Woman Professor Claims Alt-Right Memes Dangerous to Democracy

A woman professor, Sophia A. McClennen, laments the legacy media’s loss of its monopoly on the production of propaganda.

She claims that alt-right Internet memes, such as the Trump Tweet showing him body slamming CNN, are dangerous. That’s pseudointellectual nonsense coming from a woman professor who will probably receive a raise and promotion for writing this shallow piece.

I’ve excerpted about a third of it.

Excerpt from Salon

Forget fake news — alt-right memes could do more damage to democracy

As BuzzFeed notes, there is “a sprawling new universe of far-right internet personalities who have aligned themselves with a ‘new right’ or ‘alt-right’ or ‘new far-right’ political youth movement in the US.” This group is interested in moving their trolling into the real world.

Whether on Reddit or YouTube or another form of social media these alt-right rants share a few key beliefs. As Malia Rolt explains in a piece on YouTube and the alt-right, those posting right-wing hate speech “all believe that the media is untrustworthy and political correctness has gone too far, and see advocacy for equality for all as a threat to freedom of speech.”

The issue of freedom of speech and social media, of course, is a tricky issue since all of the platforms have rules and restrictions over the sort of content they allow. And yet, there is some evidence to suggest that the application of those rules may indeed favor aggressive speech by the right more than from other quarters.

For instance, a report from ProPublica suggests that Facebook’s internal rules for censoring hate speech is biased to favor both the right and celebrity users. In contrast, “Facebook users who don’t mince words in criticizing racism and police killings of racial minorities say that their posts are often taken down.”

They compare two posts. One by a U.S. congressman who wrote a post after a terrorist attack in London that called for the slaughter of “radicalized” Muslims. “Hunt them, identify them, and kill them,” declared U.S. Rep. Clay Higgins, a Louisiana Republican. “Kill them all. For the sake of all that is good and righteous. Kill them all.” And one by Boston poet and Black Lives Matter activist DiDi Delgado: “All white people are racist. Start from this reference point, or you’ve already failed.”

Delgado’s post was removed and her Facebook account was disabled for seven days. Higgins’ post was untouched. Such practices certainly suggest deep political biases in the ways that Facebook censors users.

All of this combines to suggest that, while each social media platform has a different identity and different content rules, there is increasing evidence that right-wing hate speech is growing in power and force across the major social media platforms and into everyday life.

What this week’s Trump Twitter war against the mainstream news media teaches us is that CNN should be worried — but not about Trump’s attacks, rather about the fact that an increasing number of U.S. citizens are forming their political ideas based on alt-right rants, and not on anything that even remotely resembles information.

Microchip has been banned from Twitter over 100 times. He’s far from alone. Recall that MILO was permanently banned and has never come back. Microchip gets back on via trickery until Twitter discovers he’s back, when they ban him again.

The point is that the rules do not favor the alt-right. Another point is that the media is obviously not trustworthy.

McClennan’s essay starts with the wrong premise. The only way to break the media monopoly is through alternative media, citizen journalism, taking matters one Tweet, comment, and blog post at a time.

The “fake news” phrase has come into widespread use for a reason and if the professor doesn’t acknowledge that, she’s either stupid or lying.

LOOKS LIKE PROFESSOR MCCLENNEN WAS A BERNIE SUPPORTER.

Germany Legalizes Sodomite Marriage After Merkel Allows Vote

GERMAN WEIRDOS CELEBRATE THEIR NEW RIGHT.

According to the BBC, polls say that 83 percent of Germans support sodomite marriage.

When a country goes full retard, it goes all the way.

Historically, sodomy was illegal, a “crime against nature.”

A good historian could probably make the case that civilizations that engage in mass degeneracy do not long survive.

When Germany is under Muslim control, this law will be repealed and those who supported it will be thrown off rooftops along with all the sodomite couples who have marriage licenses.

Maybe the legalization is a good thing. It’ll make it easier for the Imams to identify the fags.

Excerpt from the BBC

A clear majority of German MPs have voted to legalise same-sex marriage, days after Chancellor Angela Merkel dropped her opposition to a vote.

The reform gives gay men and lesbians full marital rights, and allows them to adopt children.

At present, same-sex couples are limited to civil unions.

Mrs Merkel’s political opponents were strongly in favour. But Mrs Merkel, who gave MPs the go-ahead for a free vote only on Monday, voted against.

