Wednesday, December 30, 2020

Spokesman for Florida Gov. Ron DeSantis deactivates Twitter after saying every dead COVID victim should be balanced with 99 photos of survivors

A simple and obvious comment was not permitted

The spokesman for Florida governor Ron DeSantis has left Twitter after he posted an insensitive message in the early hours of Wednesday morning.

A search for the account of Fred Piccolo Jr. currently comes up empty on the social media site.

The deactivation of his account comes after he tweeted, 'I'm wondering since 99%. Of Covid patients survive shouldn't you have 99 photos of survivors for every one fatality? Otherwise you're just trying to create a narrative that is not reality.'

The tweet was deleted prior to the account disappearing from the website. Before it was deleted, however, it was captured in a screenshot by WLRN reporter Danny Rivero.

Academic website The Conversation bans climate change sceptics, locks dissenter accounts

Global warming has become conventional wisdom among Leftists. If you tell a big enough lie often enough, Leftists will be eager to believe it. Conservatives worldwide rarely believe in global warming but are under a lot of pressure to keep quiet about it. This is the latest example of that

Amusing that the "conversationalists" now want to have a conversation only with themselves. Not much of a conversation.

They started out with some pretensions of scholarliness but now they are just another Leftist propaganda rag. But they never were much more than that. Conservative comment of any sort was always rare there

Academic website, The Conversation, has banned publication of comments that dispute man-made climate change and will lock the accounts of readers who attempt to post dissenting views.

As part of a global collaboration of more than 250 news outlets called Covering Climate Now, The Conversation said constructive positive discussions did not include having contact with “climate change deniers”.

The Conversation Australia said banning comments from contrarians was part of improving its climate change coverage. “Once upon a time, we might have viewed climate sceptics as merely frustrating”, Editor and Executive Director, Misha Ketchell said.

“But it’s 2019, and now we know better,” he said. “Climate change deniers and those shamelessly peddling pseudoscience and misinformation, are perpetuating ideas that will ultimately destroy the planet. “As a publisher, giving them a voice on our site contributes to a stalled public discourse.”

The Conversation’s editorial team has been told to take a zero tolerance approach to moderating climate change deniers, and sceptics. “Not only will we be removing their comments, we’ll be locking their accounts,” Mr Ketchell said.

“We believe conversations are integral to sharing knowledge, but those who are fixated on dodgy ideas in the face of decades of peer-reviewed science are nothing but dangerous,” he said.

“It is counter-productive to present the evidence and then immediately undermine it by giving space to trolls.”

The Covering Climate Now initiative includes more than 250 outlets world wide with a combined audience of more than one billion. From September 15-23, participants have committed to emphasising climate stories.

Other participants include The Guardian, AFP, Bloomberg, The Christian Science Monitor, New Zealand Herald, Newsweek magazine and Al Jazeera.

The Conversation ban is in line with a push within the climate science community to de-platform those with unorthodox views.




Monday, December 28, 2020

Book Criticizing Cancel Culture Gets Canceled Because Author Criticized Islam

You may have thought the public discourse couldn’t get any more absurd. Think again. Apparently oblivious to the titanic dimensions of the irony, the publisher Little, Brown just canceled a new book, Welcome to the Woke Trials: How #Identity Killed Progressive Politics by British journalist Julie Burchill because of an “Islamophobic” twitter exchange Burchill had with Muslim writer Ash Sarkar.

So you see, it’s fine to stand up for freedom of speech, but some lines must not be crossed. And what was Burchill’s crime? Did she use racial slurs? Did she call for genocide or violence against innocent Muslims? No, apparently all she did was note the readily demonstrable fact that according to Islamic tradition, Muhammad married a child. But telling the truth is a dangerous enterprise these days.

According to The National, the Hachette group, which owns Little, Brown, announced that Burchill’s book “has been scrapped by her publisher for what it said were Islamophobic comments.”

The book, according to the report, “was promoted as a ‘characteristically irreverent and entertaining’ indictment of the ‘outrage mob.’” But the outrage mob was not outraged by anything in the book itself. It was evidently outraged because Burchill asked Sarkar, “Can you please remind me of the age of the Prophet Mohammad’s first wife?”

No, Little, Brown, you don’t believe in the freedom of speech. Clearly there are controversial or challenging perspectives you don’t dare publish. Claiming to believe in the freedom of speech while canceling a controversial book is like claiming to be a little bit pregnant. You either believe in the freedom of speech or you don’t. And you don’t.

That word again

A Virginia student says he has no regrets about sharing a video online of a white high school classmate using a racial slur that forced her to withdraw from her dream college.

Jimmy Galligan, of Leesburg, revealed to the New York Times how he had been in history class at Heritage High School last year when he received a text from a friend which included a video of classmate Mimi Groves using a racial epithet.

The three-second clip, sent by Groves to a friend on Snapchat in 2016, showed the then-15-year-old freshman looking into the camera saying ‘I can drive, n*****s’ as she was sitting in traffic.

Groves’ video had originally circulated among some students at Heritage High shortly after she recorded it in 2016, but it reportedly did not cause much of a stir.

Galligan said the racial slur used by Groves had regularly been hurled in classrooms and in hallways during his time in the Loudon County School district.

Groves, a championship-winning cheerleader, was planning to attend the University of Tennessee, Knoxville, whose cheer team were reigning national champions. She was accepted into the team in May.

Weeks later, following the Memorial Day police killing of George Floyd in Minnesota, racial injustice protests broke out across the nation.

Within a matter of hours, the clip had been shared widely across social media, including on TikTok and Twitter.

As views of the footage continued to mount, as did furious calls from members of the public demanding the University of Tennessee revoke its admission offer to Groves.

In the case of Groves, within two days, she was kicked off the university’s cheer team and forced to withdraw from UT under pressure from admission officials, citing hundreds of emails and phone calls from outraged former and current students.




Sunday, December 27, 2020

Oregon Doctor Who Lost Medical License Over Face Masks Is Fighting Back

An Oregon doctor -- a physician, not a "Dr." Jill Biden -- lost his medical license after speaking out about face masks. What exactly did the doctor say about face masks? He said masks don't do much when it comes to stopping the spread of COVID-19. Of course, Dr. Anthony Fauci said the same thing and didn't lose his medical license. But this isn't Dr. Fauci we're talking about. It's Dr. Steven LaTulippe, a retired Air Force officer and practicing physician for more than 20 years.

