Muzzie Dog-Hating Woman Prof Dragged Off Plane is Criminally Charged

ANILA DAULATZAI. DOGS SMELL BETTER THAN HER.

I think you will enjoy watching an entitled Muzzie bitch get hers (very gently, though) from local police. Heavy has the scoop on her background. She’s an ex-Harvard professor of Islamic Studies, currently at a university in Maryland. She studies violence in Muslim countries.

She claims to have a dog allergy. Doubtful. I think she’s an America-hating, dog-hating maggot who should be deported over this incident.

San Diego Union Tribune

Charges have been filed against a college professor who was dragged off a Southwest Airlines flight after she complained she was allergic to two dogs that were onboard.

Anila Daulatzai, who is a socio-cultural anthropologist at the Maryland Institute of Art, is facing numerous counts including disorderly conduct, according to the Los Angeles Times.

She was asked to leave the Southwest flight that was heading from Baltimore to Los Angeles on Tuesday night after she complained that she was allergic to the animals, one of them an emotional support dog and the other a pet.

She told the crew that the allergy was life-threatening and she demanded that they provide her with an EpiPen, Southwest spokesman Chris Mainz said. We do not have or administer shots,” he said to the Times.

Daulatzai, who the airline described as “uncooperative,” also did not have the medical certificate necessary for her to continue on the flight.

The video of the incident begins with a blurry shot of three officers talking to the woman who was near the back of the jet.

“What are you doing?” “My dad has surgery. What are you doing?” she screams at the officers who are trying to get her to move after the captain of the flight ordered her to disembark. ‘C’mon lady, let’s go,” replies one of the officers.

She then stops and says she “needs to close her pants,” and she follows that by accusing one officer of “trying to rip her pants off.”

As they continue to pull and push her toward the exit, she declares that she will walk amid admonishments to the officers “not to touch her” and to “stop it.”

Passengers who are watching chime in, some yelling at the woman to “show them that you’re walking.” One man declares, “Jeez, lady, get off the plane!”

“They spent a long time talking to the woman, explaining what the situation was, trying to work with her,” said Bill Dumas, who taped the commotion, to CBS LA. “The pilot said they wouldn’t leave until it got resolved.”

Southwest issued a statement after the incident.

“We are disheartened by the way this situation unfolded and the customer’s removal by local law enforcement officers. We publicly offer our apologies to this customer for her experience and we will be contacting her directly to address her concerns.”

According to the airline’s policy regarding customers with disabilities, if the company is notified at the gate that a passenger has an allergy to animals they will be seated as far away from the animal as possible. It goes on to state that the airline is required by law to transport assistance and emotional support animals and that they do not have to caged. Pets must be contained in carriers.

Besides disorderly conduct, Daulatzai was charged with failure to obey a reasonable and lawful order, disturbing the peace, obstruction of a police officer and resisting arrest, the Times reported.

Lt. Kevin Ayd of the Maryland Transportation Police told the newspaper that Daulatzai made an appearance in court and was then released on her own recognizance.

Even if I didn’t like dogs, they smell and behave better than sand roaches. They should have dragged this one’s sorry Harvard a** back to the Middle East.

Here’s the charges, via the link to Heavy:

LOL.

Are All Jews Socialists, Progressives, Communists, Left-Liberals, Bernie and Hillary Supporters, Democrats, Marxists? “No!” Says Jewish Professor

Libertarian professor Walter Block, a Jew, is asked in an email about his feelings toward Jews.

Is Dr. Block antisemitic because he detests almost ALL Jews?

Read and decide for yourself.

Lew Rockwell

Are All Jews Socialists, Progressives, Communists, Left-Liberals, Bernie and Hillary Supporters, Democrats, Marxists? No!

