groups’.

But bacteriologist Professor Hugh Pennington, who chaired inquiries into E.coli outbreaks in Scotland and South Wales, said: ‘This won’t save lives. It comes under the heading of political correctness and I am very sceptical it will have any permanent benefit. As for avoiding upsetting animals, that is a load of rubbish.

SOURCE


Sunday, May 10, 2015



Colors in politics

For a very long time, red has been the color of the Left.  But in America today it is the color of Republicans.  How come? It was a bit of Leftist "cleverness" by some media types in (I think) the year 2000, when they put up TV projections of the vote on election night that reversed what was customary and displayed GOP-leaning States in red -- part of the unending quest for change that characterizes Leftists.

In the graphic below, an election-night projection from the recent British election, you will note that party colors follow tradition in Britain.  Conservatives are true blue.  The only dubious bit about British practice below is showing the Scottish Nationalists in yellow.  Why?  The only reason I can think of is that it is more polite than showing them in their true colors -- Fascist brown.



Given the love of change for the sake of change that we often seem to see on the Left, I wonder if some bright spark will in due course revert to the original colors for TV displays?

Being a male, blue is of course my favorite color so I am rather pleased to see in operetta that blue eyes are often described as treu, variously translatable as loyal, faithful, reliable, honorable, trustworthy.  I say more about that here

Operettas all date from before WWII, however, so they could say things that would not be allowed today.  Just mentioning blue eyes is probably "racist" these days. I seem to have gotten away with talking about iris pigmentation, however  -- which is the same thing.



And we all know of course that blacks are no longer "colored" -- the NAACP excepted.





False racism accusation acknowledged

An actress who accused Los Angeles police of racially profiling her in a lewd conduct case has agreed to apologize to the three officers who detained her months after the incident took place. Daniele Watts, who acted in the movie “Django Unchained,” pleaded no contest on Monday to disturbing peace with loudness after police responded to reports that she was having sex with her boyfriend in a parked car in September, NBC News reported.

The three officers had briefly detained Watts and her boyfriend, Brian Lucas, before releasing them later in the day. Watts condemned the officers’ decision in a Facebook post, claiming they had both been fully clothed. She wrote: "The tears I cry for a country that calls itself 'the land of the free and the home of the brave' and yet detains people for claiming that very right."

Watts and Lucas were sentenced to 40 hours of community service and a year of "formal diversion" that usually entails counseling. The two were also reportedly ordered to write apology letters to the three officers and occupants of the nearby building where they were detained. Charges of lewd conduct were removed from their records.

SOURCE

Friday, May 08, 2015


Air Force general resigns command after ‘drunker than 10,000 Indians’ remark

Caught out by a bit of military slang

An Air Force general resigned his command last week after making insulting remarks about Native Americans.

Maj. Gen. Michael Keltz, commander of the 19th Air Force at Joint Base San Antonio-Randolph, made the comments during a disciplinary hearing last month for a lower-ranking officer accused of being intoxicated, reported the Express-News.

Keltz told the officer he appeared to be “drunker than 10,000 Indians” in a photo entered as evidence in the hearing.

The other officer had accepted a finding of wrongdoing in a previous hearing, and Keltz berated him after the officer had asked for a reduced punishment during the April 9 hearing.

Keltz is a decorated combat pilot who led task forces in Iraq and Afghanistan.

SOURCE






Greenpeace fracking advert that claimed drilling for shale gas 'won't cut energy bills' is banned by watchdog

Lies are not protected speech.  Shale has already slashed American oil and gas prices dramatically

A Greenpeace advert claiming that allowing fracking in UK ‘won’t cut energy bills’ has been banned in a victory for David Cameron and other supporters of the technology.

The campaigning group argued fracking for gas under Britain would threaten the climate, the countryside and the water supply.

Significantly, it attempted to appeal to the nation’s purses and wallets by stressing: ‘Experts agree – it won’t cut our energy bills.’

However, a complaint from the pro-fracking Labour peer Lord Lipsey said it was wrong and misleading to state that access to a new source of gas from shale rocks will not cut prices.

The Advertising Standards Authority (ASA) has agreed and banned Greenpeace from making the claim in its anti-fracking advertising campaigns.

The group cited comments from the Lib-Dem energy secretary, Ed Davey, who in March described the idea that fracking would massively reduce prices and transform the economy as ‘ridiculous’.

However, the ASA rules today that given the disagreements, Greenpeace was wrong to state as fact that the introduction of fracking in this country will not cut energy bills.

The watchdog pointed to the comments made by Mr Cameron as evidence there is no consensus on the impact on bills.

It said: ‘While we acknowledged that Greenpeace had provided quotes from 22 people, groups or organisations, demonstrating support for the view that fracking would not reduce energy prices, we understood that there was a significant division of informed opinion on the issue.

