Wednesday, May 30, 2018
Soylo Is The Star Wars Role Model Male Feminists WANT - ARE WHITE MALE SJWs POISONING THE DISNEY STAR WARS SHILL MEDIA? - SOYLO DEVASTATES DISNEY WITH FRANCHISE LOW OPENING!! WHERE TO GO FROM HERE?
Soylo Is The Star Wars Role Model Male Feminists WANT - ARE WHITE MALE SJWs POISONING THE DISNEY STAR WARS SHILL MEDIA? - SOYLO DEVASTATES DISNEY WITH FRANCHISE LOW OPENING!! WHERE TO GO FROM HERE?
http://starwarsparodyhub.blogspot.com
LIVE: GEORGE SOROS ADMITS ROSEANNE BARR WAS RIGHT TO CALL HIM A NAZI COLLABORATOR
Top globalist says helping Nazis was “happiest time of his life”
Alex Jones breaks down the controversy surrounding Roseanne Barr’s tweets about George Soros being a Nazi collaborator and about Valerie Jarrett’s resemblance to a Planet of the Apes character.
The Manchester Bomber Was Enabled by the British Government
The culpability of the British government and its intelligence agencies in enabling suicide bomber Salman Abedi to blow himself up at a pop concert in Manchester is being masked one year later by the mood of grief and mourning over the death and injury of so many people.
It is heartrending to hear injured children and the relatives of the dead say they do not hate anybody as a result of their terrible experiences and, if they feel anger at all, it is only directed towards the bomber himself. Victims repeatedly say that they did not want the slaughter at the Manchester Arena to be used to create divisions in their city.
The downside of this praiseworthy attitude is that it unintentionally lets off the hook those British authorities whose flawed policies and mistaken actions really did pave the way towards this atrocity. Appeals against divisiveness and emphasis on the courage of survivors have muted attacks on the government, enabling it to accuse those who criticise it of mitigating the sole guilt of Abedi.
This attitude is highly convenient for former prime minister David Cameron who decided in 2011 on military intervention against Muammar Gaddafi. His purported aim was humanitarian concern for the people of Benghazi, but – as a devastatingly critical report by the House of Commons Select Committee on Foreign Affairs said last year – this swiftly turned into “an opportunistic policy of regime change”.
The military intervention succeeded and by the end of the year Gaddafi was dead. Real power in Libya passed to Islamist militias, including those with which the Abedi family were already associated. Pictures show Salman’s brothers posing with guns in their hands. Libya was plunged into an endless civil war and Benghazi, whose people Cameron and former French president Nicolas Sarkozy were so keen to save, is today a sea of ruins. Inevitably, Isis took advantage of the anarchy in Libya to spread its murderous influence.
This is the Libyan reality which was created by Cameron and Sarkozy, with sceptical support from Barack Obama, the then US president, who famously referred to the Libyan debacle as a “shit show”.
Libya became a place where the Abedi family, returning from their long exile in Manchester, were able put their militant Islamist beliefs into practice. They absorbed the toxic variant of Islam espoused by the al-Qaeda clones, taking advantage of their military experience honed in the Iraq war, such as how to construct a bomb studded with pieces of metal designed to tear holes in human flesh. The bomb materials were easily available in countries like Britain.
Salman Abedi was responsible for what he did, but he could not have killed 22 people and maimed another 139 others, half of them children, if the British government had not acted as it did in Libya in 2011. And its responsibility goes well beyond its disastrous policy of joining the Libyan civil war, overthrowing Gaddafi and replacing him with warring tribes and militias.
Manchester had since the 1990s become a centre for a small but dangerous group of exiled Libyans belonging to anti-Gaddafi groups, such as the Libyan Islamic Fighting Group, originally formed by Libyans fighting the communists in Afghanistan. After the invasion of Iraq in 2003, strict measures were taken by MI5 and the police against Libyans thought likely to sympathise with al-Qaeda in Iraq and, later, Isis. They were subject to counter-terrorism control orders monitoring and restricting their movements and often had their passports confiscated.
But no sooner had Britain joined the war against Gaddafi than these suspected terrorists became useful allies. Their control-orders were lifted, their passports returned and they were told that the British government had no problem with them going to Libya to fight against Gaddafi. In place of past restrictions, they were allowed to pass to and fro at British airports. Some militants are reported as saying that when they had problems with counter-terrorism police when flying to Libya, the MI5 officers with whom they were in touch were willing to vouch for them and ease their way to the battlefront in Libya, where MI6 was cooperating with Qatar and UAE as financiers of the armed opposition.
