Some people might call that espionage

Jewish publications get all upset when a Jew's loyalty is questions. Here is an example from Forward:

Refugee Jewish Vet Testifying On Impeachment Has Loyalty Questioned On Fox, CNN

After reports emerged that National Security Council member Lt. Col. Alexander Vindman was set to testify to Congress about his discomfort with President Trump’s Ukraine policy and actions, conservative commentators began implying that Vindman, a Jewish former refugee from Ukraine, was disloyal to the United States.

“Here we have a U.S. national security official, who is advising Ukraine while working inside the White House, apparently against the president’s interests, and usually they spoke in English,” Fox News Channel host Laura Ingraham said on Monday, referring to Vindman’s interactions with Ukrainian officials who asked him for advice on how to handle Trump. “Isn’t that kind of an interesting angle on the story?”

“I find that astounding,” replied former George W. Bush administration official John Yoo. “And some people might call that espionage.”

I am still figuring out all the players here, as the impeachment hearing are being held by Democrats in secret.

Impeachment is being led by Schiff, Nadler, and Schumer. There is not even a pretense of fair play, or following rule of law.

Hating Trump is good for business

Two NY Times columnists admit:

Bret Stephens: Hi, Gail. Bad news: The White House has canceled its subscriptions to The Times and The Washington Post. Will our business survive? Will the Republic?

Gail Collins: Bret, the one lonely good thing I can say about our president is that he’s been good for business.

Bret: At last count, we’re at 4.7 million subscribers, up from three million when Donald Trump was elected. Thank you, Mr. President!

Okay, I get it now. This is the why the NY Times lies about Pres. Trump on a daily basis. It has a subscriber base of Jewish Trump haters.

Warren needs approval from 9yo mentally ill girl

A Quillette essay says It’s Time for ‘LGB’ and ‘T’ to Go Their Separate Ways. There is a logic to this, but I doubt it.

The social justice warriors require that all other SJWs be fully onboard with all of their causes. They won't stop until they have changes all our pronouns and and subjected us to their sick ideologies.

A gay mag reports

Warren got the most response, though, for her interactions with 9-year-old trans boy Jacob Lemay, attending with his mother, Mimi. “What will you do in your first week as president to make sure that kids like me feel safer in schools?” asked Jacob, who became an immediate hit with the audience and on the internet. “And what do you think schools need to do better to make sure that I don't have to worry about anything but my homework?”

The senator replied that she’d pick a good secretary of Education, someone who’s not Betsy DeVos, Trump’s appointee, but she’d have her nominee meet with Jacob and get his approval. “Does that sound good?” she said. Jacob seemed satisfied.

Really? Pres. Warren will have to get approval from a 9-year-old girl being raised as a trans boy for her cabinet appointment.

If you told me 5 years ago that a presidential candidate would say something so silly, I would not have believed it. But Warren leads in some polls, and such statements now seem normal for those owned by the Ctrl-Left. The Dems are on their way to nominating a lunatic. Reelecting Trump will be the only sane course of action.

Ignore hyphenated names and celebrate Holloween

There are a lot of people who don't like Halloween, from Christians who think that it is Satanic, to parents who think that it is unsafe. But NPR Radio complains that it is too offensive for other reasons:

MIA MOODY-RAMIREZ: They wonder, what's the big deal? Why are people getting upset over this?

FADEL: She's the chair of Baylor University's Department of Journalism, Public Relations and New Media. She says people might think a costume is funny or beautiful. The big deal, though, is it's a dominant culture taking elements of a minority culture with disregard.

MOODY-RAMIREZ: So it's the idea of people wearing something without really knowing the history of whatever it is that they're wearing. Or also, if it's something that's from an oppressed group and people are benefiting financially from using that product or wearing that attire but they're not actually showing respect for that culture.

No, this is crazy.

Halloween is celebrated in White Christian countries. If there is any cultural appropriation going on, it is non-whites celebrating Halloween. Those people should celebrate their own holidays instead of complaining about ours.

Baylor U. is paying Mia Moody-R. to teach White hatred. She should learn to respect White culture.

Zizek appears to be a nut

Jordan Peterson debated an eastern European leftist intellectual named Zizek. I never heard of him. It turns out that he has a substantial following, altho many others believe that he is either evil or a phony. I am referring to Zizek, altho the same could be said of Peterson.

Read this leftist critique of Zizek, and you probably won't read any more. Here is a sample:

In short, Žižek’s views on (Muslim) immigrants and refugees can be roughly summarized as follows: despite the fact that the majority of immigrants are inherently predisposed towards fascism, pedophilia, the subordination of women and the hatred of free speech, Europe should, nevertheless, open its doors to them and guarantee their “dignified survival”.

It is amazing how many distinguished academic scholars are really crackpots.

Wacky Jewish ideas on sovereignty

It is anti-Semitic to say that Jews are taking over the world, but it is also anti-Semitic to oppose Jews taking over the world. Here is a Jewish opinion:

Sovereignism is nothing but the new name of anti-Semitism. Jews and Muslims, who are both threatened by it, must unite against the fantasies of the great replacement.

Having sovereign nations makes it harder for Jews and Muslims to take over, I guess. And while Jews hate the Muslims and Muslims hate the Jews, they both seek to undermine European sovereignty.

Islam is not a threat to France; it is a component since the eighth century. It is through it, and through Jewish philosophers, that Greek thought arrived in France at the turn of the first millennium. And never has the world been better off than when Judaism, Christianity, and Islam worked together to make reason triumph over obscurantism. ...

[France] must not fall for the fantasies of the ‘great replacement,’ remember that she carries the name of an invading people, and that she is, from her origin, a foremost place for the settlement of innumerable peoples which every Frenchman, wherever he comes from, is the heir to. ...