The doctor spoke at a "Stop the Steal" rally on Nov. 7 in Salem, Oregon, made some heretical comments about face masks the Oregon Medical Board doesn't want people to hear, and a few weeks later the board suspended his license. A similar thing happened to Galileo. I would say the city of Salem is known for its witch trials, but it's the wrong Salem and LaTulippe never got a trial.

The doctor's license was suspended after the medical board declared that LaTulippe "presents a serious danger to the public health and safety." The board claims the physician and his staff refused to wear face masks and encouraged patients to remove theirs as well. The doctor's clinic is also accused of failing to implement screening procedures upon entry to the premises.

According to LaTulippe, the board's emergency suspension order is "riddled with misleading, deceptive, and fraudulent information."

"For example, they claim that I have no detailed COVID-19 protocol," the doctor told Townhall. "I do have an excellent protocol that worked beautifully - no viral spread among my patients or staff, despite me never closing my clinic throughout the entire pandemic. They state 'there is no effective [COVID] treatment at this time,' yet every COVID patient I treated - about 100 - recovered very quickly (within about a week) and completely."

None of LaTulippe's patients required hospitalization and there were no deaths. The catalyst for the doctor's suspension appears to be his remarks before the Stop the Steal rally on Nov. 7, where the physician referred to the coronavirus as "a common cold virus that has been with us forever."

LaTulippe said he's very much interested in practicing "evidence-based medicine," just not the "politics-based medicine" currently in vogue in the medical community, especially in Oregon.

What in the Fresh Hell Is This? Wishing Someone a 'Merry Christmas' Is White Supremacy

I mean, we shouldn’t be shocked that people like this exist. Ever since 'wokeness' latched onto the political Left like a barnacle, the hot takes have grown more insane. Whatever you thought was ‘too extreme’ quickly was turned on its head with these people. Since Obama, the ‘woke’ Left has thrust scores of pseudo-intellectual talking points into the social media universe in the hopes of making it mainstream. Yet, the most common is making everything into a vehicle for white supremacy and then bashing it. Ladies and gentlemen, these people think that a man who holds the door for a woman is a sexist, misogynist dinosaur. Are we shocked that they decided to put Christmas on the white supremacy list?

Even now, we can’t say Merry Christmas on certain platforms, who have opted for the more politically correct ‘happy holidays’ send off. But as Jen Bokoff of the Disability Rights Fund reminded all of us today, a lot of people don’t celebrate Christmas, so please be cognizant of that because “the default Merry Christmas as a normal greeting is also white supremacy culture at work.” Yeah, we’re not all mentally defective, Jenny. If I see someone with a yarmulke on, I’m not going to say, “Merry Christmas.” Also, this isn’t some random holiday. It’s not something where only half the nation celebrates. The vast majority celebrate Christmas. In fact, billions do. And not all Christians are white people. I guess it would shock Jen that a lot of people of color are—gasp—Christian.

The added idiocy with this ‘wishing merry Christmas is white supremacy culture’ take is that it carries this connotation that all holidays are relatively equal with regards to participation. Sorry, given the numbers, no one really celebrates Kwanzaa. I think more people attend ComicCon than those who celebrate Kwanzaa. We’re also the most religious industrialized nation. It’s not even close. The United States has a population of 331 million; 205 million are Christians.

It’s all part of the multi-pronged assault on other institutions that divert attention away from the power base that progressives think we should all trust without question and worship like God, and that would be the government. You can’t be trusted with firearm ownership, only agents of the state can be. We’ll give you free health care. We’ll take care of you from cradle to grave. The list goes on and on, but religion and its Constitutional protections present the biggest threat to the progressive agenda, the woke agenda, which is why they workday and night to eliminate these people from society. So, piss these people off, and wish everyone a Merry Christmas this year, next year, and for all time.




Saturday, December 26, 2020

Facebook removes Pete Evan’s page after continuously posting misinformation

Facebook gets it right for once. The man is a terrible combination: Great self confidence combined with an empty head. He has survived in the public eye so long mainly because women like his looks

Facebook has removed the disgraced chef’s profile from its platform, after claiming he was spreading “misinformation” that could lead to “imminent physical harm”.

In a statement, a Facebook spokesperson said: “We don’t allow anyone to share misinformation about COVID-19 vaccines that have been debunked by public health experts. We have clear policies against this type of content and we’ve removed Chef Pete Evans’ Facebook Page for repeated violations of these policies.”

One Twitter post revealing the news had a large amount of people commenting their gratitude that the chef had lost his voice on the platform.

While the celebrity chef posts numerous conspiracy-style posts daily, he said last week that Sydney-siders should not get tested for COVID after the Northern Beaches outbreak.

Posting to Facebook, the outspoken anti-vaxxer and conspiracy theorist shared a photo of an article that read: “Sydney COVID outbreak grows with two new cases overnight.”

In the caption, Evans wrote, “OUTBREAK … 2 cases,” along with clown-face emojis.

He added: “Can you see where this is heading again. Testing for the common cold? Do not get tested.”

One of Evans’ biggest controversies came when he posted a cartoon appearing to feature a neo-Nazi symbol recently. Following the post, Evans was dumped by his publisher Pan Macmillan Australia.

Shortly after, Big W, Kmart, Coles, Booktopia and Target also cut ties with him, while Dymocks pulled his books off the shelves. He was also dropped as a contestant on I’m A Celebrity Australia.

Evans’ company was fined more than $25,000 by the Therapeutic Goods Administration (TGA) in April after he promoted a device called a ‘BioCharger’ on Facebook, claiming it could be used in relation to the coronavirus. The TGA said the claim had “no apparent foundation”.

The former My Kitchen Rules judge denied that he used the nazi symbol intentionally.

Evans’ Instagram page is still active. Instagram is owned by Facebook.

Canucks fire anthem singer Mark Donnelly for performing at anti-mask rally

The Vancouver Canucks fired their longtime national anthem singer Mark Donnelly after learning he would be singing at a rally organized by coronavirus deniers and anti-mask advocates.

Shortly after the Vancouver Sun reported that Donnelly had agreed to perform at an event called the Christmas Freedom Rally in Vancouver on Saturday, where hundreds planned to gather and protest COVID-19 restrictions, Canucks owner Francesco Aquilini tweeted at the newspaper to request they change their headline to “former Canucks anthem singer.” Aquilini also wrote “#wearamask.”