This opportunistic alliance between the British security services and Libyan Salafi-jihadis may explain why Salman Abedi, though by now high up on the list of potential terrorists, was able to fly back to Manchester from Libya unimpeded a few days before he blew himself up.
There should be far more public and media outrage about the British government’s role in the destruction of Libya, especially its tolerance of dangerous Islamists living in Britain to pursue its foreign policy ends. The damaging facts about what happened are now well established thanks to parliamentary scrutiny and journalistic investigation.
The official justification for British military intervention in Libya is that it was to prevent the massacre of civilians in Benghazi by Gaddafi’s advancing forces. The reason for expecting this would happen was a sanguinary speech by Gaddafi which might mean that he intended to kill them all. David Cameron, along with Liam Fox as defence minister at the time and William Hague as foreign secretary, have wisely stuck with this explanation and, as a defence of their actions, they are probably right to do so. But a report by the House of Commons Foreign Affairs Select Committee says that the belief that Gaddafi would “massacre the civilians in Benghazi was not supported by the available evidence”. It points out that he had retaken other towns from the rebels and not attacked the civilian population.
The British followed the French lead in military intervention and Sarkozy similarly justified his policy as being in defence of the people of Benghazi. We are a little better informed about the real French motives thanks to a report, revealed through the Freedom of Information Act, made in early 2011 by Sidney Blumenthal, an unofficial advisor to Hillary Clinton, the then US secretary of state, after a meeting he had had with French intelligence officials about Sarkozy’s motives for intervention.
The officials told Blumenthal that Sarkozy’s plans were driven by five main causes, the first being “a desire to gain a greater share of Libya oil production” and the next being to increase French influence in North Africa. His other aims were to improve his own political standing in France, enable the French military to reassert their position in the world, and prevent Gaddafi supplanting France as the dominant power in Francophone Africa.
The intelligence officials make no mention of any concern on the part of Sarkozy for the safety of the Libyan people. Conceivably Cameron, Hague and Fox had much purer and more altruistic motives than their French counterparts. But it is more likely that the aim was always regime change in the national interest of those foreign powers who brought it about.
[Posted at the SpookyWeather blog, May 30th, 2018.]
UK: Descent into POLICE STATE - Black Pigeon
UK: Descent into POLICE STATE - Black Pigeon
Related:
British Media Calls the Tommy Robinson Protestors "Far Right"
[Posted at the SpookyWeather blog, May 30th, 2018.]
Related:
Buzzfeed Attacks Free Speech Supporters and Tommy Robinson Advocates as "Right Wing" - Free Tommy Robinson Petition - Rebel Media FIGHTS UK gag order on Tommy Robinson news:
http://trumpisright.blogspot.com/2018/05/buzzfeed-attacks-free-speech-supporters.html
E Celeb Tommy Robinson Sentenced to 13 Months in Jail, Muh Free Speech:
http://trumpisright.blogspot.com/2018/05/e-celeb-tommy-robinson-sentenced-to-13.html
Small Brain Cucks think Tommy Robinson Dindu Nuffin and USA =/= UK Law:
http://trumpisright.blogspot.com/2018/05/small-brain-cucks-think-tommy-robinson.html
How Identity Politics Is Changing Universities
Ours is a politicized age from the college campus to the corporate boardroom, a situation in which things that once were personal now are utterly political.
The hard left now controls not only higher education, but also much of scientific research upon which the future of humanity as we know it depends. What began in 1969 as the establishment of a single course in Women’s Studies at Cornell University and similar courses elsewhere in what then were called Black Studies has metastasized into a monster that almost completely dominates higher education in the United States and Canada. Today, it is rare to find a college or university that does not have majors and programs in Identity Studies.
This long march of feminists and racialists from near-obscurity to absolute-dominance is compared to the rise of Snopes family created by author William Faulkner in his 1940 novel, The Hamlet. In Faulkner’s book, the Snopeses move into the Mississippi community of Frenchman’s Bend and slowly take over nearly all aspects of life. Even though the locals seem to understand what is taking place, they are seemingly helpless because they heard the rumor that people that made a Snopes unhappy would have their barns burned to the ground.