“We can imagine, we can dream of Jerusalem as the capital of the planet, which will one day be united around a world-government. It would be a fine place for a world-government.”

This is so foolish, I don't know where to start. What we understand as "reason triumph over obscurantism" is almost entirely a Christian invention. Jerusalem would be the worst place for a world capital.

Madness leads to Civil War

Wash. Examiner reports:

Partisan political division and the resulting incivility has reached a low in America, with 67% believing that the nation is nearing civil war, according to a new national survey.

“The majority of Americans believe that we are two-thirds of the way to being on the edge of civil war. That to me is a very pessimistic place,” said Mo Elleithee, the executive director of Georgetown University’s Institute of Politics and Public Service.

I agree with that. We are headed for civil war, unless ppl come to their senses.

There are many issues where there is no reasonable compromise, such as yesterday's post on court-endorsed non-genetic mom sexually mutilating a 7-year-old boy.

It found that 84% believe that “behavior that used to be seen as unacceptable is now accepted as normal behavior.”

I believe the reverse is worse -- behavior that used to be normal is now seen as unacceptable.

Douglas Murray has written a new book titled "The Madness of Crowds: Gender, Identity, Morality." He is a British gay atheist, and he is restrained in his condemnations, but he is right that our society has gone mad.

The NY Times now admits that the so-called impeachment inquiry is really a Deep State coup. There is no longer any pretense of this being a prosecution for some recognized crime. A faction of the CIA and State Dept are unhappy about some foreign policy decisions, such as not supporting some Cold War and endless mideast war policies. It is just a question of how much these anonymous backstabbers hate Trump, and whether Congress has the votes to oust him.

Court forces dad to castrate son

Washington Examiner reports:

A jury in Texas returned a verdict on Monday that will prevent a Texas dad from intervening in the gender transition of his 7-year-old son.

Jeffrey Younger had petitioned a court in Texas to grant him sole custody of his twin sons, James and Jude, in part to avoid a plan to infuse James with female hormones.

Do you need any more proof that our society has been taken over by sickos?

If you don't buy into this garbage, then you are bigot. How far will the Left go? Have you had enuf yet?

According to the comments, the dad is the genetic dad, and the mom is not the genetic mom.

Maybe we should return to a system that favors father custody.

Update: The London Daily Mail has the story.

It turns out that the legal mom is a pediatrician who annulled the marriage because she claimed that he exaggerated his resume, and the judge believed her rather than him. She also made domestic violence allegations against him, but those were not believed.

She is obviously a lunatic. She even wants to rename the boy Luna!

Update: It appears that the dad lost the case because he had previously lost some of his parental rights. The judge said he lied about some things many years earlier, and I cannot assess that. Regardless, the court should not be forcing a boy to become a girl. I saw a report that the judge now recognizes this, perhaps because of the adverse publicity, and has given the dad the right to oversee the bogus psychiatric treatment. So maybe the boy will be saved.

Update: This reddit thread has more info about the case, including a juror saying the dad was an unemployed con man, and the legal mom should get custody because she has more money.

Maybe law should say that the parent with more money should win a child custody dispute, but that is not the law we have. The way the system is set up, the parent with less money usually wins such disputes, and the child support/alimony payments are ordered.

The dad supposedly lied about a few things, but if so, I am not sure what is worse. The dad for telling the lies, or the gestational mom for believing such silly lies. No one that gullible should be making big decisions.

The jury was apparently not so crazy because it knew that the dad would have veto power over castration. But it still authorized this lunatic legal mom to raise this boy as a girl.

Mitt Romney is a phony

The Atlantic mag has an article on how much Mitt Romney hates Pres. Trump, and how he is just planning for impeachment instead of trying to advance his legislative goals.

To Romney, Trump’s performance as president is inextricably tangled up in his character. “Berating another person, or calling them names, or demeaning a class of people, not telling the truth—those are not private things,” he says, adding: “If during the campaign you pay a porn star $130,000, that now comes into the public domain.” ...

Romney told me that he does not have an abstract definition of “high crimes and misdemeanors,” and that when it comes to identifying impeachable acts, he follows Supreme Court Justice Potter Stewart’s famous standard for defining hard-core porn: “I’ll know it when I see it.” Asked if he’s seen it yet, Romney told me that he’ll make up his mind once he hears all the evidence at the trial: “At this stage, I am strenuously avoiding trying to make any judgment.”

Okay, but what is the real issue here?

“I think people forget I worked for 10 years as a management consultant,” Romney said, referring to his time at Bain & Company. “Which meant I was able to make no decisions, I was able to get nothing done, and I had to try and convince people through a long process.” In retrospect, it seems, he was destined for the U.S. Congress.

No, we all understand that Romney is all talk and no action. He stumbled into some money opportunities, and got rich off of others. His run for the Presidency showed that he had no vision for the job, and no backbone to get anything done against opposition.

The article omits the elephant in the room -- his Mormon religion. His hatred for Trump is similar to that of other Mormons, like Jeff Flake. They cannot articulate it either.

Mormons are like the mirror image of left-wing Jews who hate trump. Both factions have an irrational hatred for Trump, and want to oust him from office. The hatred appears to be grounded in some religious beliefs, altho they don't explain it that way. It would sound too ridiculous if they admitted that they don't like him because he doesn't wear the right kind of underwear.

Romney probably tells himself that he is honest while Trump is a liar. The truth is more nearly the opposite. Trump tells us where he stands and why. Romney is never so straightforward. The Atlantic reporter says that he has been covering Romney for nine years, and he always seems like he is just saying what his consultants tell him to say. I think that he is one of the most loathsome characters in politics today.

Update: Romney tweets under the name Pierre Delecto (@PierreDelecto).

