Saturday, March 17, 2018

The Era of Malice

Whatever happened to those friendly, blue pith- helmeted British “constables on patrol” of yore?  The stolid ones who walked the foggy streets armed only with nightsticks, and gave you some visible assurance they were on the lookout for bad guys, and not you?

They’ve been long buried, or retired, or have been replaced by PC-friendly, PC-compliant nonentities who’ll take orders and harass or arrest advocates of the freedom of speech, rather than risk dismissal and a pension for calling a Muslim a Muslim. They’d prefer to arrest  Winston Churchill for bad-mouthing Nazis or Muslims than blow a whistle in pursuit of criminals. Paul Weston, a British libertarian, was arrested  and silenced for reading excerpts from Churchil’s The River War. The “constables” are now on the lookout for you and for any evidence of “hate speech” against especially Muslims.

It’s evidence of Britain’s capitulation to Islam that it persecutes the advocates of the opposition of such capitulation that three individuals were barred from entering Britain because they allegedly posted a threat to “public safety” by holding their views. Lauren Southern, and Austrian activist Martin Sellner of Génération Identitaire and his girlfriend, American author and YouTuber Brittany Pettibone. Southern was detained in Calais, while Sellner and Pettibone were imprisoned for three days after being grilled on their political beliefs and speeches in Islamized Europe.

Sadiq Khan, the Muslim mayor of London, and determined to “transform” the City into a Sharia-compliant center of Islamic triumph, has called for the tech companies to sift out and crush free speech, as though the tech companies weren’t doing enough already. Do not defame Islam with “Islamophobia” or you will “spend a night in the box” or worse. Khan makes Oliver Cromwell look like a Quaker. The American Thinker has his number.  On March 14th it ran this article, “Sadiq Khan Squelches Freedom of Thought and Expression”:

Sadiq Khan, the first Muslim mayor of London,  will be speaking at a conference of technology executives in Austin, Texas.  The gist of his remarks has been announced.  It is a speech advocating a troika of control, condemnation, and confiscation.  The control he requests is that the masters of the internet bar anti-Islamic comments and threats.  His condemnation is of President Donald Trump for his tweets (especially those in support of Britain First), which have proven to be an encouragement to those with an anti-Islamic agenda.  And he suggests that the big technology firms be taxed not on the basis of profits, but on the basis of revenue if the anti-Islamic messages continue on the internet, thus threatening confiscation if his "advice" is not taken.  He has expressed delight at Germany's hate speech laws, advocated and advanced by Angela Merkel.

CAIR attempted to shut down a talk by Anni Cyrus,, a former Iranian refugee invited by a chapter of the American Legion, to speak about the horrors women face in mullah land (and which she endured for fifteen years), but failed when the chapter president, an ex-Marine, told CAIR to go shoe a goose. Jihad Watch wrote:

Regardless of CAIR’S effort to silence Anni Cyrus, the event went as planned, on Sunday, March 11, thanks to the American Legion’s refusal to bow to an organization as unsavory as CAIR and allow it to dictate who it features as speakers. This is an important push-back against how confused and compromised the American public sphere has become. Anni Cyrus is a courageous and much-needed voice trying to dispel that confusion. She should be heard, without interference from the polite and sinister authoritarians of CAIR.

Midnight for S.A. whites
In the meantime, the genocide of white farmers (and of whites in general) continues apace in South Africa, whose Parliament adopted the new law that would  confiscate without compensation white-owned farms, and also just murder whites or reduce them to subsistence-level penury. Quartz Africa  offers this confusing report concerning the Australian offer to “fast-track” visas for white farmer:

A potential offer by Australia to give white South African farmers “humanitarian” visas has sparked backlash from the South African government.

Australia’s home affairs, immigration and border protection minister Peter Dutton said he had asked his department to “look at ways in which we can provide some assistance”, following claims in the country’s Rupert Murdoch-owned newspapers that “white South African farmers are murdered every week….”

The South African government denies that it intends to wipe out whites.

“There is no need to fear. We want to say to the world that we are engaged in a process of land redistribution which is very important to address the imbalances of the past,” a spokesperson for international relations minister Lindiwe Sisulu told Guardian Australia. “But it is going to be done legally, and with due consideration of the economic impact and impact on individuals.”

There is plenty to fear. “Redistribution” means a Stalinist policy, which resulted in the deaths by murder or by intended starvation of millions of Russians, a phenomenon which  will be repeated in South Africa. It is not only farmers who will be targeted, but the countless white engineers and technicians who have been removed from their jobs and relegated to shanty towns or squatter towns.