From: Robert Ferguson [mailto:robert30062@gmail.com]
Sent: Monday, September 11, 2017 6:53 PM
To: Walter Block
Subject: Anti-Semitism

I have to say Dr. Block, that I have deep feelings of resentment toward Zionist Jews. From Mayer Rothschild to Bernanke and Soros, I have serious problems. I have liked Ben Shapiro for a few years. Wow what a brilliant young man he is. But I just read an article that was linked on LRC in which he said that Yasser Arafat was “the most notorious thug of the 20th century”. What does that even mean? Certainly other men in the 20th century were more thug like and more notorious? Maybe Truman dropping the bomb perhaps? It’s that kind of thing that bothers me. I think you are Jewish, so I am reaching out in need of guidance on this. R.F

Dear Robert: I have great resentment not to Zionist Jews, but to virtually ALL Jews. Why? Because most of them are socialists, progressives, communitst, liberals, Bernie and Hillary supporters, Democrats; ugh. As it happens, I am myself Jewish. I’m not practicing, but I was born to Jewish parents, I was bar-mitzvahed, and when and if the next Hitler comes along, I will be undoubtedly on his list. But I don’t resent ALL Jews. Some of us are leaders in the freedom movement. Just to name a few:

Gary Becker,
Walter E. Block,
Nathaniel Brandon,
Alan Bock,
Frank Chodorov,
Aaron Director,
Michael Edelstein,
Gene Epstein,
Marcus Epstein,
Richard Epstein,
Lanny Freidlander,
David D. Friedman,
Milton Friedman,
Rose Friedman,
Steve Globerman,
David Gordon,
Gary Greenberg,
Ron Hamowy,
Steve Horwitz
Israel Kirzner,
Ludwig Lachmann,
Michael Levin,
Ludwig von Mises,
Victor Niederhoffer,
Robert Nozick,
Leonard Piekoff,
Dyanne Petersen,
Ayn Rand,
David Ricardo,
Howard Rich,
Murray Rothbard,
Aaron Russo,
Murray Sabrin,
Anna Schwartz,
Bernie Seigan,
Arthur Seldon
Julian Simon,

Unhappily, Jews of this sort are if not rarer than hen’s teeth, almost as rare. Not all of these Jews would consider themselves libertarians. The Objectivists would certainly reject this appellation. But, none of them, not a single one, were, or would have been, socialists, progressives, communists, left-liberals, Bernie and Hillary supporters, Democrats, Marxists.

If anyone can add to this list of mine, or correct it in any other way, please do so. Note, I do not include those who consider themselves to be conservatives and certainly not, equally ugh, neo-cons.

The professor’s list omits Laura Loomer. LOL.

New Artificial Intelligence Computer Algorithm Can Tell Whether You’re a Sodomite from a Photograph

Today, we don’t need our human built-in gaydar or artificial intelligence to tell us who’s a sodomite and who isn’t.

They get in your face and do everything possible to make it obvious, including telling you unwanted stories of anal sex.

The Guardian

Artificial intelligence can accurately guess whether people are gay or straight based on photos of their faces, according to new research that suggests machines can have significantly better “gaydar” than humans.

The study from Stanford University – which found that a computer algorithm could correctly distinguish between gay and straight men 81% of the time, and 74% for women – has raised questions about the biological origins of sexual orientation, the ethics of facial-detection technology, and the potential for this kind of software to violate people’s privacy or be abused for anti-LGBT purposes.

The machine intelligence tested in the research, which was published in the Journal of Personality and Social Psychology and first reported in the Economist, was based on a sample of more than 35,000 facial images that men and women publicly posted on a US dating website. The researchers, Michal Kosinski and Yilun Wang, extracted features from the images using “deep neural networks”, meaning a sophisticated mathematical system that learns to analyze visuals based on a large dataset.

The research found that gay men and women tended to have “gender-atypical” features, expressions and “grooming styles”, essentially meaning gay men appeared more feminine and vice versa. The data also identified certain trends, including that gay men had narrower jaws, longer noses and larger foreheads than straight men, and that gay women had larger jaws and smaller foreheads compared to straight women.

