Monday, December 17, 2018



Company Looks To Gut Tucker Carlson over ‘Poorer and Dirtier’ Immigration Comment

Fiery conservative commentator Tucker Carlson has never had a problem speaking his mind. For better or for worse, the Fox News host’s public opinions are unfiltered and raw, which contributes to his sizable following.

Given Carlson’s unabashed approach to sociopolitical discourse, he has made his fair share of leftist rivals. Sometimes, as is the case with CNN, those leftists have no discernible comeback other than to mock him.

Other leftists, however, have taken to aiming for Carlson’s wallet when he says something that might hurt their feelings.

Carlson is facing the wrath of leftists over a comment he made on his show while decrying rampant and unchecked immigration into America.

“We have a moral obligation to admit the world’s poor, they tell us, even if it makes our own country poorer and dirtier and more divided,” Carlson said.

That comment sparked immediate outrage across social media, with many people complaining to the various advertisers on “Tucker Carlson Tonight.”

I saw you advertise on Tucker Carlson's show. One of the biggest advertisers of the year, in fact!

Insurance company Pacific Life, for its part, caved in to the outrage spreading across social media and pulled its ads from Carlson’s show. The company announced the decision on Twitter.

“As a company, we strongly disagree with Mr. Carlson’s statements. Our customer base and our workforce reflect the diversity of our great nation, something we take great pride in. We will not be advertising on Mr. Carlson’s show in the coming weeks as we reevaluate our relationship with his program.”

Fox News responded to Pacific Life’s decision with a statement to The Hill.

“It is a shame that left wing advocacy groups, under the guise of being supposed ‘media watchdogs’ weaponize social media against companies in an effort to stifle free speech,” a company representative said. “We continue to stand by and work with our advertisers through these unfortunate and unnecessary distractions.”

As of this publication, Carlson has not responded to the controversy surrounding his remarks.

SOURCE 



Apple CEO To Ban ‘Sinful’ Conservative Speech. Leaves ‘F*** White People’ and ‘Suck My D*** H**’ on iTunes

Apple CEO Tim Cook defended censorship by claiming it would be a “sin” not to remove content on Apple’s platform, but Apple allows songs like “F*** White People” to stay on iTunes.

Speaking at Anti-Defamation League’s “Never is Now Summit” on Monday, Cook made a bizarre attack on free speech.

“We only have one message for those who seek to push hate, division, and violence,” Cook said. “You have no place on our platform. You have no home here.”

Of course, content that allegedly pushes “division” only applies to conservative content. Cook would be hard-pressed to remove far-left content because conservatives are the ones pushing “division” in the eyes of the left.

In reality, without “division,” the left would simply dominate everyone without opposition, which is clearly big tech’s goal.

If Apple was serious about broadly censoring “hate, division, and violence” without an ideological motive, they wouldn’t allow songs like “F*** White People” and “Suck My D*** H**” to stay on iTunes.

Apple’s platform also has countless mainstream rap songs threatening violence against President Donald Trump.

SOURCE 



Sunday, December 16, 2018



Teachers rip down statue of Gandhi unveiled by Ghana's president - saying the independence leader was 'racist' as a young man in South Africa

The iconoclasts are right this time.  Gandhi had a very low opinion of Africans after living in Africa for some time

A statue of Mahatma Gandhi on a university campus in Ghana has been pulled down by lecturers arguing that India's most renowned independence leader was racist.

After campaigning for the statue's removal for two years, teachers at the University of Ghana in the country's capital Accra took matters into their own hands on Wednesday.

The statue was unveiled in June 2016 by India's former President Pranab Mukherjee, who also gave a speech encouraging students to 'emulate and concretise' Gandhi's ideals.

However shortly afterward lecturers started a petition to get rid of the statue, which had been located in the university's recreational quadrangle.

According to the BBC, the petition said that Gandi was 'racist' and called for African heroes to be honoured instead.

The professors said that the fact that the only historical figure memorialised on the university campus was not African was 'a slap in the face that undermines our struggles for autonomy, recognition and respect', The Guardian reported.

They also reportedly cited several of Gandhi's writings which refer to black South Africans as 'kaffirs' (a highly offensive racist slur), accuse the South African government of trying to 'drag down' Indians to the level of 'half-heathen natives' and describe Indians as 'infinitely superior' to black people.

Gandhi (1869 – 30 January 1948) is the most famous leader of India, where he is referred to as Bapu (papa). He led the country to independence from British rule, which it achieved in August 1947. He is remembered for his tactics of peaceful civil disobedience, which have inspired civil rights movements throughout the world.

From age 23, Gandhi spent two decades living and working as a human rights lawyer in South Africa, where he developed his political and ethical views.

While there he also faced persecution because of his race and served four prison terms totalling seven months for resisting racially-biased laws.

SOURCE 








Luxury brand Prada in racism controversy over $750 toy monkey



Another week, another luxury brand in hot water over an alleged racism controversy.

This time it's luxury fashion brand Prada, which says it will stop selling a $US550 ($766) monkey figurine after it was likened to racist caricatures historically used to dehumanise black people.

The monkeys were part of Prada's new "Pradamalia" line of small items such as key rings and toys featuring cartoon creatures. The black and brown versions have oversized red lips, a traditional hallmark of "blackface".

Suffice to say, the reaction to the range was swift, and negative. Quasi online fashion police Diet Prada, which partly takes its name from the brand, questioned why such controversies keep happening at luxury brands.

"Many are comparing 'Otto', a resulting mutation of one of Prada's oldest mascots, the monkey, to Little Sambo, a children's book character from 1899, who exemplified the pickaninny style of blackface caricature," wrote Diet Prada's Lindsey Schuyler and Tony Liu.

The company issued a statement apologising for the figures and saying they would be removed from sale.

"They are imaginary creatures not intended to have any reference to the real world and certainly not blackface," the company said. "Prada Group never had the intention of offending anyone and we abhor all forms of racism and racist imagery. In this interest, we will withdraw all of the characters in question from display and circulation."

SOURCE 


Friday, December 14, 2018


"Hate speech" is just an attempt to limit free speech

Free speech must encompass so-called ‘hate speech’ or it is not free speech at all – it is restricted, proscribed, regulated speech. Likewise, academic freedom that rules out ‘incendiary language’ and ‘the disparagement of any person or persons based on religion, nationality, race, gender, sexual orientation or identity’ is not academic freedom. It is permission to utter only banal and already-accepted platitudes.

Increasingly, the concept of ‘hate speech’ is being used to draw limits around what can and cannot be said. We need to be clear that hate speech is an invented, subjective and arbitrary concept. There are no objective measures of ‘hatefulness’. What counts as ‘hate speech’ is defined by the offended – or, more often, those quick to perceive offence on behalf of others – and enshrined by those in authority. The starting point for all this is that some people are more vulnerable than others and in need of special protections; their identity or beliefs need to be placed beyond criticism.

Over recent years, a pattern of censoring views deemed beyond the pale has become established. Initial offence-taking is swiftly followed by public declarations of outrage. The selective highlighting of ‘inflammatory’ words and phrases is accompanied by a social-media trial and calls for the guilty party to be removed from public life. The success of this formula has meant it has spread from campus into mainstream society, and from the political left to all shades of opinion.

For too long, campus and academic activists have been at the forefront of calling for views they disagree with to be censored rather than challenged. It is tempting to sit back and enjoy the times when this comes back to bite them. But a proper defence of free speech requires challenging the very notion of hate speech and insisting that all views are heard, no matter how contemptible.

SOURCE






An Aussie bargain shop chain pulls ‘disgusting’ figurines from shelves after social media storm

Not sure what is wrong about this.  The figurines actually look better than most real-life Aborigines today -- who are very prone to obesity etc

An Australian bargain shop chain has been forced to apologise and pull a bizarre product from its shelves following a social media backlash.

A picture of the figurines depicting scantily clad indigenous Australians carrying boomerangs and didgeridoos was uploaded onto Twitter over the weekend.



It was uploaded by Luke Pearson, founder and CEO of IndigenousX — an indigenous owned and run independent online media platform.

“The perfect gift for white ppl who ‘love Aboriginal culture’ but would rather not interact with us in real life,” he wrote alongside an image of the “Australian Aboriginal” figurines.

The China-made trinkets — which were being sold for just $3 each — were spotted at a Hot Bargain shop in the Lake Haven Shopping Centre on NSW’s Central Coast.

It’s understood similar figurines are being sold at other Aussie bargain shops and Mr Pearson claimed they were as “common as golliwogs in Australia” on Twitter.

Outraged commenters piled in on criticism of the figurines and the shop’s decision to stock them. “Holy sh*t that’s racist, vile and offensive,” wrote one commenter.  “I can’t believe people still sell these,” wrote another.

“That’s even more offensive than all those cheap, Indonesian knock-offs being sold as ‘authentic’ indigenous art in the gift shops,” added a third.

The bargain chain has now said it will immediately remove the product from its shelves following the outcry.

SOURCE 





Thursday, December 13, 2018





This Teacher Was Fired for ‘Misgendering’ a Student. Who Could Be Next?

Last week, a Virginia school board voted unanimously to fire a teacher after he refused to comply with administrators’ orders to use a female student’s preferred masculine pronouns. The student “transitioned” over the summer and began identifying as a man.

This latest casualty in the culture wars raises the obvious question: Who could be next?

Peter Vlaming went to great lengths to accommodate the student without violating his Christian faith. He used the student’s new name to avoid upsetting the student, but refrained from using pronouns altogether in the student’s presence to avoid speaking against his belief that God created human beings male and female.