Dems add more anti-Russian hysteria

The NY Times editorializes:

In the summer of 1950, outraged by Joseph McCarthy’s anti-Communist inquisition, Margaret Chase Smith, a Republican senator from Maine, stood to warn her party that its own behavior was threatening the integrity of the American republic.

She complained about the "Communist design of 'confuse, divide and conquer.'"

Communism was threatening the American republic. We had commie spies and sympathizers at the highest levels. Spies gave away our atom bomb secrets and undermined our foreign policy.

Now the Russians are no longer commies, and China is more of a threat.

But the deep staters and Dems want to bring back the Cold War. They are preoccupied with weird conspiracy theories about how the Russians supposedly interfered with the 2016 election. Hillary Clinton blames the Russians for her loss, and now claims that Tulsi Gabbard is a Russian puppet.

The Russians do indeed have a long history of propaganda seeking to 'confuse, divide and conquer.' But so does the NY Times, Wash. Post, and CNN.

It is funny how the NY Times sides with the Russians as long as they are Commies, and then turns anti-Russian when the Russians reject Communism.

Another NY Times essay:

As a feminist philosopher, I understand our constitutional crisis to be all tangled up with a specific brand of what I call “sovereign masculinity.” Sovereign masculinity is not a real, existent thing. It lives instead in that dimension of human existence Charles Taylor called the “social imaginary,” and is just one of many things that situate me in the world in ways I don’t have to think about. ...

The conservative Harvard political philosopher Harvey Mansfield wrote a treatise praising this kind of manhood in 2006, as an antidote to America’s post-9/11 blues. “The most dramatic statement of manliness would be the one where the man is the source of all meaning, where nothing else has meaning unless the man supplies it,” he wrote. The ultimate aspiration of the sovereign man is to have his speech operate like the speech of a god, where his word instantiates truth.

This is why toxic masculinity is not a separate issue from political authoritarianism generally. The sovereign man is not subject to the law because he is a source of law for others. The spectacles of subservience we have witnessed since Trump was elected are testament to that equivalency. Once obedience to the word of the sovereign sets in, becomes normal, we are on the road to an authoritarian state.

When Marie Yovanovitch stood up straight and walked with unassailable confidence through flashing press cameras to testify before Congress, after being told not to, the spell was broken.

These people are nuts.

Yovanovitch was fired because she was a holdover political appointee who are rumored to be disloyal. Her testimony proves that she is disloyal. I don't know anything about her, but there is not a list of those who complain about being fired by Trump, and their complaints pretty well prove that they should have been fired.

Correction: A comment below suggests that my terminology was a little sloppy. Ambassador is a political job, where the President is entitled to appoint people faithful to his policies. This ambassador was a political appointment in the sense that Pres. Obama moved her from being a career State Dept employee to a political position. She was only fired in the sense that she was re-assigned back to the State Dept. These changes occur with every new administration. That is my understanding.

Dems seek to control Facebook

The NY Times reports:

Mr. Zuckerberg fought back against the idea that the social network needed to be an arbiter of speech. He said that Facebook had been founded to give people a voice and bring them together, ...

“Zuckerberg attempted to use the Constitution as a shield for his company’s bottom line, and his choice to cloak Facebook’s policy in a feigned concern for free expression demonstrates how unprepared his company is for this unique moment in our history and how little it has learned over the past few years,” said Bill Russo, a spokesman for the presidential campaign of former Vice President Joseph R. Biden Jr.

Later on Thursday, Ms. Warren took aim at the company again in a tweet: “Facebook is actively helping Trump spread lies and misinformation. Facebook already helped elect Donald Trump once. They might do it again—and profit off of it.”

The Democrats got support from about 95% of newspapers, 99% of Hollywood, and 90% of broadcast news in 2016, and still lost. For Biden or Warren to win in 2020, they will need even greater control of the news media.

That is why they endlessly pursue their crazy conspiracy theories about how the Russians or Ukrainians influenced the news in 2016.

A NY Times column argues:

Trump and his supporters are trying to “Pelosify” Schiff. Representative Andy Biggs, an Arizona Republican, is calling for a censure of Schiff for pursuing “a witch hunt in a fantasy land.”

All this is bizarre. Schiff has not even come out for impeachment, saying that such decisions should await the investigation, although he is blunt about describing Trump as a danger to the country. Schiff was chosen to lead the impeachment inquiry precisely because of his reputation not as a bomb-thrower but as a reasonable lawyer who will oversee a meticulous inquiry.

Schiff has been pro-impeachment for a year. Pursuing “a witch hunt in a fantasy land” is a good description of what he has been doing.

The House has not even authorized impeachment hearings. Schiff has been holding secret hearings.

Zuckerberg's sister is busy trying to defend the Classics from the Red Pill:

Zuckerberg prefers to tag these alt-right groups with a name they have given themselves, particularly those on the social-networking site Reddit: the Red Pill. ...

The Red Pill, Zuckerberg says, believes that multiculturalists, globalists, feminists, and political-correctness scolds keep our society in a similar state of slavery. Like the characters in the film, members of the Red Pill believe that only they can see things as they really are, often with the guidance of classical authors. The Red Pill forum had 260,000 members before Reddit “quarantined” it last September for its offensive content. Zuckerberg, citing self-reported surveys, says members are predominantly white, heterosexual American men between the ages of 18 and 35, politically conservative, and with no strong religious affiliation.

Of course the site is only quarantined because leftists do not want you to learn Red Pill wisdom.

Einstein did not consider himself European

Linh Dinh writes:

In 2018, the publication of Albert Einstein’s travel diaries was greeted by newspaper headlines lamenting his politically incorrect views of Asians, particularly the Chinese.