Human judges performed much worse than the algorithm, accurately identifying orientation only 61% of the time for men and 54% for women. When the software reviewed five images per person, it was even more successful – 91% of the time with men and 83% with women. Broadly, that means “faces contain much more information about sexual orientation than can be perceived and interpreted by the human brain”, the authors wrote.

Wait for it. Here comes the political agenda in 3 … 2 … 1 …

The paper suggested that the findings provide “strong support” for the theory that sexual orientation stems from exposure to certain hormones before birth, meaning people are born gay and being queer is not a choice. The machine’s lower success rate for women also could support the notion that female sexual orientation is more fluid.

The rest of the article goes on to bring up the ethical issue involved with exposing queers who may not want to be exposed by AI.

For decades there was an uneasy truce. Don’t ask, don’t tell was basically how society operated. Most of us are willing to let fags do whatever they wish in private, but they now insist on making it public.

This new AI needs to be weaponized in order to be able to exclude the genetic dead ends that call themselves “gay” from our future.

THEY’RE SODOMITES? I’M SHOCKED!

Leftist Antifa Expert Draws Dartmouth Faculty Support for Allegedly Advocating Violence Against “Nazis”

DR. MARK BRAY. ALLEGEDLY ENDORSES ANTIFA VIOLENCE.

Die Nazi Scum.

We’re seen the signs at so-called counterprotests held by the Antifa. We’ve also seen them attack people they consider to Nazis, which is anyone who disagrees with them.

Since the Anitfa petition went viral and caught everyone’s attention, I wonder if the faculty who supported the Antifa feel any embarrassment. The press moved from support to condemnation of the Communist/anarchists in a flash when it became expedient to do so. Professors haven’t been coming out against the Antifa that I know of.

Mark Bray should be fired for advocating violence, if that accusation is true. It’s one thing to hold political opinions, but entirely another thing to use the bully pulpit of the classroom and the TV interview to push others to go out and violate the law by attacking people with bike locks and baseball bats.

The New American

On August 21, Dartmouth College president Philip J. Hanlon issued a relatively mild public statement disavowing recent comments by one of the college’s lecturers in support of the violent actions of the anarcho-communist group Antifa. Now, more than 100 Dartmouth faculty members have signed a letter in support of the lecturer, Dr. Mark Bray, and are calling upon Dr. Hanlon to retract his statement.

Dr. Bray is the author of Antifa: The Anti-Fascist Handbook, and since the deadly battle in Charlottseville, Virginia, between Antifa cadres and neo-Nazis on August 12, he has shot to stardom, thanks to friendly interviews with NPR, CNN, NBC, Slate, Vox, Vice, and more.

As we noted in our August 29 article, Liberal Media: Cheerleaders for “Antifa” Communist Thugs, the violent Antifa extremists have been generously showered with sympathetic coverage by much of the media. On August 14, for example, Yahoo! News posted a story titled, “As neo-Nazis grow bolder, the ‘antifa’ has emerged to fight them.” Like many similar reports in the “mainstream” media, the article paid an obligatory nod to objectivity by quoting Antifa critics, but the upshot for many readers will be: “Finally, someone is standing up to the Nazi-KKK bullies!”

The masked, black-clad Antifa radicals scored a big media boost from NBC shortly after Charlottesville when Meet The Press featured a powderpuff interview by Chuck Todd of Mark Bray on August 16. Todd then brought Bray back for another friendly gabfest on August 20. Bray, a longtime militant activist and a visiting lecturer in Gender Studies at Dartmouth College, publicly let it be known that he is a supporter of Antifa. In other words, he is not coming under criticism merely because he is a scholar who has written a book about a subject he has researched. He has not, as far as we know, publicly admitted to taking part in violent and illegal Antifa activities, but he vocally endorses their actions and is viewed by both supporters and opponents as the chief theoretician and “public intellectual” of the militant movement. Bray previously wrote a sympathetic book promoting the Occupy Wall Street movement, which provided the training ground where the Antifa leaders recruited many of their activists, refined their Marxist-Leninist rhetoric, and honed their violent communist tactics.