A Canucks spokesperson confirmed the dismissal to CBC, writing, “You are safe to say his days are over.”

According to the Canadian Press, Donnelly told the crowd that he still decided to sing Saturday because he questions the “draconian lockdown protocols.” He described his firing from the institution he’s been publicly associated with since 2001 as “censorship.”




Tuesday, December 22, 2020

Protect Election Integrity - Censor Anyone Who Questions the Election

Last week, Google's YouTube announced that “supporting the integrity" of the election required it to censor anyone alleging that "widespread fraud or errors changed the outcome of a historical U.S. Presidential election".

By historical presidential election, Google meant this one. Democrats are still free to allege that they would have won in 2000 or 2016, if it hadn’t been for the chads or the Russians.

A huge tech monopoly closely tied to the Democrats, which was sued by the Trump administration over its illegal abuses, censoring critics of the Democrat election fraud is protecting and supporting something alright, but that thing is very definitely not integrity.

Election integrity, like fact checking, is one of those curious terms whose meaning was ‘Orwellianized’ in the last decade. Fact checking used to mean media organizations checking their facts before they published a story. Now the media has mostly done away with internal fact checking and uses fact checking to describe its efforts to censor conservative media.

Election integrity traditionally meant verifying the integrity of the process, but is now being used to mean silencing anyone who questions the integrity of the election. In both cases a term that meant protecting the integrity of an internal process has been turned inside out to mean covering up for the corruption of the internal process by censoring its outside critics.

The Oxford Union invited a comedy writer to give a talk on 'cancel culture' – then cancelled his appearance

Writing on his own private internet forum, Mr Linehan – who was banned from Twitter this summer for violating the site's rules against hateful conduct – said of the invitation: 'Wow, what an opportunity to really get to grips with cancel culture and what it means to our society.

'I'd better start thinking about the line I'm going to take, and give a few examples of... oh wait no it's been cancelled.'

Mr Linehan has been an ardent supporter of JK Rowling, who has also been accused of transphobia.

He was among 58 actors, writers and presenters who signed a letter supporting the Harry Potter author against an 'insidious, authoritarian and misogynistic trend'.

He has also drawn criticism for his comments on the Holocaust. He was condemned in February by Lord Pickles, UK special envoy on post-Holocaust issues, for 'trivialising' the tragedy after he compared transgender children to concentration camp prisoners subjected to Nazi experiments.

The writer's invitation to Oxford had been opposed by the student union's LGBTQ campaign, which said the Oxford Union was committed to 'causing controversy rather than encouraging debate'.

A spokesman said the union had 'acted with poor judgment both in inviting Mr Linehan and in choosing to revoke that invitation, thereby opening themselves to the same accusations of 'cancel culture' they had originally sought to discuss'.




Sunday, December 20, 2020

YouTube shuts down Dilbert creator Scott Adams

Google-owned YouTube shut down Dilbert Comic strip creator Scott Adams on Friday, stripping a video off the platform from the podcaster’s channel without warning.

“Google (YouTube) just shut me down,” Adams wrote on Twitter featuring a screenshot of the message from YouTube. “The video they deleted is no different from all of my other content. I assume they’ll come for the other videos soon.”

Adams, a comic-turned podcaster who describes himself as “extra provocative,” published the 1,213th episode of his show titled, “Biden COVID Plan, Swalwell’s Chinese Spy, Pelosi Still a Steaming Pile,” on YouTube before it was taken down by the internet giant.

YouTube wrote in an email to Adams the episode violated its guidelines pertaining to “spam, deceptive practices and scams policy.”

YouTube’s censorship of Adams follows a recent company announcement that it would be removing any content critical of the 2020 election process alleging widespread voter fraud tipped the outcome of the November contest.

After preemptively declaring Republican claims of deceptive voter fraud as a conspiracy remaining to be proven in court, YouTube is still host to a wide range of other dangerous conspiracies across its platform, from ideas that President Donald Trump is a Kremlin agent to the idea that aliens build the Egyptian pyramids.

Cambridge academics win free speech row as rebels vote down university chiefs' plan to force them to be 'respectful of the diverse identities of others'

Academics voting on a new free speech policy at Cambridge University have rejected demands that views remain 'respectful', fearing this could crush freedom of expression.

In what is being seen as a victory for common sense, dons opted instead to support 'tolerance' of differing opinions.

Protecting the right to robust debate, they also decisively backed amendments making it harder for public speakers to be 'no-platformed' – or boycotted because of their views.

The changes mean the university's updated Statement on Freedom of Speech now spells out that speakers can be barred only if they are likely to use 'unlawful speech' or cause other legal problems.

A large majority of academics voted to significantly modify the proposed guidelines, which insisted on staff and students being 'respectful of the differing opinions of others'.

It comes weeks after students at Clare College tried to force a porter out of his job after he declined to support a pro-trans motion in his role as a city councillor.

The revised guidelines ensure the right to express 'controversial or unpopular opinions within the law, without fear of intolerance or discrimination'.

They will expect 'staff, students and visitors to be tolerant of the differing opinions of others'. Academics also beefed up passages against the 'no-platforming' of outside speakers, even if controversial, saying they 'must not be stopped' except on narrow legal grounds.




Wednesday, December 16, 2020

YouTube Embraces Totalitarianism

Last Wednesday, YouTube announced it would begin removing all new video uploads that question the outcome of the 2020 election. “Our policies prohibit misleading viewers about where and how to vote,” YouTube stated in a blog post. “We also disallow content alleging widespread fraud or errors changed the outcome of a historical U.S. Presidential election. However in some cases, that has meant allowing controversial views on the outcome or process of counting votes of a current election as election officials have worked to finalize counts.”

The video platform’s rationale? “Yesterday [December 7] was the safe harbor deadline for the U.S. Presidential election and enough states have certified their election results to determine a President-elect,” the blog continued. “Given that, we will start removing any piece of content uploaded today (or anytime after) that misleads people by alleging that widespread fraud or errors changed the outcome of the 2020 U.S. Presidential election, in line with our approach towards historical U.S. Presidential elections.”

How effective are YouTube’s censorship efforts? In the same blog, the platform boasted that “over 8000 channels and thousands of harmful and misleading elections-related video” have been eliminated since September, and that 77% of them were removed before they had 100 views — even as it characterized itself an “important source of election news.”