Most egregious was Einstein’s verdict on Chinese women, “I noticed how little difference there is between men and women; I don’t understand what kind of fatal attraction Chinese women possess that enthralls the corresponding men to such an extent that they are incapable of defending themselves against the formidable blessing of offspring.” ...

To show that Einstein’s view on the Chinese was complex, and not just negative, Rosenkranz quotes from his 1919 letter to another Jewish physicist, Paul Ehrenfest, “I get most joy from the emergence of the Jewish state in Palestine. It does seem to me that our kinfolk really are more sympathetic (at least less brutal) than these horrid Europeans. Perhaps things can only improve if only the Chinese are left, who refer to all Europeans with the collective noun ‘bandits.’”

It is interesting that Einstein did not consider himself European. I thought that it was a Nazi thing to consider Jews non-European, but apparently Einstein had that opinion long before the Nazis.

Einstein is usually described as non-religious, but he very much identified with the Jews and worked towards Zionism all his life. He became an American citizen, but he also belonged to Commie front organizations, so he probably did not consider himself American either.

I am not trying to hold Einstein's private diary comments against him. He was entitled to his opinions. But Einstein is always held out as a great source of wisdom, so we should be clear on how he thought that his values were grounded.

Meanwhile, the NY Times has published the most pro-Hitler article I have ever seen. Weird. Another article by its chief film critic says Hitler comedy can be very funny, but now that Trump is President, we shouldn't laugh at it. Maybe we should ignore his stupid movie reviews.

Ronan Farrow is damaged creep

What is the deal with Ronan Farrow? He is the son of Woody Allen and Mia Farrow, and famous for writing MeToo stories. Allen is the world's most famous neurotic Jew, who described his peculiar sexual attitudes in his movies. Nutty as he is, he is a model citizen compared to the lunatic Mia Farrow.

Ronan Farrow's new book says he is gay, and "engaged" to his 8-year boyfriend, a Jewish Hollywood writer. He had a bizarre childhood, and may never have been on a date with a girl. Yet somehow he is the one to pass judgment on what male-female sexual relations are supposed to be.

Ronan appears to be severely psychologically damaged. He refuses to say whether Woody is really his father. His mother induced his adopted sister to invent a wildly implausible allegation against Woody, in order to support her child custody dispute in court. He says:

FARROW: So one of the threads that runs through the book is my sister's courage in maintaining her claim year after year, including at times when people really refused to hear her out, ... And, you know, I wanted to be honest and vulnerable, Terry, about the fact that I was not always heroic in my conversations with her, you know? ...

But over the course of this book, I do come to an understanding that I was wrong and she was right. And her claim was credible.

How does he figure out who was right by writing a book on another subject 25 years later?

If you want the sordid details, read Wikipedia on Woody Allen sexual assault allegation. I think that it is obvious that Allen is completely innocent, but decide for yourself.

But Ronan doesn't seem to be even talking about what really happened. He seems to be just saying that the girl told a plausible story, and others were wrong not to validate her feelings.

So now he is on the warpath against heterosexual Jews like his father, and Harvey Weinstein.

Ronan did not start MeToo, as that is credited to Tarana Burke. She is a 46-year-old black woman with her own rape stories. There do not seem to be any police reports, so it is not clear whether she was a victim, or if she just believed in saying "me too" as a way of supporting other women with rape stories.

She is another damaged weirdo with her own personal issues.

Maybe I should call them jokers, after the recent movie about a crazy man who never recovers from a disturbing childhood.

What these jokers have in common is that they do not distinguish fact from fiction, rape from sexual harassment, and sexual harassment from bad dates. They pass judgment on the behavior of others, while they seem to have no idea what normal human relations should be.

Jew insists on all-Jewish panel

The Forward magazine has the slogan "Jewish. Fearless. Since 1897." It reports:

I Was Protested At Bard College For Being A Jew
By Batya Ungar-Sargon

I was invited to host a breakout session of my choosing, and I proposed a workshop on navigating other people’s opinions in the age of Trump – a topic of deep importance to my work as Opinion Editor of The Forward, where we insist on representing the full gamut of legitimate opinion.

She goes on to say that the panel was all Jewish, and that there was no need for any non-Jewish opinions.

Some left-wing students protested that this was a one-sided panel. She got mad and walked off the stage.

Yet polls show that more than 95% of Jews in America have a favorable view of Israel. The debate over whether Zionists are human and deserving of human treatment will have to be held in the absence of Jews of conscience. In 2019, no Jew should be forced to debate their humanity, their right to exist independent of anti-Semitism. ...

But as I know all too well, the most important factor in hosting the full gamut of legitimate opinion is knowing where the red lines are. And if you think allowing Jews to be protested for being Jews does not represent a red line, I have nothing more to say to you, and nothing I want to hear.

So she is all in favor of expressing legitimate opinions, except for certain red lines. Jews must totally control certain subjects.

Note that this is entirely a dispute between left-wing Jews and left-wing non-Jews. I would not be surprised if I have more agreement with the left-wing Jews than the left-wing non-Jews, on the underlying issues. But those issues were not discussed.

I am just posting this as an example of how Jews think.

Imagine if a college sponsored a panel discussion on White Genocide, and only allowed KKK members on the panel. Imagine if a White Christian said that discussing threats to the White race with non-whites is a red line that must not be crossed.

There are left-wing Jews who say that support of Israel is anti-semitic, because of some disagreemnt about the governance of Gaza and the West Bank. Here they harass a pro-Israel congressman:

A Jewish activist group has called out Louisiana Rep. Steve Scalise over what the group says is anti-Semitic and white nationalist rhetoric from the Republican party.

Two members of the progressive Jewish activist group IfNotNow confronted the congressman at a town hall event in Louisiana Monday. ...

The congressman said he has fought anti-Semitism, focusing on Republican efforts to officially condemn Minnesota Rep. Ilhan Omar for a series of allegedly anti-Semitic tweets. ...