Media Research Center (MRC) president Brent Bozell condemned the NBC whitewash of Antifa. “Violent leftists have broken into the mainstream and Chuck Todd is guilty of aiding and abetting,” Bozell charged. “It is abhorrent that NBC and Todd believe it acceptable to normalize extremist groups like Antifa which use terror to silence their opposition.”

Bozell continued: “After the initial interview with Bray, Chuck Todd had the opportunity to correct his mistake but instead chose to again allow a radical to promote domestic terrorism with little push back. Can you imagine Chuck Todd inviting a member of a militant right-wing group on his show to rationalize violence against the left? NBC must cease giving legitimacy to supporters of this violent left-wing movement immediately.”

A letter to President Hanlon defending Bray, reportedly signed by more than 100 Dartmouth faculty members, goes a long way to confirming charges (as if more confirmation were necessary) that much of academia has become totally dominated by the far-left. Bray’s Dartmouth comrades see no problem with his support for Antifa’s violent approach to shutting down speech of opponents. Antifa violence, of course, is not only limited to censoring speech, nor is it directed only at genuine fascists and racists. As we have seen repeatedly (and as we will show presently) the black-clad goons broadly apply the “fascist” label and viciously attack anyone who stands in the way of their radical anarchist-communist agenda.

The Dartmouth supporters cite the cornucopia of media attention Bray has received as evidence of his importance as a scholar, and then note that even more media glory is on the way with his upcoming nationwide book tour. “With the appearance last week of his new book on the subject — which has already sold 10,000 copies and been reviewed in the New Yorker–he is embarking on a 30-city book tour,” the faculty letter breathlessly relates. “He is speaking by invitation at campuses like Duke, NYU, and Colby. In short, his historical expertise is in demand around the country and internationally.”

Insane Jew Professor Calls for Someone to Shoot Trump

PROFESSOR KEVIN ALLRED.

The professor needs to get back on his meds.

Allred is a common Jewish last name although I can find nothing that directly states that he’s Jewish. However, he does have Semitic features, thus it’s reasonable to speculate that he’s a Jew.

There’s no need to speculate that he’s mentally disturbed. That’s evident from his past history, which is linked at the bottom of this post. His most recent outburst may be criminal. He promoted the assassination of a president.

Fox News Insider

A professor who has taught classes on Beyonce and was once ordered to undergo a psychiatric evaluation for his political rhetoric said he wished that someone would shoot President Trump.

“Trump is a f***ing joke. This is all a sham,” women’s studies professor Kevin Allred tweeted, according to the Washington Times.

“I wish someone would just shoot him outright,” he reportedly wrote in the now-deleted tweet.

Over the weekend, Allred – who the College Fix said teaches at Montclair State University in New Jersey – also retweeted the infamous image of Kathy Griffin holding the president’s head.

Allred later clarified his tweet, saying that wishing death on the president is different than making a threat on his life.

Over the weekend, Allred unleashed a series of tweets slamming the administration, including one labeling Trump “a traitor and a terrorist.”

He also made several references to cleansing his timeline of “Trump fans,” at one point using a GIF of a flag burning to do so.

When Allred taught at Rutgers University, campus police sent him to Manhattan, N.Y. for a psychiatric evaluation after students “felt threatened” by him following Trump’s election.

Allred reportedly lectured about flag burning and against white people, NJ.com reported at the time.

His class on Beyonce mixed the singer’s lyrics with the writings of historic African-Americans like abolitionist Sojourner Truth.

Montclair State removed Allred’s name from their website after his employment was reported, according to the College Fix.

Last fall he was threatening to kill all white people. Saboteur365 covered the story here.

Allred is not only a crazy Jew, he’s a dangerous one. He needs to be terminated from academia. Permanently.

Outrage Over Lefty Prof Annoyed with Good Wishes for “war criminal” John McCain

Conservatives, or should I call them cuckservatives, think John McCain is a great American. He is if you think that Americans should be spending billions of dollars on fighting Israel’s wars for her.