The Daily Beast, a digital Antifa -clone of the Internet censors  (in company with Google, Twitter, and Facebook), recently ran an article by one of its “star” reporters on the Instagram and the daughters of  widely read and admired Pamela Geller.  The Federalist, in a not-very-friendly story, reported:
Will never surrender

The Twitter account of Instagram celebrity Claudia Oshry, who goes by the username Girl With No Job, has gone dark, after The Daily Beast unearthed political tweets from 2012 and revealed that her mother is right-wing provocateur Pamela Geller.

Claudia and her sisters Jackie, Olivia and Margo Oshry, had gone to “great lengths to conceal their connection to their mother,” who has been the target of multiple attempts on her life, The Beast reported Wednesday. A man was convicted last October for attempting to behead Geller on behalf of ISIS last year. In 2015, Geller hosted a controversial drawing contest in Garland, Texas offering cash prizes of the best drawing of the prophet Mohamed. The event was the target of a mass shooting that was foiled by police officers who saved countless lives by stopping the two terrorists. [Not merely “stopped” them, but shot them dead.]

The sisters had also posted messages supportive of President Trump as well as tweets mocking Obama, which The Beast highlighted.

Pamela Geller is a “provocateur”?  Not really. That’s what The Federalist called her. She reports the news which the MSM ignores and which the tech giants try their best to hide from sight of viewers, or remove altogether, or quash completely. The actions by the Daily Beast have imperiled the lives of these women.

The madness caused by Islam and anti-Trumpism has morphed into unabashed malevolence.

Saturday, February 24, 2018

Leftward Ho!

I’ve said my fill about Black Panther and am done with discussing the obvious leftist Cultural Marxist manifestation of “identity” politics for blacks, courtesy of Hollywood. 

This column is about the ongoing leftward turn of CPAC.

It’s time to focus on something that the anti-Trumpers and the Left are likely tittering about now, which is the major slide to the Left of CPAC, or the Conservative Political Action Conference.  And how are conservatives leaning Left when the Left has proven to be conservatives’ mortal enemy? 

Pamela Geller was supposed to have a panel at CPAC sponsored by her ADFI, but since September, after expressing interest, the show-runners of CPAC at the last minute, cancelled Geller even holding a panel in a spare room because it refused to allow Jim Hoft of Gateway Pundit on the panel.  The Wikipedia link to Gateway reveals the author’s bias and hostility by asserting, “The website is known for publishing falsehoods and spreading hoaxes.” Which is a lie, as much of one that accused Pamela Geller of dropping out of the latest CPAC synod. Robert Spencer has the whole story of CPAC’s dhimmitude over the jihad threat. Both Geller and Spencer describe the whirligigs, chiefly by APP’s Terry Schilling, put Geller through for months.

Robert Spencer writes:

The Conservative Political Action Conference (CPAC) has never been much interested in hosting honest discussion of the jihad terror threat.

Not only has CPAC consistently dissembled about the nature and magnitude of the jihad threat, but it has also shown a disturbing tendency to dance to the tune of the Left. Saul Alinsky’s 13th Rule for Radicals is “‘Pick the target, freeze it, personalize it, and polarize it. Cut off the support network and isolate the target from sympathy. Go after people and not institutions; people hurt faster than institutions.” The Left consistently does this; in the case of counter-jihadis (including me), it presents our statements, however correct and demonstrable, as egregious and individual to us — that’s freezing and personalizing the target. Then Leftists move to “cut off the support network and isolate the target from sympathy,” demanding that others on the Right disavow and condemn, or at very least shun, the target.  

One of CPAC’s leaders is Suhail Kan, a Muslim, who denied to an audience during CPAC-2014 that the Muslim Brotherhood existed in the U.S.

Geller writes,

The uber-left SPLC’s “Hatewatch” is a clearinghouse of enemedia articles that reflect the propaganda spin that it wants to put on news events. In this edition, it links to the Forward’s ridiculous hit piece on me that tries to make something of a few retweets supposedly by Russian bots, as well as to the CNN story in which ACU board member Terry Schilling lies about the panel I conceptualized and proposed to CPAC, and which now has been taken over by Schilling without my authorization.

You can read the full story of that here — I proposed a panel and list of speakers to CPAC. Then CPAC demanded I drop Jim Hoft, as he had offended leftists. When I refused, they canceled the panel. Now CPAC is claiming that I was
“invited” to that panel and “bowed out,” and they’re presenting a panel of the same title, with same speakers, minus Jim Hoft (who they demanded be removed) and me.