A highly selective source is more like it — one where anything inimical to the agenda of our progressive, ruling-class oligarchs will be digitally incinerated.

The hypocrisy is blinding. YouTube has no problem publishing reams of content about the disputes surrounding the 2000 election, the 2016 election, or the avalanche of baseless accusations of Russian collusion. Nor did it enforce the same policy with regard to the 2018 Georgia gubernatorial race, and losing Democratic candidate Stacey Abrams’s baseless allegations that voter fraud and suppression tilted the election to GOP Governor Brian Kemp.

YouTube is owned by Google. As of last August, Google was used for 92% of all Internet search queries in the entire world. Microsoft’s Bing is second with a 2.78% market share, and Yahoo! is third with a 1.6% market share. In the video-sharing world, YouTube’s market share is 73.7%, with second-place Vimeo at 18.6%. As FinancesOnline reveals, Google and YouTube are the one and two most-visited websites, respectively, on the entire planet. And in a chilling boast, it notes that “when you don’t know how to do something you either Google it or find out more about it on YouTube.”

Or, as it is now abundantly clear, you don’t — not when there’s a de facto monopoly to prevent it.

Why we must push back against absurd ideas

Comment from Australia

If you think the lunatic fringe of the identity politics movement exists only on the crazier recesses of Twitter then you haven’t been paying attention.

Isn’t it comforting to learn some of the state’s well-paid public servants, whose salaries remained intact throughout Victoria’s economy-destroying lockdown, were busying themselves coming up with imaginative ways to be offended on behalf of the LGBTTQQIAAP+ community?

How helpful for the state government to revise its LGBTIQ+ Inclusive Language Guide for public servants to ensure harmful terms such as “Mr and Mrs”, “he and she’’ and — brace yourself — “husband and wife’’, are replaced with non-gendered, often grammatically incoherent but always politically correct terms such as “they/them”.

The guide advises public servants to never assume a person’s gender or pronouns, to “practise’’ their PC language and to apologise immediately if they inadvertently misgender a member of the “QTIPOC (Queer, Trans, Intersex, Persons of Colour)” communities.

There are no fewer than 17 references to “intersex” and “intersexism’’ in the 11-page document that claims this newspeak is needed to acknowledge the “diversity of bodies, genders and relationships”.

Victorian public servants are advised every job applicant should be asked what pronoun they use when invited for an interview.

But the guide also warns to “avoid asking people what terms they ‘prefer’. Having a ‘preference’ can sound as if it’s a choice and most people do not feel as if they have a choice in these matters”.

So, asking what pronouns a person uses is inclusive, asking what terms they prefer is hurtful and marginalising.

On one hand it’s tempting to dismiss this nonsense as a steaming pile of bollocks but there is an ideology behind this movement that is organised, influential and has gained a powerful foothold not only in public institutions but increasingly in the private sector.

Deakin University has a lengthy but, they stress, not exhaustive list of pronouns including ze/hir, they/them, co/cos, xe/xem/xyr, hy/hym/hys and no pronoun where you must use the individual’s name.

So, instead of saying John enjoyed his time at Deakin you would say John enjoyed John’s time at Deakin. So inclusive.

If you think the lunatic fringe of the identity politics movement exists only on university campuses and on the crazier recesses of Twitter then you haven’t been paying attention.

Ideas that start as absurd, because they plainly are absurd, are adopted in academia, normalised by popular culture and before long are in high schools and work places and those who don’t submit are rebuked as transphobes, racists, misogynists and a range of other slurs used to silence dissenting voices, even if those voices are mainstream and represent the majority view.

After singer Sam Smith announced his pronouns were no longer he/him but they/them, newspapers across the globe dutifully mangled the English language to not offend the pop star and the powerful trans lobby.

It didn’t take long for Merriam-Webster dictionary to amend the definition of “they” to include a non-binary pronoun.

Ceding linguistic territory to the radical left is not only foolish but divisive and destructive. The trans activist agenda has had enormous success in silencing critics by attacking anyone who questions or corrects falsehoods as dangerous bigots.

Prominent individuals from feminist Germaine Greer, to comedian Barry Humphries to author JK Rowling have been maligned as transphobic and unworthy of the honours and acclaim they previously enjoyed, all for commentary the overwhelming majority of the population would deem perfectly acceptable.

Every day there are absurd new terms for absurd new offences that do not exist in the minds of the sane majority.

In the name of “inclusion’’ we are asked to submit to a toxic, unforgiving woke ideology.

Even the term women has been deemed as non-inclusive thus giving birth, excuse the pun, to a slew of new terms including womxn, vulva owners, menstruators and other terms that reduce womanhood to a bodily part or function.

The trans-inclusive language used to describe women can sound decidedly misogynistic. It’s little wonder the trans lobby has caused a fracture in the feminist movement.

If you don’t push back against this madness then don’t complain when it becomes the norm and we are all expected to list our pronouns on our CVs, Twitter and workplace profiles or be deemed trans-exclusionary bigots.

And, it doesn’t stop at just pronouns and gender identity. We are seeing athletes called racist for refusing to take a knee for BLM, a group founded by Marxist feminists that is explicitly anti-capitalist, anti-nuclear family and advocates for the defunding of the police and the payment of reparations for slavery.

If you’re not on-board with all that and stand during the anthem then you’re in the firing line of the activist media class.

That’s what happens when you let the radical left set the agenda.


At the weekend The Age deleted and apologised for a column by a parent whose child was transitioning because of a backlash from trans activists. The parent had “consented to testosterone treatment” but wrote about the pressure to give consent. So a thoughtful piece written by a parent with lived experience disappeared because of the mob.




Tuesday, December 15, 2020 Changes Definition of 'Court Packing' to Help Democrats finds itself under fire on social media over a recent adjustment of its definition of “court packing,” not that the online dictionary site was deterred, hitting back to defend its actions…

The change was an addition that reads: “the practice of changing the number or composition of judges on a court, making it more favorable to particular goals or ideologies, and typically involving an increase in the number of seats on the court: Court packing can tip the balance of the Supreme Court toward the right or left.”

The original definition, which centered on President Franklin D. Roosevelt’s efforts to add justices to the U.S. Supreme Court, was bumped to the secondary definition.

Cleveland Indians announce plans to ditch controversial nickname

The Cleveland Indians will soon be no more.