In campus politics, the activists did not threaten to burn only the barns but rather the entire college campus. Anyone in higher education that might allegedly say or write something that offends someone in a politically-protected group is likely to be the focus of the infamous Twitter Mob, and even a distinguished career and something as prestigious as a Nobel Prize offers no cover, as Tim Hunt found out.
----------------------------------------
Instead of being subordinate to disciplines such as the sciences, the Identity Studies dominate campus discourse and their advocates now force scientists and mathematicians to bow down to racialism and feminism. Professors that do not stoop quickly or those that resist often are pushed out of their jobs or are marginalized. The feminist uprising that threw Lawrence Summers out of Harvard’s presidency, along with the outcry responsible for the ouster of Nobel Prize-winning scientist Tim Hunt from his university position in Great Britain for remarks that he made as a luncheon speaker, speaks to the influence and power feminism has at the modern university.
In fact, ideologies of identity now are being embedded into actual scientific study itself, a phenomenon embodied by a recent academic paper in the science journal Progress in Human Geography, entitled “Glaciers, gender, and science: A feminist glaciology framework for environmental change research.” The last sentence of the paper’s abstract declares:
Even traditional feminists cannot escape the campus witch-hunts that ramped-up enforcement of Title IX of the 1972 Higher Education Act has created. Highly-accomplished Northwestern University film professor Laura
Kipnis in 2015 found herself being investigated by her employer for alleged Title IX violations because of an essay she published in The Chronicle of Higher Education entitled “Sexual Paranoia Strikes Academe.” Kipnis, it would seem, had the necessary credentials of a feminist, but that did not matter to the new campus Snopeses. (Northwestern did rule in her favor, but only after Kipnis fought back. She then published another essay, this one on her “inquisition,” and recently publishing a book, Unwanted Advances: Sexual Paranoia Comes to Campus,about her experiences.)
The present situation is close to being a crisis, if not already one.Faculty members on many campuses are being forced to sign “diversity statements,” which are little more than disguised loyalty oaths, which should be anathema in higher education. Universities are demanding conformity that is reminiscent of the Lysenkoismthat infected universities and the scientific community of the U.S.S.R. for decades, and with disastrous results.
https://www.zerohedge.com/news/2018-05-27/how-identity-politics-changing-universities
[Posted at the SpookyWeather blog, May 30th, 2018.]
The hard left now controls not only higher education, but also much of scientific research upon which the future of humanity as we know it depends. What began in 1969 as the establishment of a single course in Women’s Studies at Cornell University and similar courses elsewhere in what then were called Black Studies has metastasized into a monster that almost completely dominates higher education in the United States and Canada. Today, it is rare to find a college or university that does not have majors and programs in Identity Studies.
This long march of feminists and racialists from near-obscurity to absolute-dominance is compared to the rise of Snopes family created by author William Faulkner in his 1940 novel, The Hamlet. In Faulkner’s book, the Snopeses move into the Mississippi community of Frenchman’s Bend and slowly take over nearly all aspects of life. Even though the locals seem to understand what is taking place, they are seemingly helpless because they heard the rumor that people that made a Snopes unhappy would have their barns burned to the ground.
In campus politics, the activists did not threaten to burn only the barns but rather the entire college campus. Anyone in higher education that might allegedly say or write something that offends someone in a politically-protected group is likely to be the focus of the infamous Twitter Mob, and even a distinguished career and something as prestigious as a Nobel Prize offers no cover, as Tim Hunt found out.
----------------------------------------
Instead of being subordinate to disciplines such as the sciences, the Identity Studies dominate campus discourse and their advocates now force scientists and mathematicians to bow down to racialism and feminism. Professors that do not stoop quickly or those that resist often are pushed out of their jobs or are marginalized. The feminist uprising that threw Lawrence Summers out of Harvard’s presidency, along with the outcry responsible for the ouster of Nobel Prize-winning scientist Tim Hunt from his university position in Great Britain for remarks that he made as a luncheon speaker, speaks to the influence and power feminism has at the modern university.