Oliff-Lieberman then asked about President Donald Trump's claim that Jews who support Democrats are "disloyal Jews," to which Scalise appeared to smile while replying "I don't know when you had that meeting with him."

When asked to condemn anti-Semitism among Republicans, Scalise instead said he condemns "all of it," and encouraged Oliff-Lieberman to condemn anti-Semitism "on the Democrat side." ...

"I gave him the opportunity to practice Teshuva this morning, the Jewish tradition of repairing harm that has been done. ...

"Donald Trump calls me a disloyal Jew and you say nothing. You stay silent. It's a trope that literally sent my grandfather to Auschwitz, Jews being called disloyal in Germany," Newman said to Scalise.

It is really sick the way some Jews will bring up the Holocaust to harass whoever happens to be their political enemies at the moment. They support Palestinian Arabs and fight Republicans, but it is the Palestinian Arabs who attack the Jews, not the Trump Republicans. It is obvious that these Jews just hate Trump and Scalise because they are White Christians.

Start brainwashing at age 6 months

I posted research that 5-year-old kids have an understanding about racial differences, and now NPR Radio says that White parents should start brainwashing early:

Even when parents do talk about social identity, according to the survey, many wait until their kids are 10, 11 or even 12 years old. Jennifer Kotler Clarke, who oversaw the Sesame survey, says parents seem to think younger kids don't notice these differences, though "there's all sorts of research that suggest that children very early on notice definitely physical differences between different people and they make meaning of those differences. And there's discrimination very early on."

How early on? Try six months old.

It says that non-white parents talk to their kids about racial identity all the time, but White parents don't. Apparently liberals have persuaded Whites into raising a color-blind generation, but the kids notice race anyway.

Obviously color blindness is not good enough for the social justice warriors. That was also showed by the recent Harvard admissions trial, where the judge said that Harvard could go on with its twisted racial preferences forever.

Little kids already know who is smart

The London Daily Mail reports:

Children associate being ‘brilliant’ with white men, but not black men, a shocking new study suggests.

Researchers surveyed 200 children and found that, regardless of their own race, they linked the stereotype of intelligence with white men much more than white women.

However, by contrast, the stereotype wasn’t applied to black men, as black women were seen by the children as smarter. ...

For the study, published in the Journal of Social Issues, the team recruited 200 five and six-year-olds from public elementary schools in New York City. ...

The team says that policies that help children understand what ‘intellectual ability’ is might ‘reverse this inequity’.

The full paper: The acquisition of gender stereotypes about intellectual ability: Intersections with race.

This is funny. It is like professors writing an academic paper on whether the emperor has no clothes. All the adults agree that he is wearing clothes, but the 5-6yo children say he is naked. So the professors recommend policies for brainwashing the kids into thinking that the emperor is wearing clothes.

Even tho the academic paper has a section on "limitations" of their work, they never address the possibility that the kids could be right. I am sure that they would just cite an authority to show the kids wrong, if they could.

No, it is pretty clear that this paper is about brainwashing kids to unlearn the truth.

Another Daily Mail article says that a Kenyan used laser-guided Nike shoes and an army of pacers to run a sub-2-hour marathon. No one accepts this as a record, because of the obvious cheating involved.

Joanna Schroeder writes in a NY Times op-ed:

Racists Are Recruiting. Watch Your White Sons.

Parents need to understand how white supremacists prey on teen boys, so they can intervene. ...

The first sign was a seemingly innocuous word, used lightheartedly: “triggered.”

As my 11- and 14-year-old sons and their friends talked and bantered — phones in hand, as always — in the back seat of the car, one of them shouted it in response to a meme, and they all laughed uproariously.

I almost lost control of the car. That’s because I know that word — often used to mock people who are hurt or offended by racism as overly sensitive — is a calling card of the alt-right, which the Anti-Defamation League defines as “a segment of the white supremacist movement consisting of a loose network of racists and anti-Semites who reject mainstream conservatism in favor of politics that embrace implicit or explicit racism, anti-Semitism and white supremacy.” People associated with this group are known for trolling those who disagree with them, and calling critics “triggered” is a favorite tactic.

No, this is just crazy Jewish propaganda. The alt-right is not a white supremacist movement, and "triggered" is not a codeword. The word is in common use by right and left wingers.

Again it appears that kids have a firmer grasp on reality than adults writing for the NY Times.

the “white genocide” — which the Anti-Defamation League defines as the white-supremacist belief that the white race is “dying” because of growing nonwhite populations and “forced assimilation.”

But of course, it’s not just that we want to prevent our sons from becoming perpetrators of mass shootings. We want to raise them to be the kind of men who would never march with the neo-Nazis who chanted “Jews will not replace us” in Charlottesville before one of them killed a counterprotester, Heather Heyer.

More Jewish propaganda. Apparently she thinks that being a killer neo-Nazi is the same as not wanting Jews to commit genocide against Whites.

The term "genocide" was popularized by Jews, and defined by them to be broader than killing an ethnic group. An accepted definition of genocide is:

the deliberate and systematic destruction of a racial, political, or cultural group

Today there are those who are actively working towards white genocide, and those working against it. White supremacists want whites to be supreme, while others merely oppose its destruction. There is a difference.

By publishing articles like this, the NY Times shows that it is firmly on the side of destroying whites.

Many of these spots are created and promoted by organizations like PragerU, which, Dr. Duffy notes, is not an accredited university but a propaganda machine that introduces viewers to extremist views via video.

This is more crazy name-calling paranoia. I have watched a bunch of PragerU videos, and none of them are extremist. Prager is a religious Jew with mainstream conservative views. His videos are some of the least radical political videos you can find.