The measure was backed by 393 lawmakers, while 226 voted against and four abstained.

The German legal code will now read: “Marriage is entered into for life by two people of different or the same sex”, AFP news agency reported.

How did Merkel prompt the vote?

During her 2013 election campaign, Mrs Merkel argued against gay marriage on the grounds of “children’s welfare,” and admitted that she had a “hard time” with the issue.

But at an event hosted by the women’s magazine “Brigitte” on 26 June, she shocked the German media by announcing on stage that she had noted other parties’ support for it, and would allow a free vote in the future.

The usually-cautious chancellor said she had had a “life-changing experience” in her home constituency, where she had dinner with a lesbian couple who cared for eight foster children together.

As the news spread on Twitter, supporters rallied under the hashtag #EheFuerAlle (MarriageForAll) – and started calling for a vote as soon as possible.

Following Friday’s vote, Mrs Merkel said that for her marriage was between a man and a woman. But she said she hoped the passing of the bill would lead to more “social peace”.

Rachel Maddow Denies Contact with GOP Shooter, but Segment Does Not Air in Rerun

If you like mysteries, here’s one for you.

James Hodgkinson, the GOP Congressional shooter, was a big fan of Rachel Maddow. As we’ve noted in an earlier post, Maddow was one of a dozen or more celebrity pundits who helped radicalize the shooter.

Of course, now everyone is saying that they are against violence, when all they’ve been doing is feeding the leftist nut jobs around the USA the lie that Trump stole the election and that he’s the new Hitler.

To repeat a line that became famous during the Watergate affair, modified to fit: “What did Rachel Maddow know and when did she know it?

Breitbart

Wednesday on MSNBC’s “The Rachel Maddow Show,” host Rachel Maddow reacted to news that James Hodgkinson, the now-deceased alleged shooter in an incident that has resulted in five people hospitalized, including House Majority Whip Rep. Steve Scalise (R-LA), was a fan of her program.

Maddow referenced a Hodgkinson letter to the editor that appeared in the July 29, 2012 edition of the Belleview (IL) News-Democrat, but denied having received correspondence Hodgkinson.

“[H]e once submitted a letter to the editor that cited statistics about political donations that he says he heard on this TV show because he said he watched this TV show,” she said. “I should tell you we went through our correspondence today as soon as we got his name, as soon as we got that detail about him. We didn’t find evidence he ever sent anything to this show or tried to contact us at all.”

During the re-air of her program at 12 a.m. ET, the segment did not air. Instead, the opening segment was a replay of a May 26 segment about allegations of President Donald Trump and his associates having ties with the Russian government.

The mystery is why the denial did not air when the show repeated later in the evening. Could it be that in fact there was contact between Maddow or her show and the shooter?

There needs to be a special prosecutor appointed to investigate the links between the mainstream media and Hodgkinson. There’s more smoke here than the is for the ridiculous Trump allegations about ties to Russia.

A special prosecutor should be given the resources to investigate all of Maddow’s shows for the last two years. Ditto the shows featuring Stephen Colbert, John Stewart, and others. The question at hand is whether these pundits dished out fake news that incited the shooter to go on his rampage.

What does the consumption of the type of anti-Trump material pedaled by the likes of Maddow over extended periods of time do to the already warped mind of a leftist?

Journalists who produce fake news, actors who produce fake Shakespeare featuring Trump’s assassination, and comedians who hold up bloody heads should all be investigated and held accountable.

It wouldn’t surprise me in the least that people on Maddow’s show had contact with the shooter, encouraging him in his radical thinking.

Let’s get to the truth for a change.

FBI Refuses To Hand Over “Comey Memos” To Congress

The FBI is stalling in providing the evidence requested by a Congressional committee. That slow walk is giving more time for President Donald Trump’s enemies to continue their daily unrelenting smear jobs on him. The goal is his removal from office.

While Trump’s overseas trip has been a yuuuuge success in spite of the press sniping at him, events back home show that while the cats been away the mice have been at play.

Zerohedge

House Oversight Committee Chairman Jason Chaffetz said today that the FBI had decided to withhold documents, including memos, notes, summaries, and recordings, requested by his committee in regards to the ongoing Russia probe. This was revealed in a letter sent by Chaffetz to the FBI responding to the agency’s decision to withhold documents requested by the Committee on May 16, 2017.