If you want to find criticism of McCain, you have to go libertarian or alt-right. Or, in this case, what I believe to be a Jewish leftist peacemongering professor.

Fox News

A California professor is facing a backlash over a social media rant in which he calls Sen. John McCain, who is battling a brain tumor, a “war criminal.”

KGTV reports that those who have criticized San Diego State University professor Jonathan Graubart for his comments include students enrolled at the college.

JONATHAN GRAUBART.

“I find myself annoyed at the groundswell of good wishes for John McCain after his diagnosis of glioblastoma and have been thinking through why,” Graubart wrote on Facebook Friday, the same day McCain went public with the illness.

Graubart then made an analogy about elite lives and ordinary lives and circled back to McCain.

“McCain is a war criminal and, more to the point, someone who as a politician has championed horrifying actions and been lousy on state commitment to public health,” the professor said. “So dying or not, he’s a risible public figure (I have no idea what he is like on the personal level and don’t care).”

Graubart concluded by saying, “But ultimately what troubles me is the urge to send such well wishes to an utter stranger as it reinforces the notion that some lives are more important than others. There are lots of people with glioblastoma and who have died from it (including my mother 20 years ago).”

McCain’s doctors found the tumor after the senator underwent a procedure to remove a blood clot from above his left eye.

SDSU student Ben Dilbeck told the station Graubart’s comments were shocking.

“I would never wish cancer upon my worst enemy and then to be annoyed by people just wishing you the best for having cancer, I just thought it was totally inappropriate,” he said.

The station also interviewed former SDSU student Colby Tunick who read what the professor wrote while in Prague.

“I think I was a little disturbed, to be quite honest,” Tunick told the station, via Skype. “You may disagree with someone politically, morally, philosophically, but you don’t wish someone harm.”

He also said he wasn’t surprised about the post.

“He has told me that he thinks it’s his job as an academic to stir controversy and he normally does that through Facebook,” Tunick said.

But some people defended Graubart, saying he’s entitled to speak his mind. They described him as a man of integrity and intelligence.

The College Republicans of SDSU, a student group, posted a statement on social media Sunday condemning Graubart’s remarks.

“As an academic authority at SDSU, Dr. Graubart’s sickening lack of respect toward Senator McCain will not be tolerated by our organization and should not be tolerated by university administration,” the statement said.

An SDSU spokesperson told KGTV the university does not have a social media policy for faculty and staff.

“As a public institution, we do not and cannot regulate the private speech of students, faculty or staff,” the spokesperson said. “However, that should not imply the university’s endorsement of any particular viewpoint.”

Graubart did not immediately respond to a request for comment.

Graubart’s SDSU bio says his specialty as a professor are the areas of international relations and international law. It says he is a former San Francisco lawyer who worked in the Treasury Department when Ronald Reagan was president.

Now that McCain is dying, we’re just going to have to hold our noses and let the cucks out there lionize the shill for Israel as some sort of great American hero. You can bet that before he dies, the military will announce that they’re going to name an aircraft carrier or some other big ship after him. His name will live on for another 50 years after he’s dead. So be it.

As to Professor Graubart, his opinions about McCain are fine with me. I’m for free speech. It’s too bad the professor couldn’t or wouldn’t call out McCain as a crook shilling for the military-industrial complex and the Jews, and getting rich doing so.

Economics Professor “Deirdre” McCloskey Writes A Diversion Away from Truth at Libertarian Reason Site

DONALD MCCLOSKEY BECAME DEIRDRE MCCLOSKY SOME DECADES AGO.

Deirdre McCloskey no longer has her dick.