It’s intellectual theft.

It also plays into the vicious hands of the CPAC, which has announced its intention to “destroy” the individuals and groups that it deems “hate groups” because they dissent from its far-left agenda. CPAC, like RINOs everywhere, always jump to do the left’s bidding, and act as its tools. That’s what’s happening here. Does CPAC leadership think the left will spare them if they jump to its tune and drop Hoft when they demand it, and sing along with the SPLC? They are in for a surprise.


CPAC's Terry Schilling: Snake in the grass.
Now Terry Schilling of the American Principles Project (APP) says he is holding the panel anyway, without either me or Hoft, and that it was his panel to which he invited me. In reality, neither Schilling nor the APP nor anyone at CPAC had any hand in the conception or organization of this panel. CPAC’s claim that I was “invited” to this panel that I originated and that I then bowed out is a lie; their running with this panel that I conceived and organized without my authorization or consent is intellectual theft.

This is the height of irony: a panel on free speech from which not one, but two speakers have been banned. How can they claim to stand for free speech after dropping a speaker because of pressure from the authoritarian left? What value can a free speech panel have when two free speech leaders were banned from that panel? And if I am so toxic, having been shunned at CPAC for years, why are they stealing my work?

The panel is now bitterly ironic: social media censorship discussed at a heavily censored event. CPAC should be inviting us, not banning us. To bow to the left by dropping Jim Hoft of Gateway because the left is targeting him only reinforces our weakness and shows why we are losing this great war.

Grover Norquist’s influence at CPAC, the American Conservative Union,  and in other “conservative” burrows of obsequious deference to Islam –  “Carry a twig,” not  “big stick” – to the effect that many conservatives regard Islam is a “religion of peace,” regardless of the number of attacks in the West and on Westerners committed by the murderous sycophants of Islam. It is likely significant to his mindset that Norquist is married to a Palestinian Muslim, and has become a
CPAC's Grover Norquist: Muslim leader
Muslim..  He claims that Islam’s beliefs and practices are compatible with the U.S. Constitution.

Will not Surrender to Norquist's "lions" of Islam
The Potomac Tea Party Report in 2011 suggested this dollop of honesty from Norquist:

If Norquist was sincere in his belief that Muslim goals (Sharia!) and our Constitution were perfectly compatible, he would quit calling those who disagree with him names.  He would stand up and tell the truth about his involvement since before 9/11 with Islamists. He would explain how and when he himself became a Muslim.  He would put it all out on the table and urge debate on his apparent belief that the Republican Party should embrace all Muslims and frankly he should agree to debate someone like Frank Gaffney in a public forum for us all to hear all the facts so that we can each decide for ourselves who we agree with.  That is what he should do if he REALLY cares about the Republican Party.

That is not going to happen. If the powers behind CPAC are not only unwilling to debate knowledgeable authorities on the peril of Islam, but go out of their way to smear and denigrate those authorities and censor them when they can, one must ask what kind of leadership governs CPAC. Norquist cares about the Republican Party only insofar as it becomes hostile to freedom of speech.

And there you have it. The conservative cave is populated with fork-tongued snakes like Grover Norquist and Terry Schilling, more than willing to duct tape and silence crusaders for freedom like Pamela Geller and Jim Hoft and so many others.

Wither go conservatives? Except more to the left, Alinsky-style? Does the rank-and-file conservative realize what a bill-of-goods he is being sold? Does he know where he is going? 

Thursday, February 22, 2018

Black Panther: Cultural Marxist Soul Food

Class clashes in Black Panther:

tribal rituals trump reason

You wake up in the morning, turn on your computer after fixing a coffee, and read the world and national news from a variety of blog sites, some of them your regulars (Sultan Knish, Pam Geller, Robert Spencer, Diana West, Gatestone, etc.). You’re overwhelmed by a waterfall of information. You’re inundated by the volume of things you’d like to compose a column about. But it’s hard to choose, because not a thing you read doesn’t flash its importance like a neon sign.  They’re all important, just more ticks in the advance of cultural Marxism in the government, in society, and just in general.