“I’m happy to avoid female pronouns not to offend because I’m not here to provoke,” Vlaming told the press, “but I can’t refer to a female as a male, and a male as a female in good conscience and faith.”

However, this was not enough to satisfy the student’s family or the board.

“I can’t think of a worse way to treat a child than what was happening,” said the principal, who had ordered the teacher to use the student’s preferred pronouns against his beliefs.

This incident does not bode well for future conflicts over transgender policies. As more of these conflicts arise in schools, hospitals, shelters, and businesses, America must allow its citizens to think about and debate these issues freely.

No one should fear losing their job because they believe that men and women are biological realities that are not interchangeable.

Unfortunately, government coercion as a weapon of the culture wars is now spreading across the professions.

First, there were cases in the wedding industry where the government tried to force people to violate their belief that marriage is between a man and a woman—florists, bakers, photographers, wedding venues, and so forth.

Then those lawsuits spread to even more industries—videography, web design, calligraphy studios, and public service.

Now, the government is beginning to penalize people who hold that there are two biological sexes. For example, a Catholic hospital was sued for refusing to remove a biological female’s healthy uterus to pursue gender transition. Meanwhile, two parents lost custody of their teenage daughter for refusing to allow their child to take testosterone and identify as a boy.

This could be just the beginning. House Democratic Leader Nancy Pelosi recently announced that the Equality Act will be a top Democratic priority in 2019. The bill would impose controversial transgender policies on the nation by elevating “gender identity” to protected status in federal anti-discrimination law.

This would have drastic implications for average Americans. It would open up sex-specific facilities like bathrooms, locker rooms, and shelters to members of the opposite biological sex. It would allow biological males to compete on women’s sports teams. It would force health care providers and insurance companies to provide and pay for radical transgender therapies.

In brief, stories like Vlaming’s would become the new normal.

This kind of sweeping, coercive policy is not the answer to current debates about gender identity. Americans must remain free to discuss these policies in a respectful manner—which is why the firing of Vlaming is so disturbing. Instead of allowing the parties involved to find a workable compromise, the school board not only picked sides, it silenced one side.

This is an extremely disturbing precedent.

Sadly, while Vlaming was willing to work to make the student a cherished member of the community, the school board was not willing to work to make the teacher a cherished member as well.

Instead of pursuing a solution that would respect everyone—teacher and student alike—the school board refused to respect Vlaming’s beliefs and terminated him.

Speaking and acting according to one’s conscience should not be a fireable offense. When authorities try to force people to act against their beliefs, it is a blatant abuse of power—one that can easily backfire when political power changes hands. That is why everyone should be concerned about these emerging challenges to freedom of conscience.

SOURCE 




Head of communications for Grindr resigns after the company's president says he believes marriage is between man and woman

An executive for Grindr - the largest queer dating app in the world - has resigned just weeks after the company's president said marriage is between a man and woman.

Landon Rafe Zumwalt, the head of communications for Grindr, made the announcement in an open letter shared on Medium.

'As an out and proud gay man madly in love with a man I don't deserve, I refused to compromise my own values or professional integrity to defend a statement that goes against everything I am and everything I believe,' Zumwalt wrote.

'While that resulted in my time at Grindr being cut short, I have absolutely no regrets. And neither should you.'

Zumwalt was referring to a Facebook post shared last month by the company's president, Scott Chen.

In the post, Chen said: 'There are people who believe that marriage is a holy matrimony between a man and a woman. I agree but that's none of our business.

'There are also people who believe that the purpose of marriage is to create children that carry their DNA. That's also none of our business,' Chen added.

Chen also wrote in the now-deleted post that 'there are people that are simply different from you, who desperately want to get married. They have their own reasons'.

According to an article by INTO, Chen had shared the post on his personal Facebook page to call out Cher Wang, the president and CEO of HTC, whose non-profits backed anti-LGBTQ groups in the US that organized to influence Taiwan's referendum on same-sex marriage.

Chen wrote that marriage is a 'personal thing' and encouraged the rich to the poor or those who are suffering from war'.

'Why spend all that money to stop people who love each other from getting married? Aren't there more important stuff in life?' he asked in the post.

SOURCE 

Wednesday, December 12, 2018



Dean Martin's Daughter Defends 'Baby, it's Cold Outside'

Radio stations from Cleveland, Ohio to Madison, Wisconsin have stopped playing "Baby, it's Cold Outside" amid a national movement against the song's lyrics. The Christmas song, famously sung by Dean Martin and written for the film Neptune’s Daughter, is no longer the popular tune it once was

The lyrics that give critics particular pause are the lines:

"So really I'd better scurry (beautiful please don't hurry).
But maybe just a half a drink more (put some records on while I pour).

The neighbors might think (baby, it's bad out there).
Say what's in this drink? (no cabs to be had out there)."

Cleveland's Star 102 radio station started the trend of taking the song off their Christmas playlist after receiving caller complaints. "Now, I do realize that when the song was written in 1944, it was a different time, but now while reading it, it seems very manipulative and wrong," radio host Glenn Anderson wrote in a blog post.

Dean Martin's daughter Deana Martin is shocked by how people are suddenly treating her dad's classic song. She said critics have got it all wrong.

“There's nothing bad about that song," Martin said adamantly on "Fox & Friends" Monday. "And it just breaks my heart and I know my dad would be going insane right now…He would say, what's the matter with you? You know, get over it. It's just a fun song.

Martin continued to explain that the song's original intent is not nearly so sinister as its critics are suggesting. "It's a sweet, flirty, fun, holiday song," she said, adding that the current controversy is "madness."

Martin said she has no plans to change the lyrics. “I don't want to. I don't want to change the lyrics. Where she says, you know, ‘hey, what's in this drink?’ I don't think she's talking about some pill being put in that drink. You know, like, ‘is this punch? You know, what's in this drink? Is it vodka?’ You know, I mean it was, it was nice. It's just breaking my heart that people would turn that around.”

SOURCE 









Whining New Zeland woman didn't like being called a Kiwi

A New Zealand woman who accused her former boss of racial discrimination says it's ruined her life.

Julie Savage, a former supervisor at the Vili's Cakes kitchen in Adelaide, said she was 'disrespected' when her co-workers repeatedly called her a 'Kiwi' instead of using her name.

But her complaint, which was heard before the South Australian Employment Tribunal, was dismissed as a 'perceived lack of respect'.
Julie Savage, a former supervisor at the Vili's Cakes kitchen in Adelaide , said she was 'disrespected' when her co-workers repeatedly called her a 'Kiwi' instead of using her name
+4

Julie Savage, a former supervisor at the Vili's Cakes kitchen in Adelaide , said she was 'disrespected' when her co-workers repeatedly called her a 'Kiwi' instead of using her name

Ms Savage, who was referred to as 'Kiwi' by bakery owner Vili Milisits, said the colloquial term was used in a derogatory way, NZ Herald reported.

'I had a Kiwi flag on my desk, I am proud. But that wasn't my name, that's the issue. No-one called me that but him. He used it like it was my name, like ''go and do the dishes, Kiwi'', or ''wipe the table, Kiwi''.'

Ms Savage said her boss used the name to order her to do jobs, rather than use the word as a term of endearment. 

'He used that like it was my name,' she said, claiming it caused her to suffer from depression and low self-esteem.

Ms Savage and her husband and son moved from Auckland to Adelaide in 2006. She was hired the next year.

She was eventually promoted a supervisor role after working as a short order cook for a few years.

While she would take some New Zealand jokes on the chin, Ms Savage said the persistent use of 'Kiwi' wore her down.

A year-and-a-half after laying her official complaint in 2016, Ms Savage lost her racial discrimination case.

On Sunday December 2, the claim was dismissed by Tribunal Judge Leonie Farrell, who said: 'Calling a New Zealander a Kiwi is not of itself offensive. Kiwi is not an insult.'

The bakery's owner admitted he had called Ms Savage the moniker, but argued that it was a fond nickname and never intended to be demeaning, Adelaide Now reported.

Judge Farrell ultimately agreed, throwing out any accusations of discrimination.

'It was pretty satisfying when I saw what the commissioner said ­– I'm happy with that,' Mr Milistits said.

He thanked the tribunal for finding in his favour, but said the 18-month-long trial was 'slow'.

Ms Savage who is a 'a proud Kiwi' said she's lost her self-esteem and suffers from depression.

She said she was disappointed with the tribunal's decision but wouldn't be able to afford an appeal.

The case wasn't about money but rather about receiving an apology, Ms Savage said.

'I feel this case is a moral victory for me against Vili Milisits and that hopefully he will no longer call people that he employs by another name other than their given name.'

SOURCE 


Tuesday, December 11, 2018



Truce achieved in Berkeley free speech fight

A truce of sorts was reached last week in the latest battle over free speech at UC Berkeley. Rare is the lawsuit settlement in which each side can credibly claim a level of vindication. This is one.

Young America’s Foundation, the conservative nonprofit that bankrolled the lawsuit against the university, hailed the settlement as a “landmark victory for free expression.” Its statement triumphantly declared that UC Berkeley could “no longer wantonly treat conservative students as second-class members of its community while ignoring the guaranteed protections of the First Amendment.”

Conversely, a spokesman for the university said the settlement essentially validates its existing policies on security fees and time-and-place restrictions that apply to all campus speakers, regardless of ideology. Spokesman Dan Mogulof also emphasized that a federal court had upheld the constitutionality of those policies seven months ago.