The FBI’s denial to cooperate is presented below:

According to a statement [5]by the Oversight Committee, “Chaffetz requested memos, notes, summaries, and recordings to assist in the Committee’s investigation of the FBI’s independence, and which are outside the scope of the Special Counsel’s investigation.”

The documents are due June 8, 2017, but that may not happen as it appears the FBI is suddenly unwilling to cooperate.

As Chaffetz elaborates, after a New York Times report that former Federal Bureau of Investigation Director James Corney memorialized the content of phone calls and meetings with the President in a series of memoranda, he requested those memoranda and any related notes, summaries, and recordings. The FBI is withholding those documents, citing to the appointment of Robert Mueller as Special Prosecutor. According to a letter from your staff: “In light of this development and other considerations [the Bureau] is undertaking appropriate consultation to ensure all relevant interest implicated by your request are properly evaluated.

The letter states:

“The Committee has its own, Constitutionally-based prerogative to conduct investigations. But the Committee in no way wants to impede or interfere with the Special Counsel’s ability to conduct his investigation. In fact, the Committee’s investigation will complement the work of the Special Counsel. Whereas the Special Counsel is conducting a criminal or counterintelligence investigation that will occur largely behind closed doors, the Committee’s work will shed light on matters of high public interest, regardless of whether there is evidence of criminal conduct.

“The focus of the Committee’s investigation is the independence of the FBI, including conversations between the President and Comey and the process by which Comey was removed from his role as director. The records being withheld are central to those questions, even more so in light of Comey’s decision not to testify before the Committee at this time.”

“I am seeking to better understand Comey’s communications with the White House and Attorney General in such a way that does not implicate the Special Counsel’s work.”

As Chaffetz concludes, “Congress and the American public have a right and a duty to examine this issue independently of the Special Counsel’s investigation. I trust and hope you understand this and make the right decision-to produce these documents to the Committee immediately and on a voluntary basis.”

The American public is certainly looking forward to the FBI’s release of the full content of the Comey’s memos, not only those relating to his meetings with Trump, but just as importantly, with Loretta Lynch, as well as Barack Obama and/or Hillary Clinton.

Have the paper shredders at the FBI been working overtime. Are computers being wiped clean?

Comey gave Hillary Clinton a free pass for her crimes. What do the Clintons have on him.

Perhaps as I am writing these words, Comey is writing his memos, which will contain false allegations against Trump.

While it’s impossible for anyone outside the immediate circle to know the details for sure, the broad outline is one of corruption in the FBI with a strong incentive to take down Trump to keep business going as usual.

If the FBI were an honest operation, they would have tracked down the parties engaging in criminal leaks designed to bring down Trump. It can’t be that hard to do.

DID HE REALLY WRITE MEMOS? WHERE ARE THEY?

Comey has a strategy when the memos can’t be produced:

Louisiana House Votes to Block Removal of New Orleans Confederate Monuments, Negros Stage Walkout

JEFFERSON DAVIS MONUMENT REMOVED IN NEW ORLEANS.

Butthurt black legislators staged a walkout in Baton Rouge, Louisiana on Monday, thus raising the average IQ of the Louisiana House of Representatives by at least 10 points.

The walkout was over a bill that would require a vote by locals before any war monuments on public land could be removed

The Advocate

The Louisiana House approved legislation Monday aimed at blocking the removal of Confederate monuments, causing the 24-member Legislative Black Caucus to walk out.

A largely party-line 65-31 vote followed an emotionally charged two hours of debate and comes as the majority-black New Orleans is taking down statues of figures from the Civil War’s Confederacy.

“It was disgusting. We just couldn’t stay,” said Black Caucus member Rep. Terry Landry, D-Lafayette, while waiting in the hall for an aide to get his glasses and cellphone from his desk in the chamber. “You have to stand for something.”

The measure now goes to the state Senate for consideration. Two other proposals with similar objectives — House Bill 292 and Senate Bill 198 — are awaiting a hearing in committees.

House Bill 71 would forbid the removal, renaming or alteration of any military monument of any war, including what is referred to in the bill as the “War Between the States,” that is situated on public property unless a majority of the voters in the municipality or parish approve.

All wars were mentioned in the measure, but the debate focused only on Confederate monuments.

“The monuments you seek to protect are deeply offensive to African-Americans and to Christians,” said state Rep. Katrina Jackson, D-Monroe. “Do they have any monuments to (Adolf) Hitler in Germany?”