In fact, ideologies of identity now are being embedded into actual scientific study itself, a phenomenon embodied by a recent academic paper in the science journal Progress in Human Geography, entitled “Glaciers, gender, and science: A feminist glaciology framework for environmental change research.” The last sentence of the paper’s abstract declares:
Merging feminist postcolonial science studies and feminist political ecology, the feminist glaciology framework generates robust analysis of gender, power, and epistemologies in dynamic social-ecological systems, thereby leading to more just and equitable science and human-ice interactions.The sentence is laughable on its face, but the politicization of academic study is real. Faulkner’s Snopes family consisted of dull, mediocre but dogged people who strategically-placed themselves in locations in which they gained control over others. The academic Snopeses have done the same, putting themselves not only in important governing and administrative positions on campus, but also in government regulatory jobs such as the Office of Civil Rights in the U.S. Department of Education. While many people in traditional academic pursuits sought to publish and expand knowledge in their fields, those in the Identity Studies sought to expand their own political power by threatening anyone who opposed them, accusing dissenters with accusations of racism, sexism, and homophobia.
Even traditional feminists cannot escape the campus witch-hunts that ramped-up enforcement of Title IX of the 1972 Higher Education Act has created. Highly-accomplished Northwestern University film professor Laura
Kipnis in 2015 found herself being investigated by her employer for alleged Title IX violations because of an essay she published in The Chronicle of Higher Education entitled “Sexual Paranoia Strikes Academe.” Kipnis, it would seem, had the necessary credentials of a feminist, but that did not matter to the new campus Snopeses. (Northwestern did rule in her favor, but only after Kipnis fought back. She then published another essay, this one on her “inquisition,” and recently publishing a book, Unwanted Advances: Sexual Paranoia Comes to Campus,about her experiences.)
The present situation is close to being a crisis, if not already one.Faculty members on many campuses are being forced to sign “diversity statements,” which are little more than disguised loyalty oaths, which should be anathema in higher education. Universities are demanding conformity that is reminiscent of the Lysenkoismthat infected universities and the scientific community of the U.S.S.R. for decades, and with disastrous results.
https://www.zerohedge.com/news/2018-05-27/how-identity-politics-changing-universities
[Posted at the SpookyWeather blog, May 30th, 2018.]
ROSEANNE IS RIGHT: GEORGE SOROS IS A NAZI COLLABORATOR
Globalist billionaire tries to whitewash dark past
Comedian Roseanne Barr went on a tweet storm Monday night, going after Chelsea Clinton, Obama advisor Valerie Jarrett, and billionaire George Soros.
George Soros Admits Roseanne Barr Was Right pscp.tv/w/bd3VBTExOTI5…
It all started when Barr tweeted “Chelsea Soros Clinton,” asserting Clinton was married to Soros’ nephew.
Clinton responded, pointing out she married the son of a corrupt congressman.
Good morning Roseanne - my given middle name is Victoria. I imagine George Soros’s nephews are lovely people. I’m just not married to one. I am grateful for the important work @OpenSociety does in the world. Have a great day! twitter.com/therealroseann…
Barr apologized for the error, but reminded her followers that Soros is a Nazi collaborator, who “turned in his fellow Jews to be murdered in German concentration camps and stole their wealth.”
CORRECTION: CHELSEA CLINTON IS NOT MARRIED TO A SOROS NEPHEW. HER HUSBAND IS THE SON OF A CORRUPT SENATOR, SO SORRY!: https://t.co/FuEVnmnxu4— Roseanne Barr (@therealroseanne) May 29, 2018
Sorry to have tweeted incorrect info about you!I Please forgive me! By the way, George Soros is a nazi who turned in his fellow Jews 2 be murdered in German concentration camps & stole their wealth-were you aware of that? But, we all make mistakes, right Chelsea?
Soros himself responded to Barr’s accusation about his Nazi ties after her tweet about Valerie Jarrett made national news.
“George Soros survived the Nazi occupation of Hungary as a 13-year-old child by going into hiding and assuming a false identity with the help of his father, who managed to save his own family and help many other Jews survive the Holocaust,” Soros’ spokesperson said in a statementTuesday.
“He did not collaborate with the Nazis. He did not help round people up. He did not confiscate anybody’s property. Such false allegations are insulting to the victims of the Holocaust, to all Jewish people, and to anyone who honors the truth. They are an affront to Mr. Soros and his family, who against the odds managed to survive one of the darkest moments in our history.”
Soros has denied the allegations before, ever since he admitted collaborating with the Nazis as a young boy to “60 Minutes” in 1998.