Here is the welcome bottom line: Conservatives are guaranteed a platform at the university of the 1960s Free Speech Movement. The demonstrators who have tried to silence high-profile appearances by right-wing provocateurs such as Milo Yiannopoulos, Ben Shapiro and Ann Coulter will not be able to stop future appearances by threatening havoc.

And, just as important: The conservatives who have tried to claim censorship and martyrdom when they encounter the conditions imposed on all other groups have lost their talking point. The Young America’s Foundation agreed to this deal and will be paid $70,000 of its attorney fees.

SOURCE 




Australia: How it could be ILLEGAL to say 'he' or 'she': Failing to use transgender terms could land Australians in court under proposed laws

Using the pronouns 'he' and 'she' could land Australians before the courts under Tasmania's controversial transgender rights reforms, legal experts have warned.

Landmark reforms - put forward by the Labor opposition, the Greens and slammed by Scott Morrison as 'ridiculous' - could include a provision that would make it illegal for people to refuse to name others by their preferred pronoun.

The proposed laws would allow parents in Tasmania to decide whether their child's gender is recorded on birth certificates - and enable people aged 16 or older to legally change their gender.

The bill passed Tasmania's lower house last month and must now pass the state's 15-member upper house - nine of whom are independents - to become law.

Dr Greg Walsh from the University of Notre Dame Australia said the reforms were largely 'admirable', but condemned dictating how people use pronouns as 'completely unacceptable'.

'The Tasmanian parliament's proposed changes to its anti-discrimination legislation could make it illegal for a person to not accept a transgender person's gender identity,' Dr Walsh told The Australian.

'Although it is admirable that parliamentarians want to ensure those who are transgender are ­respected, the attempt to use state power to force individuals to use language that contradicts their deeply held beliefs is completely unacceptable.'

Conservative ­activist group Advance Australia described the proposed changes as a 'slippery slope', 'compelled speech', and asked: 'What's next?'

'If a trans person said to me, ''I would prefer it if you called me or address me by X'', out of respect, you would do it. But the government has no place telling you that you must say that,' the organisation's national ­director, Gerard Benedet, told the paper. 

The changes were last month passed by the casting vote of Tasmania's Liberal Speaker Sue Hickey, who voted against her party and with Labor and the Greens.

Liberal Attorney-General Elise Archer believes the amendments are deeply flawed.

'This amended bill contains legally untested, unconsulted and highly problematic changes that we could not support,' she said in a statement last month.

Transforming Tasmania, a transgender and gender-diverse rights group, has lauded the proposed changes, as have Labor and the Greens.

'These changes will make people, who we should all care about, feel happier, safer and more included,' state Greens leader Cassy O'Connor told parliament.

Prime Minister Scott Morrison previously criticised the debate over the removal of gender markers from passports and birth certificates.

'A Liberal national government will never remove gender from birth certificates, licenses and passports - who are Labor kidding? Get real,' Morrison wrote on Twitter.

'This is the problem with Labor, obsessed with nonsense like removing gender from birth certificates rather than lower electricity prices, reducing tax for hard-working families and small businesses.'

Campaigners condemned Morrison's remarks as an 'outdated' and a 'totally inappropriate' attack against the LGBT+ community.

'Yet again, we see a destructive statement from someone in a position of prominence and influence,' Sally Goldner, a spokeswoman for Transgender Victoria, told the Thomson Reuters Foundation.

'To attempt to link the words transgender and nonsense is vilification and totally inappropriate.'

In September, the prime minister drew widespread criticism after commenting on social media that schools do not need 'gender whisperers' in response to a report that teachers are being trained to identify transgender children. 

SOURCE 




Monday, December 10, 2018



Calif. University 'Whiteness' Panel Claims 'Veggie Tales' Is Racist

Last week, a two-hour "Whiteness Forum" held by students at Cal State San Marcos added the children's Christian program "Veggie Tales" to the list of forbidden "racist" media. I fondly recollect waltzing with potatoes up and down the produce aisle in my childhood years, and can report with certainty that evidence for this claim is just as hard to find as a Cebu.

According to The College Fix, a female student at the "Whiteness Forum" argued that "Veggie Tales" is racist because the villains are vegetables of color. "When kids see the good white character triumph over the bad person of color character they are taught that white is right and minorities are the source of evil," the project stated.

As The College Fix's Drew Van Voorhis explained, the female student argued that "the accents of the evil characters tend to sound ethnic, such as Latino, while the good characters sound white."

For those unfamiliar with the children's program, "Veggie Tales" is a kid's cartoon show featuring vegetables and often portraying biblical allegories. The main characters are Bob the Tomato — certainly a "vegetable of color," namely the color red — and Larry the Cucumber. Contrary to protestations of racism, the show even has a blatantly anti-racist song.

Eric Metaxas, a bestselling author and former "Veggie Tales" writer and narrator, offered a playful yet profound comment to PJ Media's request for comment.

"All vegetables are part of one race, even though they are of many colors," Metaxas said. "They are all descended from the same parents — the Adam and Eve of vegetables, who foolishly ate a forbidden fruit (irony?) and screwed everything up for all vegetables descended from them. At least I’m pretty sure that’s the story."

Christianity teaches that all people — regardless of race — were created in God's image, have sinned, and are in need of the saving grace of Jesus Christ. "Veggie Tales" has presented the same message, over and over again, and if there was a latent racist message, Metaxas would know about it.

The villains do often have silly accents, often for purposes of humor.

Perhaps the most memorable of these silly accents has nothing to do with race. In "Josh and the Big Wall," the allegory about Joshua's capture of the city of Jericho, the villains are a pair of particularly stuck-up peas ... with French accents. Is this racist? Against white Europeans?

SOURCE 







An “In God We Trust” sign is causing a serious uproar in one town

It’s found on American currency. It can be seen in one Missouri town’s government chambers. And all it’s done is cause heated debate.

A sign bearing the words “In God We Trust” in the Wentzville city government chambers has led to an intense divide. As explained by the St. Louis Post-Dispatch, the fight over the sign became worse when neighboring Maryland Heights resident Sally Hunt was escorted by two police officers out of a city council meeting at the direction of Mayor Nick Guccione. Hunt is opposed to the sign and had come to the meeting to speak against its display. When she ran out of time, Guccione made her leave.

According to KMOV, Guccione said he had to stand by his decision to remove Hunt from the meeting the way he did.

“Maybe in hindsight, I should have given a warning to sit down, but you know what, I make a decision, and I have to stand by it,” he said.

While the sign has overwhelming support in the town, several residents expressed displeasure either with the sign or with the way Hunt was removed from the meeting.

The divided opinions on the sign became clear as the public comments section of the meeting began.

SOURCE 



Sunday, December 09, 2018



'It wouldn't say white if I was Caucasian': Asian woman claims hipster café gave her a 'racist' receipt after she ordered raisin toast

It is normal for cafe staff to identify customers in some way on the order docket.  It can be by a table number and it can be by asking a name.  In this case the staff member has apparently   forgotten to ask a name so used a description

An Asian woman has claimed a cafe gave her a supposedly racist receipt which described her ethnicity.

Katherine Chen had ordered her raisin toast to take away from a café in Sydney's trendy Surry Hills but was surprised when she saw her receipt.

While some cafes use the customer's name to identify whose order it is, this café chose to write the woman's ethnicity as her identifier instead.

The word 'Asian' was written in capital letters above her raisin toast order.

SOURCE 







   
‘Bringing home the bacon’ offensive to vegans

Has vegan activism gone too far?

Common phrases like “bring home the bacon” and “put all your eggs in one basket” have been deemed offensive to vegans and vegetarians, who want them replaced with animal-friendly alternatives like “bring home the bagels” and “put all your berries in one bowl”.

Instead of “kill two birds with one stone” we should say “feed two birds with one scone”. “Take the bull by the horns” should become “take the flower by the thorns”. No longer should we “beat a dead horse” but instead “feed a fed horse”. And rather than “let the cat out of the bag”, we should simply “spill the beans”.

According to one academic, as increased awareness of vegan issues filters through society, meat-based metaphors may end up being ditched from the language altogether.

“If veganism forces us to confront the realities of food’s origins, then this increased awareness will undoubtedly be reflected in our language and our literature,” Swansea University researcher Shareena Hamzah wrote in The Conversation.

According to Dr Hamzah, meat is “more than just a form of sustenance, it is the very king of all foods”.

“Historically, the resources required to obtain meat meant it was mainly the preserve of the upper classes, while the peasantry subsisted on a mostly vegetarian diet,” she writes.

“As a result, the consumption of meat was associated with dominant power structures in society, its absence from the plate indicating disadvantaged groups, such as women and the poor. To control the supply of meat was to control the people.”

Dr Hamzah, whose research interests include contemporary literature, women’s writing, gender and sexuality studies, equates meat to the “patriarchal mindset of the early 20th century” when “a man’s right to eat the best meat is unquestioned”.

“Meat is power, meat is for men,” she writes.

“(In Jeanette Winterson’s novel The Passion), the main female character, Villanelle, sells herself to Russian soldiers in order to have some of their scarce and valuable supply of meat. The female body is just another type of meat for these men and carnivorous desire leads to carnal pleasure.”

Today, she argues, meat is “repeatedly the subject of much socially and politically charged discussion, including about how the demand for meat is contributing to climate change and environmental degradation”.