Following in the path of the Washington Football Team, Cleveland has decided to remove its nickname many consider racist and insensitive, the New York Times reported.

An official announcement could come as soon as this week, according to the outlet.

Kayo is your ticket to the best sport streaming Live & On-Demand. New to Kayo? Get your 14-day free trial & start streaming instantly >

The 105-year-old “Indians” moniker has for decades drawn ire from Native American groups, and those frustrations became more prevalent with the US in the midst of a reckoning on racism and social injustice following police shootings involving unarmed black men and women.

Two months after the May death of George Floyd, Cleveland joined the Washington Football Team in saying it would consider changing the nickname.

“We are committed to making a positive impact in our community and embrace our responsibility to advance social justice and equality,” the team said in July, regarding the possibility of the name-change.

“Our organisation fully recognises our team name is among the most visible ways in which we connect with the community.”




Sunday, December 13, 2020

YouTube joins the censor squad

YouTube is joining Twitter and Facebook in censoring election fraud speech. With more than 126 million users in the United States, YouTube is by far the largest online video property in the country.

Despite the uncertainty of the outcome of the 2020 election and ongoing legal challenges, including one with the U.S. Supreme Court, YouTube said as of today channels must avoid videos alleging widespread fraud, software glitches or counting errors in the 2020 election.

By deploying algorithms to suppress what in some cases may in fact be disinformation,” Romano explained, “they will invariably wind up also removing legitimate reporting and commentary on the real-life legal challenges currently being waged at the Supreme Court or even commentaries that counter those and other challenges being raised. YouTube can disagree with these legal challenges and say they are baseless as they will soon be settled in short order one way or another, without censoring content about them in a manner designed to suppress public dissent and questions about the legitimacy of the 2020 elections.”

According to a new NPR/PBS NewsHour/Marist survey one-in-three Americans does not trust the outcome of the election.

“This is why alternatives like Rumble and Bitchute are now increasingly being utilized as the public grows tired of Big Tech’s censorship and demand increases for true free speech platforms,” added Romano.

Rumble emerged as a YouTube competitor in 2013. The founder and CEO Chris Pavlovski said unlike YouTube, Rumble treats all creators equally. “We emerged to protect the little creator that was not getting good distribution on their home-based content. That’s our core mission to protect that and bring that value to every creator regardless how big or how small they are.” Since the election, Rumble has grown by 700 percent.

More credit card tyranny

An Urgent Message From Lydia Brimelow To’s Credit Card Donors

I have to report some very bad news: on Friday morning, our payment processor of several years standing abruptly sent us an email announcing that because of "violations" of its Service agreement, which it did not specify, it intends to stop working with us after Sunday, December 13.

At this point, I do not know if will be able to process credit card donations beyond that date.

We all know that these are dark days for America. This is further proof.

We will always accept snail-mailed checks and money orders to PO Box 211, Litchfield CT 06759. Cryptocurrency addresses are also available at

VDARE are a rare voice. They are immigration critics and believe significant race differences exist




Saturday, December 12, 2020

Pornhub: MasterCard, Visa stop payments to porn site amid child abuse scrutiny

First they came for the porn sites. Will they come for the site's customers next? They have the data to do so and could claim that the customers are ultimately to blame

MasterCard and Visa have announced they will suspend payments to Pornhub as the site comes under scrutiny for what it allows on its platform.

Earlier this week exclusively reported the horrific daily searches of victims who are forced to look for videos of their own abuse in the hope of getting it removed from Pornhub.

MasterCard and Visa said they’d look into their financial links to the site’s parent company MindGeek, which owns a network of porn sites that also includes YouPorn and Redtube, after The New York Times published an op-ed with disturbing details of missing children appearing in exploitative videos on the site.

On Thursday, MasterCard and Visa stopped processing payments on Pornhub, according to Reuters.

“Our investigation over the past several days has confirmed violations of our standards prohibiting unlawful content on their site,” MasterCard said in a statement reported by the New York Post.

The NYT’s investigation resulted in changes to Pornhubs policies on Tuesday, with the site pledging to crack down on illegal content. Pornhub said it will impose new restrictions on who can upload videos and a hire new squad of content moderators that will seek out potentially illegal material.

In its biggest change, Pornhub will only allow verified users to upload videos to the site. That privilege is currently restricted to Pornhub’s content partners and members of its “Model Program,” which requires performers to verify their identities by uploading a photo of themselves.

“These actions are exceptionally disappointing, as they come just two days after Pornhub instituted the most far-reaching safeguards in user-generated platform history,” the site said of MasterCard and Visa’s moves.

“This news is crushing for the hundreds of thousands of models who rely on our platform for their livelihoods.”

Complaints about Vicar of Dibley Black Lives Matter episode before it even airs

The BBC has defended a forthcoming episode of The Vicar of Dibley which references Black Lives Matter, after more than 100 people complained before it had even aired.

The episode sees the Reverend Geraldine Kennedy, played by Dawn French, taking the knee and discussing the death of George Floyd.

It is part of a new series of 10-minute films for BBC One, The Vicar of Dibley in Lockdown, which addresses events from the past year.

In a statement, the BBC said: “In The Vicar of Dibley in Lockdown, Geraldine shares with her congregation her take on some of the key stories of 2020, including clapping for the NHS, the Black Lives Matter movement, lockdown, and school exams being cancelled.

“She is a much-loved and well-established comic character and will be seen processing the year’s events in her familiar outspoken and high-spirited way.”

In the episode, Geraldine tells viewers: “I’ve been thinking about this Black Lives Matter thing and the horror-show that was the murder of George Floyd... I’m aware that all lives matter, obviously, but until all lives matter the same we’re doing something very wrong, so I think we need to focus on justice for a huge chunk of our countrymen and women who seem to have a very bad weird deal from the day they’re born.”

The character is then seen pinning a Black Lives Matter poster on the parish noticeboard before taking the knee.




Friday, December 11, 2020

NY leads massive antitrust suit from 48 attorneys general against 'predatory' Facebook to force it to sell Instagram and WhatsApp because it uses its dominance to 'suffocate and squash rivals'

Forty-six states and the Federal Trade Commission have filed massive antitrust lawsuits against Facebook, seeking to force the company to divest major acquisitions such as Instagram and WhatsApp.