60 Minutes: [You] went out, in fact, and helped in the confiscation of property from the Jews.
Soros: Yes. That’s right. Yes.
60 Minutes: I mean, that’s — that sounds like an experience that would send lots of people to the psychiatric couch for many, many years. Was it difficult?
Soros: Not — not at all. Not at all. Maybe as a child you don’t — you don’t see the connection. But it was — it created no — no problem at all.
60 Minutes: No feeling of guilt?
Soros: No.
Twitter:
Denmark's Muslim Colonies - Sargon
When you have lost control of part of your country to a foreign culture, it is called a colony. It is the duty of the liberal state to regain control over its territorial integrity, using force if resistance is met.
[Posted at the SpookyWeather blog, May 30th, 2018.]
[Posted at the SpookyWeather blog, May 30th, 2018.]
VIDEO: DON LEMON BLAMES TRUMP FOR ROSANNE’S TWEETS
Host says ‘conspiracy theories are ‘hurting the fabric of American society’
CNN’s Don Lemon attempted to link Roseanne Barr’s controversial tweets to President Trump Tuesday night, claiming that Trump is encouraging ‘everyday racism’.
“This is about everyday racism, the normalizing of everyday racism, and bigotry, and hatred,” Lemon declared.
Lemon also threw in ‘conspiracy theories’ for good measure, stating “this President does that, Roseanne repeats it, and she promotes it, as well. They’re doing the same thing.”
"This is about everyday racism, the normalizing of everyday racism, and bigotry, and hatred, and conspiracy theories ... this President does that, Roseanne repeats it, and she promotes it, as well. They're doing the same thing. - Don Lemon cnn.it/2IV6rUn
“I’m talking about the folks who are saying this has nothing to do with the president. ” Lemon continued.
“You cannot say that and have him say and do and exhibit all the behaviors he exhibits and all of a sudden you want to be disconnected from it. It doesn’t work that way. Logic does not work that way.” the host exclaimed.
“This is, again, the normalization of conspiracy theories and racism. And we cannot allow that to happen. It is hurting the fabric of American society. ” Lemon added.
“People who are racist, don’t know they’re racist. Or they say that they believe that people are going to believe they’re not racist simply because they say it is. I think we need a crash course in exactly what racism is. And again this president is trafficking in it just as Roseanne did.” Lemon said.
“We know what Donald Trump thinks. We know what Roseanne Barr thinks. It’s time for us to stop playing around with soft words by saying, ‘Oh, well they’re saying insensitive things.’ No, it’s racist! They’re exhibiting racist behavior. And far too many of our fellow American citizens agree with them. And feel emboldened to say out loud the things they wouldn’t have dared to say in public just a few years ago.” Lemon claimed.
“We have to stop pretending that this president has nothing to do with it, that he’s not emboldening racists and racism and giving them a platform and making it okay.” Lemon concluded.
In response to Lemon’s outburst, Fox News media analyst Howard Kurtz shot back, noting that “The mainstream media have to turn every negative controversy into a Trump story.”
“I was just waiting, I was counting down––CNN’s Don Lemon, ‘Roseanne and President Trump are trafficking in racism,’ MSNBC bringing it in… Although he liked Roseanne and he called Roseanne after the successful debut, this has nothing to to do with Donald Trump!” Kurtz noted.
Lemon routinely calls the President a racist, and has admitted that he sees it as an ‘obligation’ to do so.
Of course, Donald Trump is not to blame for what Roseanne Barr thinks. She has been thinking and saying things long before Trump was elected President.
It is also highly ironic that Lemon cites conspiracy theories as problematic when for over a year CNN and Lemon have been the vanguard of promoting the Russia collusion conspiracy theory, for which there is still no evidence, even after a exhaustive investigation.
CNN also had to issue a “correction” on a report last year after it claimed that Donald Trump Jr. had received exclusive access to Wikileaks emails before they were released, but it was later pointed out that the emails were from a later date and already publicly available.
Trump has referred to Lemon as the “dumbest man on television.”
Another false story, this time in the Failing @nytimes, that I watch 4-8 hours of television a day - Wrong! Also, I seldom, if ever, watch CNN or MSNBC, both of which I consider Fake News. I never watch Don Lemon, who I once called the “dumbest man on television!” Bad Reporting.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)