“Studies have indicated the negative effects of meat-eating on the human body,” she writes. “When concerns about animal welfare are added to the broth, the growth of vegetarianism and veganism threatens to dethrone meat from its position at the top of the food hierarchy.”

Animal rights groups PETA has been campaigning for “animal-friendly idioms” for years. On its website, it provides helpful alternatives for teachers to “common phrases that perpetuate violence toward animals”.

“While these phrases may seem harmless, they carry meaning and can send mixed signals to students about the relationship between humans and animals and can normalise abuse,” the organisation says.

“The words that we use have the power to influence those around us. Teaching students to use animal-friendly language can cultivate positive relationships between all beings and help end the epidemic of youth violence toward animals.”

SOURCE 





Wednesday, December 05, 2018



‘I was fired for saying Brexit is good’

Brexit is Britain leaving the EU

Andres Georgi had been earning a living as a bicycle courier for Deliveroo in Berlin. But earlier this month, he made the mistake of making smalltalk with a British customer, Redfern Jon Barrett, a writer, activist and Remainer. Georgi said that Brexit was a good thing.

After the exchange, Barrett sent a tweet complaining to Deliveroo and branding Georgi a Nazi. The accusation cost him his job. ‘The Deliveroo delivery guy just went on an aggressive nationalist rant when he saw the EU flag in our hallway. We are gay immigrants who live in Berlin. Deliveroo: please don’t send Nazis to our door!’, read the tweet.

I caught up with Georgi after his story was reported on in Ruhrbarone, a German-language blog.

For him, the tweet came as a shock. ‘I was having a great weekend doing lots of deliveries. Then I got this email from the coordinator asking whether the tweet’s accusations were true’, he tells me.

Georgi is 41 years old and had been working for Deliveroo for 13 months. When we meet, there is nothing visibly Nazi about him: no questionable tattoos, no big black boots, no insignias that might arouse suspicion.

From what Georgi remembers, the conversation with Barrett lasted only a few minutes. Barrett came to the door, and spoke in English. Georgi saw two flags in the hallway: a rainbow flag and an EU flag. ‘Are you from England?’, he asked Barrett. ‘I like the rainbow flag, but not the EU flag. I think Brexit is good’, he said.

Barrett asked him why, and he replied that Germany had too much influence in the EU. In other words, ‘nothing nationalistic at all’, Georgi says. ‘I was in a good mood as I was about to meet my girlfriend and I was definitely not being unfriendly’, he insists.

When I contacted Deliveroo, it told me that it had terminated Georgi’s contract not because of this specific incident, but because of ‘other unprofessional behaviour’. But Georgi showed me an email conversation with his Deliveroo coordinator which suggests otherwise.

The exchange focuses almost entirely on the conversation about Brexit. One email says that he had behaved irresponsibly by speaking about touchy political issues with customers. ‘It was especially inappropriate to tell an obviously pro-EU Brit living in Germany that Brexit was a good thing’, it reads.

Although another case was also mentioned – a female customer had complained about an unwarranted remark – it was clearly the tweet that triggered the sacking. (An accusation, however spurious, that a company employs Nazis is no small matter in Germany.)

SOURCE 





Black college lacrosse player, 21, is arrested for racist N-word and swastika graffiti targeting HIMSELF and other minority students in two incidents that terrorized the campus

This happens all the time and college authorities always swallow it

A black college lacrosse player has been arrested in connection with two incidents of racist graffiti found in a dorm on the Goucher College campus in Maryland.

Fynn Ajani Arthur, a 21-year-old from Brunswick, Maine, was charged with two counts of malicious destruction of property on Thursday night in Baltimore County. 

His arrest came after graffiti aimed at black and Latino students was found on the second floor of a campus dorm, one floor above where similar graffiti had been found on November 14, Goucher College administrators said in a statement.

Both incidents that shook the Towson campus involved backward swastikas and targeted specific individuals, according to the statement.  

Thursday's graffiti depicted swastikas, the letters 'KKK' and appeared to include the last names of four black students, including Arthur. The previous graffiti reportedly said all 'n*****s' on campus would be killed.

Arthur was released his own recognizance after a bail review hearing on Friday, according to jail records. He has been banned from campus pending a student conduct review. 

Goucher Public Safety officials worked with Baltimore County Police and the Federal Bureau of Investigation Baltimore Field Office to investigate both of graffiti incidents.

They determined that Arthur was responsible for the messages based on evidence found Thursday, police say.

Goucher vice president and dean Bryan Coker condemned the racist incidents during a Friday press conference, according to the Baltimore Sun.  'These acts of hate have consumed our community and we feel strongly that the suspect should be prosecuted with the strongest charges, which reflect the seriousness of these crimes,' Coker said.

SOURCE 



Tuesday, December 04, 2018




A "racist" Christmas tree

Apparently, all the products displayed are popular with blacks in Minneapolis.  Not sure why that is offensive

Two Minneapolis police officers placed on leave after racist Christmas tree display. As a "prank," an officer decorated a tree in the north Minneapolis precinct with ornaments many called racist.

Longtime civil rights activist Ron Edwards called the Fourth Precinct tree decorations — a Newport cigarette pack, a can of Steel Reserve malt liquor, police tape, a bag of Takis and a cup from Popeyes Louisiana Kitchen — a “wink wink” to racist stereotypes.

“It’s a modern-day version of a dog whistle, tainted with racism, specifically against the African-American community,” Edwards said.

The photo, which first hit social media this week, created a hectic Friday at City Hall, with Frey condemning the decorations as “racist” and “despicable.” The mayor vowed that those responsible “will be fired before the day is over.”

Jeremiah Ellison, who is now a City Council member, was among the leaders of the 2015 precinct protests. On Friday, Ellison was at a loss for words to describe his reaction to the photo of the tree.

“Man, every way I could put it would understate it,” said Ellison. “It’s disappointing, but also I think deeply disturbing to wake up to something like that. Not just for myself, but for my neighbors.”

SOURCE 




Arizona Lawmaker Says Black People 'Don't Blend In'

It seems to me that what he said was frank and truthful but I guess that is no longer allowed

An Arizona lawmaker known for his past racist remarks continues to remind everyone he is still a racist.

Republican State House Rep. David Stringer was captured on audio calling non-native English speaking students a “burden,” saying black people “don’t blend in” and lamenting a supposed “white flight” in more diverse areas of the country.

The audio, obtained by the Phoenix New Times, was of Stringer speaking with Arizona State University students following a lecture. After telling a student that “diversity in our country is relatively new,” ASU sophomore Stephen Chmura challenged Stringer, saying there was early immigration from places like Ireland and Italy.

“They were all European,” Stringer responded in the audio. “So after their second or third generation, everybody looks the same. Everybody talks the same. That’s not the case with African-Americans and other racial groups because they don’t melt in. They don’t blend in. They always look different.”

SOURCE 



Monday, December 03, 2018



'Apu arrives': Argentine TV news show uses image of the Asian shopkeeper from The Simpsons in a report about the Indian Prime Minister flying in for the G20 summit in Argentina



Argenties are half and half Spanish and Italian and this sounds verry much like an Italian sense of humor -- as with Silvio Berlusconi.  Narendra Modi is however a very dignified and constructive man who does not at all deserve this

An Argentine TV channel used an image of Asian shopkeeper Apu from The Simpsons as the Indian prime minister Narendra Modi flew in for the G20 summit.

Cronica – known for its tasteless quips – wrote the headline ‘Apu arrives’ combined with an image of the character and music from India-based movie Slumdog Millionaire.

The Simpsons shopkeeper, voiced by a white actor who puts on a heavy Indian accent, has been accused of promoting outdated racial stereotypes.

Indian-American comic Hari Kondabolu, who made a documentary about Apu last year, said of Cronica’s coverage: ‘This couldn’t be true, right?’

Cronica also flashed words from the Slumdog song across an image of Mr Modi.

The channel has already offended Turkey and Rwanda at the summit with jokes about their leaders.

SOURCE 





Sarah Michelle Gellar Reminds People ‘Not to Overeat’ on Thanksgiving: Apologizes To Those She Offended

Actress Sarah Michelle Gellar apologized to her fans Tuesday for posting a public reminder to herself “not to overeat” on Thanksgiving, saying that she’s “terribly sorry” if she fat-shamed anyone.

“I’m just going to pin these up all over my house as a reminder not to overeat on Thursday #thanksgivingprep,” Sarah Michelle Gellar initially wrote in an Instagram caption, along with old photos of herself.

The post’s caption offended many of her followers, some of whom accused the actress of promoting fat-shaming and unhealthy eating disorders. One user said that Gellar’s caption was “very dangerous” and included “insensitive wording.”

The 41-year-old immediately buckled to the social media campaign against her, saying, “It’s come to my attention that some people think I was ‘fat shaming’ with this post. That could not be further from my intentions.”

“I love Thanksgiving and unfortunately my eyes are often bigger than my stomach, and I tend to eat so much I make myself sick. This was a joking reminder to myself not to do that,” she continued. “I’m terribly sorry that people were offended by my attempt at humor. Any one that knows me, knows I would never intentionally ‘shame’ any one on any basis. I am a champion of all people.”

SOURCE 


Sunday, December 02, 2018



White Leftists Dumb Down Language for Minorities

A recently released study conducted by two researchers from Yale and Princeton Universities found that white Democrat politicians dumb down their speech when addressing minorities — specifically blacks. On the other hand, the study found no language change when white Republicans spoke to minorities. Study authors Cydney Dupree and Susan Fiske were surprised by the results, noting, "It was really surprising to see that for nearly three decades, Democratic presidential candidates have been engaging in this predicted behavior."