One suit filed on Wednesday in U.S. District Court for the District of Columbia is spearheaded by New York Attorney General Letitia James, leading a coalition of 46 states as well as Washington DC and Guam.

The lawsuit alleges that, over the last decade, Facebook illegally acquired potential competitors in a 'predatory' manner in order to dominate the market, and asks the court to consider splitting up the company by unwinding those deals.

Separately, the Federal Trade Commission filed a 53-page complaint against Facebook on Wednesday, also seeking to break up the company.

'Facebook's actions to entrench and maintain its monopoly deny consumers the benefits of competition,' said Ian Conner, Director of the FTC's Bureau of Competition in a statement.

'Our aim is to roll back Facebook's anticompetitive conduct and restore competition so that innovation and free competition can thrive,' he added.

In separate moves, the Justice Department also sued Google in October, accusing the internet giant of abusing its dominance in online search and advertising.

'Chilling and Authoritarian': YouTube Announces How It Plans to Handle Videos Critical of 2020 Election

YouTube announced plans on Wednesday to censor content that challenges 2020’s election results, saying the company will continue to strive to connect people “with authoritative information.”

“Yesterday was the safe harbor deadline for the U.S. Presidential election and enough states have certified their election results to determine a President-elect,” the tech giant said in a blog post. “Given that, we will start removing any piece of content uploaded today (or anytime after) that misleads people by alleging that widespread fraud or errors changed the outcome of the 2020 U.S. Presidential election, in line with our approach towards historical U.S. Presidential elections.

For example, we will remove videos claiming that a Presidential candidate won the election due to widespread software glitches or counting errors. We will begin enforcing this policy today, and will ramp up in the weeks to come. As always, news coverage and commentary on these issues can remain on our site if there’s sufficient education, documentary, scientific or artistic context.”

The company further explained that in addition to “limiting the reach of borderline content” they also “prominently [surfaced] authoritative information.”

While only a small portion of watch time is election-related content, YouTube continues to be an important source of election news. On average 88% of the videos in top 10 search results related to elections came from authoritative news sources (amongst the rest are things like newsy late-night shows, creator videos and commentary). And the most viewed channels and videos are from news channels like NBC and CBS.




Thursday, December 10, 2020

UK: Historical re-enactors have had their Facebook accounts frozen

The accounts of five members of the Wimborne Militia have been disabled, leaving them unable to post photos and content.

Facebook said it was investigating.

In August, the social media platform began taking down or restricting accounts backing right-wing conspiracies and US militia groups.

Wimborne Militia, which currently has about 60 members and recreates historical events such as the Monmouth Rebellion, is well known at local events, such as the annual switching on of the Christmas lights in Wimborne.

With many of its activities cancelled during the pandemic, the group has relied on social media to keep in touch with members and stage virtual events.

While the five members, who were the group's Facebook page administrators, have had their accounts disabled by the social media giant, the page itself remains online.

A spokesman for the Wimborne Militia said: "All we can imagine is that we've been caught up in an algorithm of deleting those pages because we've got 'militia' in our title and we refer to the militia in our personal accounts."

Sacked Eton teacher at centre of free speech row will turn to Parliament in the battle to keep his job if his dismissal is upheld by school's appeal panel

An Eton teacher who was sacked in a row over free speech is taking the fight for his job to Parliament - hoping to call on an unusual type of legislation not used for decades to save his future.

Will Knowland was removed from his post after challenging so-called modern feminist views about 'toxic masculinity' in an online lecture which he prepared for older pupils at the £42,500-a-year school.

The English teacher also quoted an article saying women wanted to be 'overwhelmed by the sheer power of masculinity'.

Yesterday, Mr Knowland attended an appeal hearing chaired by William and Harry's ex-housemaster, but if the original decision is upheld, he will look to a little-known piece of legislation to try and continue the fight, it has now emerged.

Parliament describes Personal Bills as a type of private bill relating to the ‘estate, property, status or style, or otherwise to the personal affairs of an individual’.

Rather than public legislation, which affects everyone in the country equally, private bills are far smaller in scale and only have an impact on specific groups of people.

They have rarely been used in modern times, having last been seen more than 30 years ago in 1987, when they allowed specific couples to marry.

Well before that, however, in the 19th century, a majority of the legislation passed by Parliament was private business.

In a note to supporters, seen by the Telegraph, he said: 'Another way in which I might hope to secure the support of members of both Houses of Parliament is by lodging a petition for a Personal Bill.

'My petition would be to try to secure a Personal Act of Parliament reinstating me as a Master at Eton College. Like any Bill that goes through Parliament, there would be scrutiny by a select committee of my case, and any petition opposing the Bill by the College. Parliament would hear evidence and submissions from counsel.'

Parliament describes Personal Bills as a type of private bill relating to the ‘estate, property, status or style, or otherwise to the personal affairs of an individual’.

Rather than public legislation, which affects everyone in the country equally, private bills are far smaller in scale and only have an impact on specific groups of people.

They have rarely been used in modern times, having last been seen more than 30 years ago in 1987, when they allowed specific couples to marry.

Well before that, however, in the 19th century, a majority of the legislation passed by Parliament was private business.

The main categories were public works and transport schemes, such as railways, waterways and harbours, permissions for divorce, and the settlement of estates.




Monday, December 07, 2020

England rugby coach Eddie Jones was 'embarrassed' in front of Eton pupils after teacher chastised him for saying players needed to display 'manliness'

The coach, 60, was responding to a question from a pupil during an event at the £42,500-a-year-school near Windsor, in Berkshire.

A female staff member told Mr Jones that she thought it was an 'inappropriate word' with the ex-rugby player 'letting it go', according to a parent.

A parent told The Times: 'A staff member embarrassed Eddie in front of the boys, saying she thought this an inappropriate word.

'Eddie behaved as a gentleman and let the moment go, but the night was soured.

'The boys were furious at such an open breach of the school's tradition of intellectual hospitality.'

Meanwhile, another parent added that he was respectfully asked to define manliness and that such questions are a necessary part of the events.

Etsy Bans Pro-Trump Slogan in Wake of Contested Election

This week, Etsy reportedly banned pro-Trump “Stop the Steal” merchandise while allowing sellers to list merchandise with the originally anti-Trump slogan “Not My President.” Etsy has claimed that “Stop the Steal” merchandise “promotes or endorses harmful misinformation,” even though President Donald Trump is contesting the 2020 election results.