Google may lead them to white nationalist outlets like The Daily Stormer, where hate and harassment are normalized. Often, they have no idea which sources are reputable.

They may also find videos by more mainstream figures, including members of the so-called intellectual dark web like Jordan Peterson, a Canadian psychologist and professor at the University of Toronto, whose conservative perspectives on feminism and gender are very popular among young men and often are a path to more extreme content and ideologies.

I have also watched a bunch of Peterson videos, and they are all completely innocuous. He has rules for life like petting a cat and cleaning up your room. He is quite centrist in all his views. He is not a right-winger, and never expresses any extreme views.

On the other hand, The Daily Stormer does believe in triggering people. It offends like the new Joker movie offends. It shocks you into re-examining your beliefs. If you want to stay in your comfort zone, then don't watch the movie and don't view the web site.

Parents also need to encourage our sons how to think critically about the things they’re hearing online. One term I’ve debunked in this way for my kids is “snowflake.” An insult embraced by moderate conservatives and the alt-right alike, it’s used to dismiss people who complain about racism, sexism or homophobia as laughably delicate.

She misunderstands the term.

Snowflake is a 2010s derogatory slang term for a person, implying that they have an inflated sense of uniqueness, an unwarranted sense of entitlement, or are overly-emotional, easily offended, and unable to deal with opposing opinions. ...

It is popularly believed, but not proven, that each actual snowflake has a unique structure. ...

1996 novel Fight Club, which contains the quote: "you are not special, you are not a beautiful and unique snowflake".

The point of the metaphor is that snowflakes are supposed to be beautiful and unique, not delicate.

Who is more of a delicate snowflake? The person who wants people to stop racial slurs or mocking of gay people or the person who is upset and offended by the use of the phrase “Happy Holidays” — a common talking point during Fox News’s infamous War on Christmas segments?

Again, she misunderstands. No one is upset and offended by "Happy Holidays". Fox's Bill O'Reilly merely disagreed with what had been a campaign to eliminate "Merry Christmas". It was the leftist non-Christians who were triggered by "Merry Christmas", and who sought to marginalize Christian expressions.

Yes, there really are campaigns to diminish the power and influence of Whites and Christians. Just read the NY Times, where it publishes anti-White and anti-Christian propaganda every day.

In the shadow of Hollywood

Netflix stock is falling out of favor, and I wonder if it is partially due to its offensive content. It regularly shows black men defiling white girls.

The title character of Hanna is a 15-year-old virgin girl who never had a friend. She finally finds a friend, and then some black guy shows up and deflowers her.

In the Shadow of the Moon is a movie where a black girl from the future comes back in time to kill white people, in order to facillitate future non-whites subjugating whites. Supposedly there is a civil war in the future between the whites and non-whites, and the non-whites can win extinguish some influential whites. The protagonist is a white cop who chases her to kill her, but then lets her go when he discovers that she is her granddaughter. His blond daughter had a baby with a black man.

We are supposed to believe that exterminating white people is a good thing.

Most of the Netflix movies have some gratuitous gay or interracial sex. To avoid it, you have to watch Russian movies, or something from another era like Downton Abbey.

Non-Netflix Hollywood productions also push gay and interracial sex. There is a new Nancy Drew (2019 TV series), and the title character is an 18-year-old white girl who secretly has sexual relations with black guy who just got out of prison.

Face it, Hollywood produces propaganda directed at white genocide.

Penn State officials were framed

The most controversial thing I have ever said on this blog is that I believe Jerry Sandusky was innocent. The case against him was just obvious nonsense.

I said similar things in the McMartin Preschool and Duke Lacrosse cases. The public eventually came out to understand that these were false accusations. But almost no one defends Sandusky or Penn State.

Jerry Coyne says Malcolm Gladwell mentions the issue, without defending Sandusky, but notes:

1.) “The boy in the shower”, the linchpin of the case against Sandusky, swore in a written statement to Sandusky’s attorney that no sexual contact had occurred. After he hired a lawyer, the boy (now older) recanted. This may be because he wanted a slice of the generous settlement offered by Penn State to Sandusky’s victims — a settlement that turned out to be about $140 million, making any claimed victim a multimillionaire.

2.) None of the eight boys who eventually said they were molested by Sandusky ever told anyone about his misconduct before they spoke to police, and many continued to associate with him in the interim.

3.) Some of the accusations, like Sandusky locking a boy in the basement for three days and repeatedly raping him, with Sandusky’s wife, one floor above and oblivious to the screams, strain credulity.

4.) Some or all of the boys (it’s not clear from the piece) were subject to “recovered memory therapy”, and didn’t remember the molestations until therapists “helped” them remember the details.

The above is only a sample of other exculpatory data offered by Crews.

There was probably better evidence against the Salem witches.

All of the accusers invented their stories after being offered millions of dollars in Penn State settlement money. Some, such as the slimeball Mike McQueary, were obviously lying for their personal gain.

Don't expect a reasoned judgment from Gladwell. He sees himself as more of a storyteller than a truthteller.

Impeachment rationale is a Jewish joke

Harvard Psychology professor Steven Pinker writes in a NY Times op-ed:

Two decades ago the impeachment of a president hinged on what the meaning of “is” is. This time it may depend on the semantics of “I would like you to do us a favor though.” ...

His supporters insist he should be taken “seriously but not literally.” Yet this time it may be the nonliteral meaning of his words that proves his undoing. ... The word “though” signals a violated expectation.

No, Clinton's impeachment did not hinge on the meaning of "is". That was just how he obfuscated a question.

This time it appears to be about the word "though", and this Jewish joke:

Announcing an undesirable state of affairs is a classic stratagem for asking the hearer to rectify it without the rudeness of an imperative. In an old joke, a couple is lying in bed and the wife says, “Murray, it’s cold outside.” Murray gets up, closes the window, and says, “So now it’s warm outside?”