‘While we understood the claim was made in the context of a public debate on fracking, we considered the claim was absolute in nature and, therefore, implied the statement was accepted among informed opinion, which we understood was not the case. Because of that, we concluded that the ad was misleading.’

Greenpeace dismissed the decision and questioned the impartiality of the ASA.

SOURCE



Thursday, May 07, 2015


Must not count Muslims

A French mayor has been accused of acting like a Nazi today after looking at children's names to establish how many were Muslims.  Far right politician Robert Menard counted up first names such as Mohamed to compile illegal statistics, in tactics which evoked memories of the Holocaust.

He claims to have established that almost 65 per cent of youngsters in Beziers, in the south of France, were Muslim, while also complaining that 'the majority of mothers don't speak French.'

Mr Menard told France 2 television station: 'Sorry to say this, but the town hall has, class by class, the names of the children.

'I know I don't have the right to do it. Sorry to say it, but the first names tell us their religion. To say otherwise is to deny the evidence.'

As a secular republic, France does not officially compile any statistics at all about people's religions, instead treating everybody as citizens equal under the law.

But Mr Menard's tactics caused outrage, with Interior Minister Bernard Cazeneuve saying counting children by religion 'takes us back to the darkest hours of our history'.

Mr Cazeneuve was referring to the Second World War Holocaust when the occupying German, with the help of French collaborators, 'rounded up' anyone suspected of being Jewish.

SOURCE




A single complaint gets an expensive  advertisement banned



An advertisement for luxury fashion brand Prada featuring a young Hollywood actress has been banned for appearing to sexualise a child.  In the image, British-born Mia Goth is seen lying on a bed through an open doorway, as if she is being spied on.

Although she was 21 when the pictures were taken, the Advertising Standards Authority said the styling meant she looked under 16.

The watchdog acted following a single complaint over the advert for the Italian label’s diffusion line Miu Miu, which appeared over a double-page spread in Vogue earlier this year.

Prada defended the image saying it was part of a campaign featuring three different models and actresses, including Imogen Poots and Marine Vacth, in a series of cinematic tableaux, denying there was a sexual tone.

The company said it ‘showed [Miss Goth] on crisp white bed sheets, wearing a sophisticated outfit, without a low neck-line, and nude make-up’.

SOURCE



Wednesday, May 06, 2015



Must not mention that Hillary Clinton is female

ONE is the former CEO of Hewlett Packard. The other is the former US Secretary of State.  They are powerful women with eyes on the most powerful position in the free world.

Yet somehow the run for presidency of newly-announced Republican candidate Carly Fiorina and Democratic hopeful Hillary Clinton has been reduced to a “weird girl fight”.

Those are the poorly-chosen words of CNN host Carol Costello overnight whose foot in mouth moment when announcing the pair’s White House bids added, sadly, to a long list of sexist remarks aimed at female politicians.

After Fiorina’s announcement that she was running, Costello said the Republican candidate had positioned herself as an ”attack dog” to take down Clinton.  “She’s sort of setting herself up to be Hillary Clinton’s chief attack dog,” she said.  “And Republicans are embracing her. So, it’s turning into this weird girl fight almost.”

SOURCE





NBC Declines to Label Gunmen in TX Terror Shooting ‘Islamic Extremists’ or 'Terrorists'

In covering the failed terrorist attack at a Prophet Mohammad cartoon event in Texas, NBC neglected to describe the two gunmen on Monday evening as “Islamic extremists” or “terrorists” while all three English networks (ABC, CBS, and NBC) prominently touted the Southern Poverty Law Center’s (SPLC) description of AFDI as an “anti-Muslim” or “anti-Islamic” “hate group.”

NBC Nightly News interim anchor Lester Holt declared in a tease that “gunmen” had “opened fire at an anti-Islamist event in Texas” and later before correspondent Jacob Rascone’s report that “[i]t happened at a Dallas suburb where a group the Southern Poverty Law Center has labeled an anti-Islamic hate group was holding a Prophet Muhammad cartoon contest.”

On the subject of whether it was a work of terrorism, Holt only went as far as to note that “authorities are investigating it as a possible terror attack.” As for Rascon, the NBC News correspondent continually referred to the terrorists as only “gunmen” or “suspects” and parroted the SPLC’s label from Garland, Texas:

While the CBS Evening News also promoted the SPLC’s labeling of AFDI, the CBS newscast stood out in how it described those behind the shooting. Anchor Scott Pelley made the immediate connection to Islam in one of the show’s opening teases: “Islamic extremists open fire in a terror attack near Dallas. We now know who the suspects were.”

SOURCE