The researchers further studied the speech of white liberals and conservatives when addressing minority individuals. Again, the researchers found that white liberals engage in a "competence downshift" in their language, whereas white conservatives did not. Dupree noted the uncomfortable irony, stating, "It was kind of an unpleasant surprise to see this subtle but persistent effect. Even if it's ultimately well-intentioned, it could be seen as patronizing." It most certainly could.

Brandon Morse of RedState observed, "We often hear from social justice adherents that we carry an implicit bias toward people of other races, and then immediately point to anyone other than themselves. Now we see why. On average, the white left is guilty of believing minority individuals are of lower intelligence than they are and dumb down their speech in order to feel like they're being kinder to them by doing so."

SOURCE 





CNN Fires Contributor Marc Lamont Hill Following His Outrageous Comments About Israel

CNN fired contributor Marc Lamont Hill after public outrage followed upon incendiary comments he made about the country of Israel.

Both CNN and Hill were deluged with criticism after comments Hill made that many saw as advocating for the destruction of Israel in favor of Palestinian land claims.

“We have an opportunity to not just offer solidarity in words but to commit to political action,” Hill said in the speech, “grass-roots action, local action and international action that will give us what justice requires and that is a free Palestine from the river to the sea.”

Much of the criticism came from his use of the phrase “from the river to the sea,” which is used by extremist groups to advocate for the erasure completely of the Israeli state and replacement with a Palestinian nation.

Hill denied that his use of the phrase was in support of the destruction of Israel, and said that he was merely favoring more freedom for Palestinians.

SOURCE 



Friday, November 30, 2018



Google blocks gender pronouns including 'him' and 'her' from its AI tool that completes sentences over fears it might predict YOUR sex or gender identity incorrectly and offend you

Google is removing gender pronouns from the predictive text feature found in its Gmail platform.

The feature will no longer suggest pronouns that indicate a specific gender such as 'he', 'her', 'him' or 'she' for fear of suggesting the wrong one and causing offence.

Google staff have revealed the technology will not suggest gender-based pronouns because the risk is too high that its 'Smart Compose' technology might predict someone's sex or gender identity incorrectly. 

Gmail product manager Paul Lambert said a company research scientist discovered the problem in January.

He wrote: 'I am meeting an investor next week and Smart Compose suggested a possible follow-up question: "Do you want to meet him?" instead of "her".'

Consumers have become accustomed to embarrassing gaffes from auto-correct on smartphones but Google is being cautious around such a sensitive topic.

Gender issues are reshaping politics and society, and critics are scrutinising potential biases in artificial intelligence like never before.

Mr Lambert said the Smart Compose team of about 15 engineers and designers tried several workarounds, but none proved bias-free or worthwhile.

They decided the best solution was to limit coverage and implement a gendered pronoun ban.

It affects fewer than one per cent of cases where Smart Compose would propose something.

'The only reliable technique we have is to be conservative,' said Prabhakar Raghavan, who oversaw engineering of Gmail and other services until a recent promotion.

The company apologised in 2015 when the image recognition feature of its photo service labelled a black couple as gorillas.

In 2016, Google altered its search engine's autocomplete function after it suggested the anti-Semitic query 'are jews evil' when users sought information about Jews.

Google has banned expletives and racial slurs from its predictive technologies, as well as mentions of its business rivals or tragic events.

The company's new policy banning gendered pronouns also affected the list of possible responses in Google's Smart Reply.

That service allow users to respond instantly to text messages and emails with short phrases such as 'sounds good.'

Google uses tests developed by its AI ethics team to uncover new biases.  A spam and abuse team pokes at systems, trying to find 'juicy' gaffes by thinking as hackers or journalists might, Mr Lambert said.

SOURCE 







Council slammed over N-word funeral post for former employee

A Queensland regional council this month posted a funeral notice on its Facebook page for a local Aboriginal man under the heading “John Hagan (N..... Rat)’’.

The November 8 post was only removed today from the Facebook page of the Paroo Shire Council, in the state’s southwest, after a complaint and threatened legal action from the three children and a cousin of Hagan.

A long-time employee of the council, Hagan, 67, was described in the funeral notice as being “known to all’’ by the racially ­offensive “N..... Rat’’, a claim disputed by his family.

Hagan’s son, Bruce, said he had never heard anyone refer to his ­father, who volunteered helping local Aboriginal youth, in the way purported by the council.

“I have never heard anyone call him by the N-word. It’s wrong, and it has been very, very hurtful to the family,’’ he said. “He worked for 45 years on the railway and then council, paid his taxes and I don’t want my dad remembered that way, it’s degrading.’’

Paroo Shire Council chief executive Oliver Simon today said he was “looking into the facts’’ behind the posting of Hagan’s ­funeral notice but that family were “usually consulted’’.

His three children, who are considering making formal complaints under state and commonwealth anti-discrimination laws, said they were not aware of any family member being consulted by the council.

SOURCE 




Thursday, November 29, 2018



Twitter Permanently Bans Feminist For Writing That ‘Men Aren’t Women’

Must not question Transgenderism

Months after Twitter’s CEO Jack Dorsey said his platform didn’t take sides, his platform is not only taking sides but becoming more progressive and Orwellian than ever.
 Nicole Russell By Nicole Russell

Last week, the social media giant permanently banned Meghan Murphy, a writer based in British Columbia, for critiquing transgender ideology online. The platform repeatedly suspended her account for this then ultimately banned her last week, saying such behavior “violated [its] rules against hateful conduct"

Murphy:

What is insane to me, though, is that while Twitter knowingly permits graphic pornography and death threats on the platform (I have reported countless violent threats, the vast majority of which have gone unaddressed), they won’t allow me to state very basic facts, such as ‘men aren’t women.’ This is hardly an abhorrent thing to say, nor should it be considered ‘hateful’ to ask questions about the notion that people can change sex, or ask for explanations about transgender ideology. These are now, like it or not, public debates — debates that are impacting people’s lives, as legislation and policy are being imposed based on gender identity ideology…

Twitter also recently banned “deadnaming”—the practice of referring to a trans person by his or her legal name, or birth name. This also likely played a role in Murphy’s suspensions and ultimate ban.

 Murphy said her account was locked again on November 15. She was told she must delete tweets that read: “Women aren’t men,” and “How are transwomen not men? What is the difference between a man and a transwoman?” Murphy deleted the tweets to regain access to her account. However, at this point, she was angry and tweeted:

“This is f—— bull—, @twitter. I’m not allowed to say that men aren’t women or ask questions about the notion of transgenderism at all anymore? That a multi-billion dollar company is censoring basic facts and silencing people who ask questions about this dogma is insane.”

This tweet went viral, garnering at least 20,000 likes. ThenTwitter locked her account again and demanded she conform—I mean, delete it. Following these suspensions, Murphy was then permanently banned. Her fans were disappointed, to say the least.

Of course, Twitter is a private company and can do whatever it likes. But they have billed themselves as an open platform, one that welcomes debate, ideas, and sharing. In an April article about how Twitter turned toxic, Fast Company reported that Alex Macgillivray, Twitter’s first general counsel, used to say, “Let the tweets flow.” Yet, Murphy writes, the platform has so persistently done the opposite in its treatment of her and other trans-critical feminists that she has started to think about the political right’s positions and be willing to dialogue with them:

While Murphy is outspoken, her tweets were far from hateful. It’s not just disappointing to see Twitter ban the social media account of a woman who was simply calling a spade a spade, but a clear example of Twitter saying one thing and effectively doing another. Instead of the “Thought Police” and “Big Brother,” now we have Jack Dorsey and Twitter.

SOURCE 

Nooses Hung At Mississippi State Capitol Just Before Runoff Election

Almost certainly put up by Democrats

Nooses hanging from trees and signs about lynching were found at the Mississippi State Capitol early Monday morning, just a day before a runoff election to decide whether a black man will represent the state in the U.S. Senate for the first time since the 1880s.

Two nooses and six signs, including one referencing murdered black teen Emmett Till, were hung around the Capitol campus at about 7 a.m. on Monday, according to Chuck McIntosh, spokesman for the Mississippi Department of Finance and Administration.

“We’re hanging nooses to remind people that times haven’t changed,” read one of the signs, NBC News reported Tuesday. Another sign referenced Mississippi’s history of lynchings.

The imagery was first obtained by a WLBT reporter, who received a call in the morning about the nooses and then notified Capitol Police.

McIntosh told HuffPost on Monday that it was unclear, based on the signs alone, whether the incident was related to Tuesday’s runoff election between Sen. Cindy Hyde-Smith (R-Miss.) and Democratic candidate Mike Espy, who is African-American. He described the signs as focusing on lynching and Till, a 14-year-old who was lynched in Mississippi in 1955 after being accused of interacting with a white woman.

“While I can’t speak to their mindset, it is notable that it was done the day before the special election,” McIntosh said.

However, a Capitol Police spokesman told NBC News that one of the signs referenced the election. The sign read: “On Tuesday Nov. 27, thousands of Mississippians will vote for a senator. We need someone who respects the lives of lynch victims,” NBC News reported, citing the spokesman.

Hyde-Smith made headlines and lost campaign funding after she joked about wanting to attend a “public hanging” earlier this month. She apologized, but the hits kept coming: a Rhodes scholar at the University of Mississippi called her a white supremacist; the NAACP and Espy himself called the comments “hurtful and harmful”; and her uncritical views of the Confederacy and Mississippi’s legacy of racism were made public.