“This bill is very much about white supremacy and divisiveness,” said Rep. Patricia Smith, a Democrat who represents a Baton Rouge district that includes the State Capitol and which is 62 percent African-American.

State Rep. Thomas Carmody Jr., a Shreveport Republican who sponsored HB71, said his legislation “is only about allowing the public to decide.” He said he was trying to protect Southern history and heritage. He also said he believes in secession and that the Civil War was not fought by the Confederacy to protect slavery.

An advisory committee in Shreveport, a black-majority city, has been holding hearings on the future of a Confederate memorial in front of the Caddo Parish courthouse. Carmody’s predominantly south Shreveport district is 88 percent white.

Even if the bill passes the Senate and is signed into law, Carmody said that because of the timing, his legislation probably would not halt the two-year effort to remove four monuments that many in New Orleans find objectionable.

“It’s offensive to bring to the middle of my city,” said Democratic Rep. Gary Carter, of New Orleans, “monuments to those who fought for my enslavement.”

Carmody replied that voters could approve, in a scheduled election, the choice made by their City Council.

“This is the worst thing I’ve ever seen done in this building,” said Rep. Ted James, D-Baton Rouge.

Democratic and African-American representatives pursued the strategy of attempting to flood the legislation with amendments, all of which House Speaker Taylor Barras, R-New Iberia, shot down as not being germane to a bill that required a vote on removing Confederate military statues. The speaker’s rulings were sustained on near party-line votes.

“I don’t know why in a session where we can’t balance a budget,” said Democratic Rep. Sam Jones, a former Franklin mayor, “we are here today to refight the Civil War.”

Jones attempted to amend the legislation to include a minimum wage. State Rep. Barbara Carpenter, D-Baton Rouge, then tried to amend the bill to allow local elections on equal pay.

Ten legislators spoke against the legislation. Carmody was the only representative who spoke in favor of it.

HB71, Carmody said over and over again, was about holding an election for any effort to remove a war-related monument. But it was New Orleans and four Confederate statues at the center of the debate.

A marker commemorating the Battle of Liberty Place, a civilian uprising against local government, which formerly had white supremacist wording, was taken down in the middle of the night April 24. A memorial to Jefferson Davis, the Confederate president, was removed Thursday.

Muh feelz.

We should have picked our own cotton.

SLAVERY IN AMERICA YESTERDAY.

SLAVERY IN AFRICA TODAY.

Olbermann Appeals to Foreign Governments to Help Overthrow Trump to Save Democracy

Watch! Seven minutes of madness from Keith Olbermann, inviting foreign powers to do what is necessary to remove President Donald J. Trump, now dictator of the U.S., from office.

American News X

In an appeal to intelligence agencies around the world, Keith Olbermann of the Resistance has said it clearly and loudly: We American citizens are the victims of a coup, one that has taken out our top intelligence agency with a summary and suspect firing of its head. He asked them for information, as we have heard for months they all have damning intel that we need to defeat this coup. But, did this outcry go too far, is his request for information from foreign intelligence services by any means necessary pushing the limits of what he should have done?

Published on May 11, 2017

It’s time to lay bare what is known about Donald Trump.

Olbermann’s followers suffer from Trump Derangement Syndrome.

Trump will go to federal prison. The Russian connection is getting darker and darker. The FBI raided the GOP campaign consultant office in Annapolis today.

Thank you Keith Olbermann, this was an historical speech! You’ve should become präsident!

We have a Dictator in the White House, Period!

Trump has dementia.

I can’t believe I am thinking this: I am looking forward to Mike Pence as the US President.

Trump is becoming a dictator the Republicans need to do something about it if they really care about the American folk

I’m all for impeaching trump given the many laws he has broken. He belongs in jail for numerious crimes. Yet, I can’t help but wonder, who becomes president? Pence? he’s just as much a bond villain as the legion of doom that Trump has placed into power. We need to get rid of his entire cabinet. How can we do that legally?

I guess all of these people forgot that Bill Clinton fired his FBI Director in 1993.

Stefan Molyneaux Critiques Third World Immigration–Endorses Marine Le Pen (Video)

France votes tomorrow. Stefan advocates France for the French. There’s seven minutes of logic here that includes analogies that might not have occurred to you before.

Published on Apr 21, 2017

On April 23rd, the latest battle against globalism takes center stage as France goes the polls to decide it’s future, choosing between Marine Le Pen, Emmanuel Macron, François Fillon and Jean-Luc Mélenchon.