I am not sure what makes this a Jewish joke, but I will accept Jewish authority on this. (Pinker describes himself as a Jewish atheist.)

Chief Trump persecutor Adam Schiff has his own goofy paraphrased interpretation of Trump's words.

So Trump is to be put on trial, not based on what he said or did, but on how his words can be translated into Jew-speak?

Pinker and Schiff seem to be arguing that whenever someone talks, there is always an ulterior motive, there is always a quid pro quo, and there is always an attempt at personal profit. They do not even recognize the possibility that Trump wanted information to be public for the good of everyone.

I guess I need to learn more Jewish jokes to understand this thinking.

According to the transcript, Trump said "I would like you to get to the bottom of it." To most people, that means Trump wants him to get to the bottom of it.

Almost everyday, the NY Times gives some bogus re-interpretation of Trump's words. Sometimes it gives the exact quote, so you can see for yourself that the newspaper is lying about the plain meaning of the words.

Trump is hated by Jews on the Left, and Mormons on the Right. Maybe next I will address why Mormons hate Trump.

Actor fired for OK symbol

It is getting easier and easier to get fired for innocently offending someone. This one is bizarre:

Universal Orlando has fired an actor dressed as the “Despicable Me” character Gru and flashed a white power symbol while posing for a photo with a 6-year-old biracial girl with autism and a 2-year-old boy, a representative from Universal Orlando told TheWrap.

The girl’s parents Tiffiney and Richard Zinger told USA Today that they noticed in one of their family photos that the actor was discreetly making the upside down “OK” gesture, which has been recognized as a hate symbol commonly used by white supremacists, while resting his hand on the girl’s shoulder. Video given to USA Today by the family further showed that the actor rested his hand on the girl’s shoulder as normal, and then made the gesture as the photo was being taken.

“We never want our guests to experience what this family did. This is not acceptable and we are sorry – and we are taking steps to make sure nothing like this happens again,” Tom Schroeder, a spokesperson for Universal Studios in Orlando said in a statement. “We can’t discuss specifics about this incident, but we can confirm that the actor no longer works here. We remain in contact with the family and will work with them privately to make this right.”

It seems very unlikely that the actor intended some sort of hate symbol.

Maybe it is better to just stay away from a 6-year-old biracial girl with autism. If this man can be blamed for this, there is no telling what you might be blamed for. The SJWs tried to ruin the Covington boy because a facial expression was perceived as a smirk.

Many conservatives have wised up about Trump

The NY Times reports:

Glenn Beck, the radio host who once called Mr. Trump “an immoral man who is absent decency or dignity,” now says that his defeat in 2020 would mark “the end of the country as we know it.” Senator Lindsey Graham of South Carolina, who so bitterly feuded with the president during the 2016 primaries that Mr. Trump gave out Mr. Graham’s cellphone number on national television, declared last week that impeachment was nothing but “a political setup.”

It can be difficult to remember that indignation and contempt for Mr. Trump once simmered in every corner of the conservative world.

Trump exposed a dirty little secret about Republicans and National-Review conservatives -- they were owned by the Left. They didn't really conserve anything. They merely tried to slow the advance of Leftism.

Now the Dems are trying to impeach Trump for merely asking Ukraine to investigate some corruption allegations. Such cooperation is even an obligation of a USA-Ukraine treaty. The effort to oust Trump should be seen as a coup by corrupt Dems.

The arguments for impeachment do not even involve anything that anyone thought was criminal before Trump.

All patriotic Americans should support Trump. I am glad to see that Beck and Graham have gotten on board. There are still a lot of RINO Republicans like Mitt Romney.

All of the Democrat presidential candidates are now committed to open borders, abolishing private health insurance, various socialist policies, and impeaching Trump for asking Ukraine to get to the bottom of some corruption allegations. Yes, these things would be the end of America as we know it.

Another dubious She Said accuser

Rowena Chiu writes a NY Times op-ed:

In 1998, I had recently graduated from Oxford with a degree in English literature, and my one ambition was to succeed in the film industry. ...

on her affair with Harvey Weinstein: a late-night meeting with Harvey. I had expected to discuss potential film productions and scripts, and we did. But after hours of fending off his chitchat, flattery, requests for massages and a bath, ultimately I found myself pushed back against the bed. I’d worn two pairs of tights for protection, and tried to appease him by taking one of them off and letting him massage me, but it hadn’t worked. ...

But even after the weeks of intense pressure, when I finally signed the nondisclosure document, accepting a settlement of £125,000 (about $213,000) and agreeing to stay silent forever, the trauma was not yet over.

She says that she was sexually attracted to him because he was a rich and powerful white man. She knew his reputation for sexual harassment when she went to work for him. She voluntarily went with him to a hotel room late at night, and took her tights off. She never took her underwear off or had sexual relations with him.

Most women are sexually attracted to rich and powerful men, and will use them to their advantage.

In those 20 years, she got married and divorced, and never told her husband.

That is her story. Weinstein says it was all consensual.

I am not going to try to figure out what happened 20 years ago, as there were no witnesses, and no way of determining the truth. Most women are unable to recount accurately incidents like this, even if they try. What they remember is some story they told about it.

It appears that she was using him as much as he was using her. She was turned on by him, and used him to get into the film industry. She flirted with him, and then collected $213k for it. She never did what she led him to believe that she was going to do. She was dishonest with her husband, and she broke her contract. She sold her body for $213k, and then reneged on the deal.

The NY Times reporters are now using her to sell a book, even tho it is doing grave damage to her reputation. Now everyone knows what she is. I think that she got bad advice.