So far, there are no suspects in the incident at the state Capitol, though police are looking at surveillance footage, McIntosh said. There are no immediate plans to beef up security at the building or elsewhere during Tuesday’s election.

SOURCE 

Despite the attempt to frighten people, Hyde-Smith won


Wednesday, November 28, 2018



Fox News Apologizes After Guest Compares Hillary To Herpes

“She won’t go away. She’s like herpes,” said Anna Paulina, director of Hispanic engagement for right-wing organization Turning Points USA.

Paulina’s comment came during a panel discussion on President Donald Trump’s lawyer Rudy Giuliani’s call for another probe into Clinton’s use of a private email server during her time as secretary of state.

“OK, that’s news that we’re breaking here. Er, not appropriate,” Leventhal responded to Paulina’s dig. He had earlier said he was “amazed” Clinton’s emails were still headline news given “everything going on in the world.”

Paulina was removed from the segment, which also featured political analyst Doug Schoen, per multiple media reports.

“We are going to wrap this segment a little bit early because of the language that was used in the segment, and we apologize to our viewers for that,” Leventhal later told Schoen.

Fellow Fox News anchor Arthel Neville later repeated the conservative network’s apology:

SOURCE 



Feminists Said This Christmas Window Display In Britain Is Sexist



A Christmas display at a Marks & Spencer in Nottingham, Britain has feminists crying sexism for advertising a women's "must-have fancy little knickers" beside a men’s "must-have outfits to impress."

According to The Guardian, the original Christmas display featured the model "David Gandy wearing M&S suits with the tagline 'must-have outfits to impress' adjacent to red and black lingerie behind the tagline 'must-have fancy little knickers.'" Take a look:

Oh. My. Living. God. #MarksAndSpencer pic.twitter.com/f4skxoFc21

— Shelagh Fogarty (@ShelaghFogarty) November 20, 2018
Feminists did not take kindly to the ad, with many blasting it as "grotesque" and "vomit-inducing." After it went viral online, protesters defaced the women's underwear slogan to read "must have full human rights."

The Facebook group Feminist Friends Nottingham received an outpouring of complaints from several women shoppers.

"Ok, M&S Nottingham, have we really not learned anything in the last 35 years? Or am I alone in finding this, their major window display, completely vomit inducing?" said shopper Fran Bailey, who chastised the ad for both "normalization of damaging gender stereotypes through the juxtaposition of images of women apparently obsessed with ‘fancy little knickers’ with images of fully clothed men being ‘dressed to impress’ in suits," and also the slogan "must-have" when "huge numbers of Britons are struggling with poverty."

Mark & Spencer later covered up the ad, asserting in a statement that the Christmas display had been taken out of context.

SOURCE 




Tuesday, November 27, 2018


Democrats Furious Over Trump’s Turkey Pardon Joke

President Trump didn’t hold anything back during this year’s annual Turkey Pardon. And, as expected, Democrats are absolutely furious about it.

From Washington Free Beacon:

President Donald Trump joked about the midterms, the Ninth Circuit Court of Appeals, and Democrats during the annual presidential turkey pardon Tuesday.

Speaking from the Rose Garden, Trump delivered the annual address. “At this time of the year, we reflect on all of the many blessings in our lives,” he said.

Speaking alongside First Lady Melania Trump, the president explained that “the winner of this vote was decided by a fair and open election.” Trump announced that of the two turkeys, Peas and Carrots, Peas had won the popular vote for the pardon. Referencing the contentious midterm elections, Trump joked, “Unfortunately, Carrots refused to concede and demanded a recount, and we’re still fighting with Carrots,”Trump joked.

In the spirit of Thanksgiving, Trump announced he would be pardoning them both. Unfortunately, “even though Peas and Carrots have received a presidential pardon,”Trump said, “I have warned them that House Democrats are likely to issue them both subpoenas.”

The president joked that his decision to pardon them both might not be final. “I can’t guarantee that your pardons won’t be enjoined by the Ninth Circuit. Always happens,” he said.

“All joking aside, this is a time for Americans to unite together in a spirit of love, understanding, unity and joy as one very proud American family. Our nation is doing well,”he said.

SOURCE 





‘Racist’: Backlash After ABC aired ‘A Charlie Brown Thanksgiving’



ABC aired ‘A Charlie Brown Thanksgiving’ Wednesday evening, a classic cartoon many Americans tune into every year, but this year many viewers were triggered by a “racist” scene.

The ‘controversial’ scene shows Charlie Brown hosting a ‘Friendsgiving’ after Peppermint Patty invites herself and the gang over to his house.

The Gateway Pundit Reports:

The Peanuts gang eats their meal in the backyard and the seating arrangement of the characters lit social media ablaze with claims of racism.

Franklin, the only black friend is sitting alone on a folding chair which caused a huge backlash from viewers.

A Charlie Brown Thanksgiving first aired in 1973, nearly a decade after the 1964 civil rights act was signed.

Charlie Schulz added Franklin to the Peanuts gang in 1968 after a teacher wrote to Schulz requesting he add a black character to the comic strip to help ease racial tensions in America.

Reaction from upset viewers:

Damn Charlie Brown, 4 on one side and no one by Franklin. Did give him lotsa desserts for reparations i guess.

SOURCE 



Thursday, November 22, 2018



Neo-Nazi Harassment Is Not Free Speech, Judge Rules

Tweets are speech so this is a bit odd. Anglin did encourage tweets but nothing more

A federal judge’s decision to allow a lawsuit to proceed against the publisher of a neo-Nazi website is “dangerous for free speech,” the publisher’s attorney said Thursday.

Attorney Marc Randazza said he believes U.S. District Judge Dana Christensen made a legally flawed decision Wednesday in ruling the First Amendment does not shield Daily Stormer publisher Andrew Anglin from being sued for his followers’ anti-Semitic harassment of a Jewish woman and her family in Montana.

Randazza said he can “see the allure of not wanting to rule in favor of the Nazi,” but expressed concern that the decision could be used to curtail free speech in many other forums.

“The rule needs to be the same no matter what your view is,” he said.

Christensen’s decision allows Tanya Gersh to proceed with her claims that Anglin invaded her privacy, inflicted emotional distress on her and her family and violated Montana’s anti-intimidation law by calling on his followers to unleash a “troll storm” on her, her husband and her 12-year-old son.

SOURCE 






Snowflake students demand university adopts 'trigger warnings' for lectures in case the contents upsets them

Students are demanding the University of Western Australia adopt 'trigger warnings' to prevent students from being upset by challenging topics.

UWA Guild president Conrad Hogg, who is leading the push, said at the September council meeting he wants to introduce alerts before lectures, Perth Now reported.

Trigger warnings, or content warnings, have become common in the United States, but so far, only Monash University has adopted the warning policy to date.

While advocates such as Mr Hogg say the alerts can help students deal with disturbing topics like suicide and sexual assault, critics claim they do the opposite.

The Institute of Public Affairs research fellow Matthew Lesh said the warnings may prevent teachers from tackling difficult concepts, and may cause additional stress.

He said by telling students something is going to be emotionally challenging in an 'over the top' way it may increase the chance of having a strong emotional reaction. 'So it is completely counterproductive for what you’re aiming to do which is help students with their mental health,' Mr Lesh said.

The warnings are already been used at the start of all Guild publications, including Damsel Magazine, which includes alerts for violence, rape, death and abuse topics.

In the latest issue of the magazine, it warns about articles that mention genitals, gendered slurs and 'ablesim' - discrimination in favour of able-bodied people.

Federal Education Minister Dan Tehan has appointed UWA Chancellor Robert French to lead an inquiry at the university to ensure freedom of speech is maintained.

'The French review is looking at ensuring free speech on campus because a university education should involve dealing with ideas and concepts that are challenging,' Mr Tehan said.

'Likewise, the introduction of trigger warnings should not be used as an excuse to avoid difficult topics, only as an aid to resilience.'

SOURCE 


Wednesday, November 21, 2018



Leeds Trinity University staff told not to use ‘don’t’ or ‘frightening’ capitals

Earlier this year, clapping was banned at one university. Now, capital letters can’t be used to avoid upsetting “snowflake” students.

Journalism professors at Leeds Trinity University in the UK have been instructed not to use certain words — in case they frighten sensitive students.

According to UK media reports, the use of capital letters has been banned as well as the “overuse” of the words “do” and “don’t”.

In an internal staff memo obtained by the Express, staff are told students’ “anxiety” can lead to academic failure.

“Despite our best attempts to explain assessment tasks, any lack of clarity can generate anxiety and even discourage students from attempting the assessment at all,” it reads.

“Generally, avoid using capital letters for emphasis and the overuse of ‘do’, and, especially, ‘DON’T’.

It also urged staff to be “explicit about any inexplicitness” in assignment requirements and to be aware that “misconceptions or misunderstandings quickly spread” among students.

“This can lead to further confusion and students may even then decide that the assessment is too difficult and not attempt it,” the statement reads.

The story quickly spread across the UK media as well as on social media, with many members of the public slamming it as extreme “political correctness” pandering to the “snowflake generation”.

In a bizarre twist, Leeds Trinity University released a statement claiming it had not banned capital letters — but confirmed “it is best practice not to write in all capital letters”.

But many social media users pointed out there was little difference between “banning” words and capital letters and asking staff not to use them.