Wikipedia

Deirdre Nansen McCloskey (born September 11, 1942),[1] formerly known as Donald N. McCloskey, is the Distinguished Professor of Economics, History, English, and Communication at the University of Illinois at Chicago (UIC). She is also adjunct professor of Philosophy and Classics there, and for five years was a visiting Professor of philosophy at Erasmus University, Rotterdam. Since October 2007 she has received six honorary doctorates.[2] In 2013, she received the Julian L. Simon Memorial Award from the Competitive Enterprise Institute for her work examining factors in history that led to advancement in human achievement and prosperity.[3] Her main research interests include the origins of the modern world, the misuse of statistical significance in economics and other sciences, and the study of capitalism, among many others.

I’m not going to comment on gender fluidity, women with penises, or even on how highly honored economics professors get things wrong all the time.

Instead, let’s get the flavor of Dr. McCloskey’s argument and then fire back with some common sense. In this excerpt she focuses on the auto industry.

Excerpt from McCloskey writing at Reason

The Myth of Technological Unemployment

Otherwise sensible folk are, for some reason, terrified by robots. Yet the results of automation are good overall. Workers move from wretched assembly-line jobs to better ones standing in white coats monitoring the robots, at the higher wages made possible by the higher tech. Or, even better, they move to jobs outside the auto industry, earning pay that goes further because people can buy the radically cheaper stuff the robots now make.

If their new jobs are not higher paying, it’s probably because the auto union managed to extract monopoly profits from the company, and therefore from consumers. Robert Reich, a reliable source of sweetly leftish errors of facts and ethics, declares that “the decline in unionization [of private companies] directly correlates with the decline of the portion of income going to the middle class.” But paying selected workers on the assembly line more than they can earn elsewhere, at the expense of other, sometimes poorer, workers’ ability to buy cars, is hardly an ethical formula for raising up the working class.

When a Ford plant installed robots, Walter Reuther, a long-ago president of the United Auto Workers union, is said to have asked a manager: “How are you going to get them to buy Fords?” But Reuther’s argument is fallacious. Employees of car companies are a trivial share of the car-buying public. You can’t create prosperity merely by having workers purchase from their own employers.

Reich has accused the following things of driving down American wages: “Automation, followed by computers, software, robotics, computer-controlled machine tools and widespread digitization.” But such innovations have actually raised real wages, correctly measured, because a human supplied with a better tool can produce more outputs. And the point of an economy is production for consumption, not protection of existing jobs.

Consider the historical record: If the nightmare of technological unemployment were true, it would already have happened, repeatedly and massively. In 1800, four out of five Americans worked on farms. Now one in 50 do, but the advent of mechanical harvesting and hybrid corn did not disemploy the other 78 percent.

In 1910, one out of 20 of the American workforce was on the railways. In the late 1940s, 350,000 manual telephone operators worked for AT&T alone. In the 1950s, elevator operators by the hundreds of thousands lost their jobs to passengers pushing buttons. Typists have vanished from offices. But if blacksmiths unemployed by cars or TV repairmen unemployed by printed circuits never got another job, unemployment would not be 5 percent, or 10 percent in a bad year. It would be 50 percent and climbing.

No, Professor, after a great deal of personal anguish, “displaced workers” go to work as assistant managers at Burger King. If. they. are. lucky.

In my experience in academia most (not all) professors who rise up to national prominence are Jew stooges. McCloskey, identified with Milton Friedman’s Chicago School of Economics, is a smart guy … uh … lady. But a lot of his work, if not all of it, is designed to divert attention away from the (((tribe))) pushing the levers behind the curtain.

If you want truth in economics, regular readers know that I go to Dr. Paul Craig Roberts, who observes that the American economy only produces low wage jobs. Unemployment may be low by official measures, but in reality because of dropouts in the labor force, it’s much higher than publicized.

When I first discovered Dr. Roberts, I stayed up all night reading every article archived on his site (see blogroll). I won’t be doing the same for McCloskey because he’s not willing to say anything truthful about race, white genocide, immigration, or the gutting of the white middle class. Dr. Roberts (and Pat Buchanan) are two “respectable” thought leaders willing to tell the truth, or at least a large part of it.

I conclude, sadly on my part, that Deirdre is a Jew stooge.