“Trump Derangement Syndrome strikes crafters AGAIN. My friend Deplorable Knitter told me her [Stop the Steal] hats have been banned on Etsy,” journalist Michelle Malkin reported on Twitter. “Here’s the email notification from Etsy: ‘Certain types of content are not appropriate for the Etsy marketplace. This includes content that promotes or endorses harmful misinformation, including items that can obstruct election integrity.”

“The US election is a major focus for many Etsy buyers and sellers right now, and we understand that members of our community are interested in commemorating this election with items that display the election results,” the Etsy email continued. “Now that a projected winner of the US presidential election has been announced, contradictory declarations of victory or content that disputes the validity of the outcome may be considered harmful misinformation and will be removed in order to minimize confusion about the election outcome.”

At the same time, it is also premature to claim that “Stop the Steal” is entirely false and “harmful misinformation.” While the narrative is unlikely, it may prove true.

Finally, if Etsy is going to police election “misinformation,” why does it allow the “Not My President” slogan? While the claim that Trump is “not my president” may be a personal declaration of someone’s feelings about the president, it also suggests that Trump is somehow illegitimate.




Saturday, December 05, 2020

Leftist hate speech OK

Leftists say many hateful things about whites but that is OK

Facebook has de-prioritized removing hateful slurs against white people, men and Americans, instead focusing on blocking slurs against black people, gays, Jews and other groups.

The change on Thursday in Facebook's algorithm is a shift from the social network's 'race-blind' system that previously removed anti-white insults as well posts such as 'men are dumb' or 'Americans are stupid.'

The changes are to the social network's automated systems, meaning hateful posts about whites, men or Americans that are reported by users can still be deleted if they violate Facebook policies.

'We know that hate speech targeted towards under-represented groups can be the most harmful, which is why we have focused our technology on finding the hate speech that users and experts tell us is the most serious,' said Facebook spokeswoman Sally Aldous.

Roughly 10,000 fewer posts are now being deleted each day after the change in policy, according to documents reported by the Washington Post.

Over the past year, Facebook has also updated its policies to catch more implicit hate speech, such as depictions of blackface and stereotypes about Jewish people, Aldous noted.

'Thanks to significant investments in our technology we proactively detect 95 percent of the content we remove and we continue to improve how we enforce our rules as hate speech evolves over time,' Aldous said.

The software tweak will initially target the most blatant slurs, including those against black people, Muslims, people of more than one race, the LGBTQ community and Jews, Facebook said.

BBC's 'woke dictionary' to stop staff causing offence: Staff will be given language guide to help 'rewire' the corporation and avoid upsetting viewers and listeners

BBC staff will be given a language guide to help them avoid offending viewers and listeners.

The move is part of plans to increase staff diversity and improve the portrayal of under-represented groups on screen.

Director-general Tim Davie said the initiative was ‘mission-critical’ and decisions about the use of language needed to be made by ‘a diverse group of people’.

A BBC reporter sparked a row – and 18,500 complaints – earlier this year by using the N-word in a crime story.

The corporation also apologised for broadcasting the same offensive term on a BBC2 programme called American History’s Biggest Fibs.

June Sarpong, BBC director of creative diversity, said the language guide would be published in January ‘offering our creative teams support’.

She added: ‘It’s not in any way saying they have to use this terminology, but it’s offering them support in terms of the kind of language that doesn’t cause offence.’

Mr Davie said the BBC needed a ‘rewiring of the core’ so that it would be ‘overt and direct that we are an anti-racist organisation’.




Thursday, December 03, 2020

Now theology teacher at Eton claims 'pupils are being indoctrinated' as he relinquishes role of head of 'perspectives' classes after sacking of 'sexism row' English tutor

A teacher at Eton College has attacked the ‘progressive ideology’ that he feels pupils are being ‘indoctrinated’ with at the elite school.

Dr Luke Martin has resigned from his role as head of ‘perspectives’ classes after his colleague Will Knowland was sacked over a controversial lecture on gender roles intended for one of these lessons.

The theology teacher accused Head Master Simon Henderson of presiding over an atmosphere of ‘religious fundamentalism’, where deviations can lead to mockery or ‘formal discipline’.

Mr Knowland, an English teacher, had wanted to deliver a questionable lecture to boys in which he cited incorrect statistics about rape and approvingly quoted an article saying women wanted to be ‘overwhelmed by the sheer power of masculinity’.

The talk, called the Patriarchy Paradox, was never used in a class but was uploaded to Mr Knowland’s personal YouTube page, where there is also a video of him weightlifting.

Mr Knowland refused to take down the video and was sacked, but has since raised tens of thousands of pounds to support an employment tribunal.

Many pupils are demanding his reinstatement, including a boy who was sent home after writing to Mr Henderson demanding that the head resign. But other figures, including Harvard psychologist Steven Pinker, who initially supported Mr Knowland, have distanced themselves after being told the actual content of his lecture.

Dr Martin, in his letter posted online by a supporter of Mr Knowland, said he was resigning from leading perspectives classes.

He said he did not agree with Mr Knowland’s remarks, but added: ‘Why should I? The point of perspectives is that boys are exposed to various perspectives, some of which they will disagree with.’ He said that Mr Knowland had expected another member of staff to give a talk offering the opposite point of view, but a female teacher had ‘declined the invitation’.

Dr Martin argued that Mr Henderson was overseeing a ‘worrying trend’ at the £42,500-a-year school, which counts princes William and Harry among its old boys.

He added: ‘There is a growing promotion of a so-called “progressive” ideology, that claims to be inclusive, tolerant, and kind.

‘But what has dawned on me over the last few years is that it is remarkably similar, in a particular respect, to the forms of religious fundamentalism that I’m familiar with. If you disagree with it, you’re excluded; if you think differently, you’re not tolerated; and if you raise objections, you’re mocked or face formal discipline.

Nike anti-racism advert in Japan sparks calls to BOYCOTT the company: Ad is accused of unfairly representing bigotry in the country

An amazingly stupid advertisement

A Nike advert highlighting racism and bullying in Japan has led to calls for a boycott from angry viewers who say it gives an unfair portrayal of the country.

The two-minute commercial shows a girl in Korean dress being stared at by passing businessmen and a girl with a black father being harassed by classmates who touch her hair, before the teenagers go on to find their confidence through football.