In a statement, vice-chancellor Margaret House said the university was committed to supporting students to be “the very best they can be”.

The public university is located near Leeds in England’s West Yorkshire.

It has a student population of more than 3625 and offers foundation, undergraduate, and postgraduate degrees in a range of humanities and social sciences.

SOURCE 






In New Zealand "Trivial" is a bad word

Final-year high school students who sat a national history exam in New Zealand have launched a petition asking the exam be marked based on students’ own definition of an “unfamiliar” word.

The year 13 students were worried they might fail their New Zealand Qualifications Authority (NZQA) level 3 history test because they didn’t know what the word “trivial” meant.

According to Stuff.co.nz, the word appeared in the paper on Wednesday in a quote from Julius Caesar: “Events of importance are the result of trivial causes.”

The question asked students to analyse the extent to which they agreed or disagreed with Caesar, with reference to the causes and consequences of a historical event.

According to the Oxford Dictionary trivial means “of little value or importance”.

Students were quick to comment on the petition, which has already been signed more than 2400 times, expressing their frustration with the exam question.

Student Logan Stadnyk of Taieri College in Dunedin is one of those who sat the paper and signed the petition.

He said he was “lucky” to understand the word, but at least half of his class didn’t.

New Zealand History Teachers’ Association chairman Graeme Ball sided with the students, calling the exam a “little bit of a snafu” on the part of NZQA, and said the language used in questions should be “accessible to all”.

SOURCE 



Tuesday, November 20, 2018



Conservative Entrepreneur Banned from Facebook Launches Competing Social Media Platform

According to a press release through MarketWatch, Addison Riddleberger said his “innovative new social networking platform geared toward conservatives, TrumpTown.com, has officially opened its virtual doors in an attempt to give users an alternative to Facebook.”

“After years of Trump supporters’ right to free speech being silenced by Silicon Valley — and ultimately culminating with my network of conservative followers being purged — I decided the far-left tech industry needed a real competitor. And thus, TrumpTown was born.”

Riddleberger — whose pages included Standing for Americans, Freedom Catalog and Patriotic Folks — says he was sent a vague warning letter by the social media giant saying that he was in violation of one of its terms of service, although the letter didn’t make it clear what term he was violating.

He told The Western Journal that he originally thought it had to do with a new firm they had partnered with to handle their advertisements, so he suspended them — and all advertisements on his websites — going forward. That apparently wasn’t it, however, since the pages were deleted along with Riddleberger’s personal account.

“TrumpTown has actually been in development for several months — once my account and pages were shut down, we went into overdrive getting the site into a position where all the basics were in place,” Riddleberger told The Western Journal. “The timing was pretty incredible the way it all came together.”

The idea of a conservative alternative to traditional social media platforms isn’t a particularly new one, although few examples have met with any sustained success. The most notable has been Gab, a Twitter-like platform that promised a policy of unfettered free speech in response to a spate of high-profile social media bans.

The problem for Gab was that while few mainstream conservatives established a presence there — instead deciding to stay on established platforms — the conversation quickly became dominated by either fringe figures or individuals whose speech had gotten them exiled elsewhere. The network came under the microscope because of the recent Pittsburgh synagogue shooting after it was revealed the alleged killer was a member and often posted his paranoid, anti-Semitic theories there.

“Gab is a great site in theory — and setting up your platform solely on the basis of free speech is fantastic — but the marketing and execution is where we differ,” he told The Western Journal. “We wanted to angle our site as being a conservative social media alternative first, not just a free speech platform. Our platform offers both characteristics, but leads with the healthy passion that 65 million Americans have toward President Trump and his conservative agenda.”

SOURCE 




Malaysian PM Mahathir Mohamad says criticism of Jews is ‘free speech’

The Muslim hatred of Jews never fails

A war of words has intensified between Malaysian Prime Minister Mahathir Mohamad and Australian treasurer Josh Frydenberg, with the 93-year-old Dr Mahathir saying he should be able to criticise Jewish people “when they do something wrong” and defending as “fair comment” his warning that shifting Australia’s Israeli embassy to Jerusalem could encourage terrorism.

Hitting back at the Treasurer, who branded the Malaysian leader “anti-Semitic”, Dr Mahathir said his past comments about Jewish people were a matter of free speech. “People accept that some people, when they do something that is wrong, they need to be criticised and they need to be pointed out that what they do is wrong,” he told The Australian on the sidelines of the APEC summit in Port Moresby.

“But you can’t say anything you want about the Jewish people. Why are they so privileged? They do a lot of wrong things … You call me anti-Semitic. I am also called a dictator. I’m called all kinds of names, but it doesn’t matter.

“I have a right to speak. To say that I can talk about anything else except criticise the Jews is something quite unfair. We are talking about free speech.”

Mr Frydenberg, the deputy Liberal leader and a prominent Jewish MP, lashed Dr Mahathir last week, saying the Malaysian leader had “form” as an anti-Semite, making remarks about Jews being “hook-nosed”, questioning the Holocaust death toll, and ­banning the film Schindler’s List in Malaysia.

SOURCE 



Monday, November 19, 2018


Dutch Leftists enraged by traditional blackface Christmas character

In Nederland, Father Christmas traditionally has black helpers

Protesters across the Netherlands have disrupted Christmas parades put on for young children, claiming the 'black-face' costumes of Santa's helpers are racist.

Children lined the streets to see parades of Saint Nicholas handing out gifts, and Santa's black-faced elves, known as 'Black Petes'.

But the day descended into chaos as the parades were mired by clashes between far-left protesters and far-right hooligans around the country.

Young children in towns and cities can watch the arrival of Saint Nicholas, along with his helpers, in celebrations held every November.

Protesters against Black Petes, known as Zwarte Piets in the Netherlands, have claimed their costumes are racist because the white actors involved 'black up'.

Those portraying Zwarte Piet put on blackface make-up and colourful attire, in addition to curly wigs and light red lipstick to depict African features. 

In the Dutch city of Rotterdam, disappointed revellers went home because of the noisy anti-blackface protesters.

In the city of Maas, the protesters left their designated demonstration boxes and witnesses spoke of 'total choas', De Telegraaf reports.

But some of the violence was also caused by football hooligans. They confronted a Kick Out Black Pete demonstration in the Dutch town of Eindhoven. They threw eggs and cans of beer at the demonstrators, and six people were arrested.

SOURCE 




White magazine shuts down after refusing to feature same-sex weddings

No freedom of religion for Christians

One of Australia's leading wedding magazines, White, is shutting down following its refusal to feature same-sex weddings.

Founders Luke and Carla Burrell, who are Christian, say the magazine became the target of a damaging campaign after Australia voted to legalise same-sex marriage last year, and a number of advertisers withdrew their support.

"White Magazine is no longer economically viable," they said in a blog post. "As much as we love what we do and are inspired by the positive impact it's had, we need to draw the curtain on this part of our lives."

Earlier this year, hundreds of wedding industry professionals boycotted the magazine over its lack of LGBTQI diversity.

Former contributor Lara Hotz, who photographed a number of covers for the magazine, told Hack it made her feel "extremely hurt".

"It appears they are happy to take money, content and photographs from LGBTQI advertisers and contributors, but are yet to support and represent us in the same way as heterosexual couples are represented in the magazine," she said.

SOURCE 


Sunday, November 18, 2018


CNN: One Of "Free Speech's Greatest Enemies"

Tucker Carlson delivered commentary on CNN and the news organization's record on free speech and journalism. Carlson called CNN one of "free speech's greatest enemies" and said it only defends the First Amendment when it's "their speech."

"We can’t help but notice that some of free speech’s greatest enemies are now posing as its defenders. Take CNN, for example," Carlson said Wednesday.

"Call CNN what you will, but don’t pretend their defenders of the First Amendment," Carlson added. From 'Tucker Carlson Tonight' on FOX News:

TUCKER CARLSON, FOX NEWS: In the past couple of days you’ve heard a lot of huffing and puffing about free speech and freedom of the press, and how those threats are currently imperiled by the White House. To be clear: we are for free speech. Unfettered, absolute free speech, the kind guaranteed by the First Amendment and ratified consistently by the Supreme Court. We’ve defended that kind of speech almost every night here for the past two years. Many others, mostly on the left, have attacked it. We know who’s for it, and who’s against it. And we can’t help but notice that some of free speech’s greatest enemies are now posing as its defenders. Take CNN, for example.

It was CNN that almost single-handedly led the campaign to have broadcaster Alex Jones banished from the internet, on the grounds that they didn’t like what Jones had to say. CNN ultimately succeeded in that. The network convinced every major tech platform to ban Jones and his outlet, InfoWars. You don’t have to like Alex Jones to see that as a terrifying loss for free speech, because it was. But CNN wasn’t done trying to silence its critics. Last year, the cable network threatened an anonymous Reddit user for creating an anti-CNN meme. They threatened to expose his identity and ruin his life if he ever criticized them again. Now CNN is claiming to defend speech. Only when it’s their speech.

You’ll notice that CNN didn’t object when the government threatened to imprison employees of the cable channel RT if they didn’t register as foreign agents. Yes, RT is owned by a foreign government. So is the BBC. Until last year, much of the New York Times was owned by a foreign national. This is true of other news organizations, none of which have ever registered as a foreign agents. But because RT is owned by Russia, which the left believes got Donald Trump elected, it’s OK with CNN if they’re bullied and silenced.

SOURCE 



Dangerous to joke about ‘Lingerie’

The International Studies Association has rejected the appeal of a professor who was found responsible for violating its code of conduct after he jokingly requested that an elevator in a conference hotel be stopped at the lingerie department.