You read the MSM sites to absorb the latest victory lap about the transgendering of society, or how Muslim “immigrants” were sentenced in Britain for repeated rapes of white British girls and children, but were given light or no sentences. But you do not believe what they have to say or report. You keep getting special invitations to subscribe to the New York Times and the Washington Post , via links from other blog sites with full transcriptions of significant articles of those articles, but you refuse to pay a dime to get regular news from the Gray Lady with a Walker, and its disinformation clone, Jeff Bezos’s new toy, the Washington Post, not after all the lies and evasions both newspapers have promoted and circulated, going as far back as Walter Duranty’s Pulitzer Prize award-winning articles on the Soviet Union that denied mass starvation and government murders in Stalin’s “paradise”.

Speaking of a Stalinesqe paradise, we visit again Black Panther, the latest victory lap of Cultural Marxism, courtesy of Hollywood. This is the fictional African country, Wakanda, that the MSM has touted as a glorious booster of black pride and a new direction of super-hero films. Black Panther is "soul food." Wakanda is a hidden country whose Ayn Rand-borrowed device hides the country from prying eyes, has eschewd all contact with the world beyond its closed borders, and owes its existence to a vibranium meteor that fell into the regions ages ago, giving the tribe that found it magical powers. Wakanda is a kind of Shakespearean monarchy of elites whose throne is up for grabs, but with far less literacy or literary value.

 Why is a hereditary monarchy an expression of Cultural Marxism? You’re supposed to suspend belief in this action comic book movie for the sake of honoring “black pride,” just as we were supposed to suspend belief, when it was propagated by Walter Duranty, that Soviet Russia was a socialist utopia of plentitude and contentment.

With no historical indication of how Wakanda actually came to be, we are supposed to just prima facie, with no further investigation, questioning, or wonder, believe that Wakanda is superior in all respects to the West.

A Black Lives Matter symbol:
Coincidence or happenstance?
But “black pride” is an identity vehicle. It is a product of Marxism.

Marxism forecasts the overthrow of the capitalist system and establishing the equalization of everyone so that no one group rules over another – the rich over the poor, socialist factories over Mom and Pop shops, one ethnic group over another, and so on. America has never had a “socialist” mentality (except among the intellectuals of the Left and mainstream media pundits of the Left), and Marxism has never been bought by most Americans as a viable or even as a desirable social system. Americans would rather forge their own lives and futures, and not the government or some coterie of the “elite.” Marxism has failed miserably anywhere it has tried. Marxism has impoverished or murdered the very “class” of people it purports to help (lately in Venezuela). It was advocated to fight the rich and the corrupt and tyrants, but all it has ever done is oppress the downtrodden and brutally squelch any resistance to the rule of the socialist elite.  

Post-modernist Marxists have given up on convincing most people that they are a downtrodden “class” or that they are oppressed proletarians, and substituted a bewildering variety of post-modern “identities”: women, transsexuals, blacks, whites, Hispanics, the obese, children, and so on, all being bequeathed by ideology the “right” of expression and “self-determination.”  Except  perhaps “whites.” In the Marxists’ hidden lexicon are the terms communism and socialism

The Cultural Marxist character of Black Panther is that it creates a mythology for blacks to “believe in” or “relate” to. The rivals for the Wakandan throne, T'Challa (the “moderate” nice guy) and “Erik” Killmonger (the power-luster) engage in a physical battle to see who is “superior,” watched over by a bald, all-female bodyguard, the Dora Milaje. The Dora Milaje could easily evolve into something akin to Hitler’s Schutzstaffel (the Protection Squadron), to enforce the king’s will on all Wakandans, except  that it’s armed with spears.

Wakanda can’t be a democracy as we know it, nor a republic. There is no inkling of what kind of government it has other than the hereditary monarchy that apparently has real and not just symbolic power, as many European monarchies have.

There are so many characters in the Marvel film and in the comic book series that it’s hard to keep track of them. One character, Zuni, who is the religious and “spiritual” advisor to the other main characters and the keeper of the sacred vibranium herb, appears and has a subsidiary role in the film. Wikipedia wrote of him:

RyanCoogler, the film’s director, said that Zuni is the Black Panther's version of Obi-Wan Kenobi.

The film borrows and filches so many gimmicks and features from its cinematic predecessors that one could make a career identifying them.  Black Panther has been ginned up as a “black moment” to celebrate “blackness” but certainly not “diversity.” Louis  Farrakhan would  agree. It’s all about blackness, so you white people, stay out of the room. Which prompts another question:  would Wakanda treat neighboring South Africa as a “good neighbor”? How would it view S.A.’s racist, anti-white government? Adopt a “different folks, different strokes” policy?