Tennis star Naomi Osaka, who was born in Japan to a Japanese mother and Haitian father and has been the victim of racial insensitivity in the country, also makes a cameo appearance in the advert.

But after racking up millions of views online, the advert has led to a backlash from Japanese people who say it makes them look 'foolish' and accused the American firm of 'creating a false impression of Japan'.

The Japanese-language clip, titled 'Keep Moving: Yourself, the Future', drew thousands of likes and dislikes on the firm's Japanese YouTube channel.

Some critics accused the sportswear company of anti-Japanese sentiment, while others claimed they would never buy from Nike again.

'Is Japan really such a country full of discrimination? It feels like you're creating a false impression of Japan,' said one viewer.




Tuesday, December 01, 2020

A hate-filled war on press freedom

Earlier this month in Scotland, John McLellan of the Scottish Newspaper Society (and a former editor of the Scotsman) told the Holyrood Justice Committee, which is looking at the hate-speech provisions of the wretched Hate Crime and Public Order (Scotland) Bill, a good deal about the practicalities of running a newspaper.

As the bill stands, it would make ‘stirring up hatred’ against certain groups a criminal offence. And the media would not be exempt. They would therefore be required to act more carefully in sensitive areas – such as race, transgender status, disability (including mental illness) and so on – so as to avoid publishing anything that might be deemed to be ‘stirring up hatred’.

McLellan countered, saying that newspapers work to short deadlines and on low budgets. When they publish accounts of what others have said, or controversial opinion pieces, they are high-profile targets for complaints from pressure groups and the disgruntled.

If lawmakers get their way, then newspapers will be forced to play safe so as to avoid legal sanction. The only way to avoid this situation, McLellan argued, would be to treat the press differently under the new legislation, and protect press freedom.

McLellan is right, even if his message was received by the members of the Holyrood Justice Committee with little more than the stony politeness of those convinced of their own utter rectitude.

Meanwhile in London, the press is fighting a similar fight, this time against the Law Commission’s proposals to extend the categories of criminal hate speech, previously dissected by Joanna Williams in spiked here. As the Free Speech Union and others have pointed out, the expanded hate-speech categories will make life very hard indeed for newspapers, radio, TV and online media who choose not to play safe and avoid controversy.

Currently, with one exception, you are only guilty of a crime in communicating offensive material if you intend to foment hatred by doing it. This makes a media outlet safe in carrying an op-ed by someone with very strong views on, say, LGBT issues, or reporting in detail on someone else’s inflammatory public outburst on the subject of Islam. So long as it does not openly support those views and leaves readers free to make up their own minds whether they agree, they do not have the necessary intent and are therefore safe from the police knock on the office door.

The same principle also safeguards publications like spiked, which regularly publishes online interviews with people whose strong views are pretty likely to cause complaints and demands for police action from at least some of the woke.

The current exception is race. All that has to be shown for charges to be brought is that the media outlet had reason to know that an interview, comment or report was ‘likely to’ provoke offence. It is because of this exception that the Met was able to haul in Darren Grimes, not for what he had said or written, but over his failure to cut David Starkey’s views on slavery and black people out of the podcast interview he produced in July.

Unfortunately, the Law Commission now wants to apply this ‘likely to’ logic not simply to race but to all hate speech: sexual orientation, transgender status, sex and disability (including mental illness). And if you thought the commission was not targeting the media here, you’re in for a shock. Its consultation paper gives the specific example of a religious broadcaster that broadcasts bought-in material, does not check it thoroughly and as a result broadcasts a statement from some fanatic that all apostates deserve death; it then treats it as obvious that the station obviously ought to be guilty of a serious criminal offence.

This is worrying. For one thing, the commission’s proposal goes even further than the Darren Grimes case. Grimes at least knew what Starkey had said; the Law Commission wants to criminalise a broadcaster who was not even aware that objectionable material was there. If these provisions come into force, the effect on the media generally is not hard to see. Whenever a paper carries an op-ed on a sensitive subject from someone with controversial views it will be taking a risk; many smaller operators will simply not dare to do this, and will prefer to play it as safe as possible.

Or, if some boneheaded religious fanatic says something provocative, the media will not be able easily to report what actually was said. It will have to choose between not reporting it at all (the safe option), or telling its readers that they will have to make do with a bowdlerised version. In so far as a newspaper distributes a book or pamphlet, it will apparently have to vet it carefully in case it contains inflammatory material. And so on.

This is objectionable. It amounts to a patrician demand to use the criminal law to purge the news media of dangerous ideas, and further to coerce them into taking positive steps to prevent the inadvertent spreading of such ideas. It also implies that you and I cannot be trusted to decide for ourselves what we think about certain ideas.

'It's not about free speech... it's about internal discipline': Eton College's provost defends sacking of teacher

Eton last night defended its decision to sack an English teacher following a dispute over a lecture.

A freedom of speech row erupted at the elite £42,500-a-year school after pupils revolted following the sacking of Will Knowland.

More than 1,000 children have so far signed a petition calling for his reinstatement amid claims he was subject to the ultimate censorship over the planned lecture in which he was due to question 'current radical feminist orthodoxy'.

The lecture was posted on Mr Knowland's personal YouTube channel, but not delivered to pupils as he intended.

Addressing the issue for the first time, Eton provost Lord Waldegrave, who is chairman of the school's governing body, said matters had been distorted, insisting: 'Eton will never cancel debate.'

The former Tory Cabinet minister defended the 580-year-old school's record on free speech.

He said two barristers had found that the lecture on Mr Knowland's YouTube channel broke equality law and regulations governing independent schools.

The peer said Eton was left with no choice after Mr Knowland allegedly refused six times to remove it while a solution was found, and he was dismissed for gross misconduct – a decision that is now under appeal.

Mr Knowland's lecture, entitled The Patriarchy Paradox, would have been delivered as part of a course taken by older pupils to encourage critical thinking.

The English master, who has taught at Eton for nine years, suggested that science and history offer evidence that masculine virtues, such as strength and courage, can be beneficial to women, families and society.

'I explained to the Head Master that I wasn't endorsing all the ideas in my lecture, but I wanted the boys to be made aware of a different point of view to the current radical feminist orthodoxy.'

Professor Steven Pinker, a psychology expert at Harvard in the US, said: 'For a teacher to be fired for discussing findings backed by scientific evidence – even if they are controversial and some may prove to be mistaken – is an assault on the values that every educational institution should hold dear.'