Richard Ned Lebow, a professor of international political theory at King’s College London, responded by saying he would meet with his lawyer on Thursday and expects to file a defamation lawsuit. Lebow, who had threatened to sue the association unless it found in his favor, did not immediately respond to a question about who exactly he’d sue.

The association’s lawyer, in a letter dated Tuesday, relayed its decision that no steps would be taken against Lebow if he offered an "unequivocal apology" to Simona Sharoni, a professor of women’s and gender studies at Merrimack College who filed a complaint about the incident.

If he does not apologize, the letter said, the association will issue a formal, private letter of reprimand.

In an email to The Chronicle on Wednesday, Lebow made it clear he had no intention of apologizing.

The incident that sparked the uproar happened in April in a crowded elevator during the association’s annual conference at a Hilton in San Francisco. Sharoni said she had offered to press the buttons for the floors where the elevator’s occupants, who she said were mostly male conference attendees, wanted to get off.

Lebow asked for the women’s lingerie department, and others in the elevator laughed, she wrote in her complaint. Lebow has disputed details of her account, but conceded joking about being let off on the lingerie floor.

When he learned she was upset, he said, he tried to resolve the dispute informally, as he believes the association’s conduct code encourages. He wrote Sharoni an email saying he wasn’t trying to make her uncomfortable or to insult women. He suggested that Sharoni, who was born in Romania and raised in Israel, might have misconstrued his remark. And he said that it was a "standard gag line" when he was growing up, in the 1950s, to pretend to be in a department store and ask the elevator operator for the hardware or lingerie department.

In an email after the uproar began, he told The Chronicle that Sharoni was "trying to impose her definition on my words, take needless offense, and use it as an excuse to make a complaint and put a chill on free speech and humor."

SOURCE 

Friday, November 16, 2018



CSU Adds ‘Long Time, No See,’ ‘You Guys,' ‘Freshman’ to Long List of Politically Incorrect Words

Students at Colorado State University (CSU), apparently, should no longer say “long time, no see,” “you guys” or “freshman,” because those terms are not considered “inclusive language.”

In an opinion piece for the Rocky Mountain Collegian, titled “CSU has gone too far with inclusive language,” CSU student Katrina Leibee said she was told to use “y’all” and “first-year” instead, in order to be “inclusive of all genders.”

“A countless amount of words and phrases have been marked with a big, red X and defined as non-inclusive,” Leibee wrote, describing her frustration with the university’s penchant for political correctness.. “It has gotten to the point where students should carry around a dictionary of words they cannot say.”

Inclusive language is language that “is free from words, phrases or tones that reflect prejudiced, stereotyped or discriminatory views of particular people or groups,” as well as language that “doesn’t deliberately or inadvertently exclude people from being seen as part of a group,” according to the U.S. Department of Education.

Leibee said she met with the CSU director of Diversity and Inclusion, Zahra Al-Saloom, who showed her an “entire packet” of words and phrases that are not considered “inclusive” at CSU. The common greeting “long time, no see,” for example, is verboten because it is apparently “derogatory towards those of Asian descent.”

“We have been asked to get rid of the language we have been using for as long as we have known the English language,” Leibee said.

SOURCE 





A rising star in virtual-reality tech was ousted from Facebook because he supported the "wrong" guy  

The Wall Street Journal reports that one of Facebook’s top executives and a rising star in the field of virtual-reality was essentially forced to resign in 2016 over his support of Donald Trump. The issue stemmed from a $10,000 donation Palmer Luckey made to an anti-Hillary Clinton group. While neither Facebook nor Luckey has ever publicly given a reason for why he left the company, CEO Mark Zuckerberg testified before Congress that his departure had nothing to do with politics.

It now appears that Zuckerberg’s testimony was not entirely honest, as a record of internal Facebook emails obtained by WSJ paints a different picture in which politics played a central role in Luckey’s ousting. The Journal notes, “Internal Facebook emails suggest the matter was discussed at the highest levels of the company. In the fall of 2016, as unhappiness over the donation simmered, Facebook executives including Mr. Zuckerberg pressured Mr. Luckey to publicly voice support for libertarian candidate Gary Johnson, despite Mr. Luckey’s yearslong support of Mr. Trump.”

Once again this latest news only goes to further expose the dangerous degree of massive leftist bias within the social media giants of Silicon Valley. Leftist bias is not new news, of course, but this story does undercut Zuckerberg’s claim that the admittedly “extremely left-leaning” environment of Silicon Valley does not impact Facebook’s policing of site content.

The story is a chilling one to those of us who are advocates of free speech. It also provides another example of what actual fascism looks like, similar to Google’s firing of programmer James Damore over his failure to fall in line with the company’s groupthink.

One final question: Did Zuckerberg lie under oath to Congress? It will be interesting to see if there is any congressional follow-up to this story.

SOURCE 

Thursday, November 15, 2018


GQ Woman of the Year cover sparks outrage as the magazine is slammed for using quotation marks around the word WOMAN

Serena Williams being named Woman of the Year by GQ should have led to nothing but celebration - but instead the tennis player has found herself at the center of a furious controversy after the publication released her cover with the word "woman" written in quotation marks.

The 37-year-old's cover shot was released on Monday alongside the three images for the Men of the Year - Michael B. Jordan, Henry Golding, and Jonah Hill - none of which featured quotation marks around the word men, a fact that has prompted serious upset online.

'Okay but why is woman in quotation marks?' one woman tweeted at GQ, while another person shared an image of last year's Woman of the Year cover - which featured Gal Gadot, and no quotation marks around the gender - alongside Serena's and simply wrote: 'Hmm.'

Another person blasted the move as 'inappropriate, dangerous, racist, and transphobic', while one person demanded that the publication issue an explanation for the controversial design decision.

Serena herself has not addressed the controversy, but nor has she shared the cover image on any of her social media accounts - which may well speak volumes in and of itself.

Some social media users rushed to defend GQ however, pointing out that the word woman was handwritten for Serena's cover by her close friend, Off-White designer Virgil Abloh, whose signature style is to use double quotation marks around basic words, something that he does on all of his clothing.

The designer was actually responsible for the Nike tutu dresses that Serena wore at this year's US Open - all of which featured the word "LOGO" in quotation marks above the signature Nike swoosh.

SOURCE 



Should social media firms be prevented from censoring speech they dislike?

What makes it acceptable for Twitter to deplatform widely unpopular members, but wrong for the Department of Justice to jail those with dissident views? As it turns out, nothing makes it acceptable. As Princeton students grapple with questions of free speech, they should consider the effects of social media companies on that speech. Anyone who is committed to a substantive right to free speech against government intervention should support a similar principle in the context of corporations policing speech.

Think about why we limit the government’s ability to censor speech in the first place: the government is large, powerful, and has an interest in suppressing dissident opinions. If the government were so discerning and so inclined, it might manage to censor only the bad views. Yet, as much as you might trust an Obama to filter out only the hate speech, you wouldn’t want a Trump to be making the same sort of decision. The fact that we cannot know what political tides loom on the horizon compels us to deny government the power to censor, even if we would be comfortable with the present government having that power. In other words, government’s ability to police speech is limited in the good times to prevent abuse in the bad.

In all respects relevant to policing speech, social media giants are just like governments in that they are large and well-resourced relative to any individual. They have interests in suspending views critical of them. Worse, they are unaccountable, and certainly more so than governments. A government official trying to censor someone will likely be stopped by other members of government vested with the power and incentive to check their abuse. Indeed, this is as true of the President as it is of the lowest civil servant when it comes to free speech, which is codified in our laws and our Constitution. Our government is intentionally organized with a principle of decentralization and mutual checks on power.

When it comes to corporations, circumstances differ. Corporations are highly centralized, and there is no corporate governance principal of respecting free speech. If a handful of board members go rogue and decide they don’t like someone, that person can lose their right to speak on the only platforms that matter for being heard. What does Twitter have to compel your trust that the U.S government does not? A better vibe? A nicer logo?

Of course, corporations are accountable in certain ways: shareholders can relent, and no firm seeks a public relations disaster. But that is exactly the point. To the extent that they are accountable, corporations are accountable in the wrong way. Or, at the very least, they are accountable in a way that would never be accepted as a means of keeping governments in check when it comes to abrogating individual rights. Public relations incentives and shareholder votes are to corporations as voters in elections are to governments. But speech rights aren’t the sort of protection that can be voted away. That is the entire premise of rights. No majority can determine that a minority has ceded their rights. This is a central tenet of constitutional democracy. That a majority of shareholders or Twitter users don’t like someone cannot possibly be justification to strip them of their right to speak.

A right to speak without any chance of being heard renders that right nothing more than an empty promise. Appeals made to the fact that participation in social media is voluntary and that these companies are private hold little sway in light of this. Free speech is an outcome we strive to achieve rather than being regarded as mere adherence to some legal text. Free speech is central to having a free society, useful political discourse, and a feeling of inclusion in the political process. It helps us find truth as a society and participate in civic life as individuals. As a result, when corporations are allowed and encouraged to hollow out that promise, everyone suffers.

I don’t particularly like Alex Jones. But I worry more about what is to come if we rally behind his being banned from YouTube. The moral arc of a decade will often bend the wrong way (consider the 1980s in the U.S., or the 1930s in Germany). If today we allow Twitter to ban those who are despised, we may be building the guillotine for our own heads.

SOURCE