She says "Harvey was white and I was a person of color", in order to fit the NY Times narrative. Of course Harvey is Jewish and she is Chinese. Harvey is facing criminal charges, based on old and dubious allegations like this one.

Expert advice on eating beef has been wrong

Experts have been giving us bad dietary advice for decades, and here is the latest example:

Public health officials for years have urged Americans to limit consumption of red meat and processed meats because of concerns that these foods are linked to heart disease, cancer and other ills. But on Monday, in a remarkable turnabout, an international collaboration of researchers produced a series of analyses concluding that the advice, a bedrock of almost all dietary guidelines, is not backed by good scientific evidence. If there are health benefits from eating less beef and pork, they are small, the researchers concluded. Indeed, the advantages are so faint that they can be discerned only when looking at large populations, the scientists said, and are not sufficient to tell individuals to change their meat-eating habits.

I haven't checked, but I bet that the people who told us to eat less beef and pork were primarily leftists.

Transgender children under the age of 16 should be able to undergo surgery without their parents’ permission, according to Australia’s top psychologists.

The Australian Psychological ­Society, which represents 24,000 professionals, says the disapproval of both parents should not inhibit a child under 16 from consenting to procedures. ...

Parents who disapprove of their children’s medical treatment pose a ‘significant barrier’ for the child, it said.

To overcome this, the body has suggested hospitals should have the right to petition courts as well as ‘advocacy’ to change the minds of parents.

Further, legal advice should be accessible so the young people can authorise their treatment, it said.

This is really sick.

I always thought Sigmund Freud was a phony, but this article relates his dubious theories with his Jewishness. Freud was considered a non-religious Jew, but his Jewishness was extremely important to him, and to the success of his goofy work. Freud would be just another quack, if he were not promoted by Jews.

The NY Times mostly prints fake news about Pres. Trump, but today's issue has an article about gay men fighting over custody of an old dog:

After a Divorce, Who Gets the Dog?

I recommend a petnup.

Steve and Jim considered themselves married in North Carolina for 4 years. The dog is 14 years old. Steve complains that only three states (Illinois, Alaska and, effective this year, California) have divorce laws where judges consider the best interests of the dog. The world has gone mad.

The 3 Stooges trying to impeach Trump

From an American Spectator essay:

Take heart, anti-Semites. Or be depressed. Because the myth on which so much anti-Semitism is built finally now is exposed as one more fantasy, one more falsehood, one more libel. This is the myth that Jews have influence in the Democrat Party. Turns out ’taint so. Duh!

Don’t get me wrong. Like most American Jews, I love many of the main anti-Semitic myths and defamations. Lying Jew-haters say that Jews control the banks. They say that Jews control the wealth. They say that Jews hypnotize the world. They say that Jews control everything.

As a Jew, what’s not to love when you read that stuff? ...

And now The Last Great Anti-Semitic Myth explodes. The myth that Jews have influence in the Democrat Party. If you want to see “powerful” Jews who are so bereft of power and influence that it would make even an anti-Semite feel pity, look at the Three Stooges: Charles Schumer, Jerrold Nadler, and Adam Schiff. ...

Schumer, Nadler, Schiff. They are the Three Stooges who symbolize and epitomize the utter emptiness and myth of “Jewish influence” in the Democrat Party. Those Jews are pure suckers, just as the Democrats have hoodwinked Black America. When the Democrats know they have you in their pockets, they move on. For example, they figure they have Blacks in their pockets, so they now focus on importing Hispanic voters to leapfrog Blacks socially and economically — which is exactly what is happening.

And the Democrats likewise know they have non-Orthodox Jews, Fake Jews, and anti-Semitic Jews in their pockets.

Okay, but that was written months ago, and now those three stooges are leading the effort to impeach Pres. Trump.

Why?

See The Secret Back Story Behind the Outright Treason of Adam Schiff for an interesting theory.

The NY Post reports:

Rep. Adam Schiff, head of the House Intelligence Committee, on Wednesday said Democrats will consider any White House efforts to stonewall the Ukraine investigation as obstruction of justice.

“It is why I saw the White House needs to understand that any action like that forces us to litigate or have to consider litigation will be considered further evidence of obstruction of justice,” the California Democrat said, noting that obstruction was one of the articles of impeachment against President Richard Nixon in 1974.

“We are not fooling around. We do not want this to drag on for months and months, which appears to be the strategy,” said Schiff,

Schiff also says: “It is hard to imagine a more corrupt course of conduct” than Trump asking Ukraine for info relevant to corruption investigations.

But why would Jews think that asking for info was corrupt? Why is his imagination so limited? Why does he say that challenging a subpoena in court is a crime?

Every US President, starting with George Washington, took the position that Congress has no right to details of discussions with foreign leaders. Trump has been more transparent than any other President. And yet Schiff makes an impeachment issue out of it?

It now turns out that the so-called whistleblower report was a set-up. The rules required such reports to be first-hand, so they changed the rules so a CIA official with only hearsay knowledge could file a report. It appears that Schiff was in on this long before it was made public.

Schiff obviously has ideas about right and wrong that are foreign to Christian Americans. Same with Nadler and Schumer. The above article attempts to explain the weirdo preoccupation with Russia and Ukraine. I don't know. Maybe I will check the Jewish press for an explanation. At any rate, it does appear that these three stooges are traitors to America.

Trolling for a civil war

Ramesh Ponnuru writes for Bloomberg/Yahoo:

President Donald Trump warns that removing him from office would “cause a Civil War-like fracture in this Nation from which our Country will never heal.” He is quoting Robert Jeffress, a prominent evangelical supporter, who also says that Democrats are trying to remove Trump from office because they know they cannot defeat him in an election. But this effort, Jeffress predicts and Trump affirms, will fail.

Ponnuru goes on to agree with Jeffress that the effort to remove Trump will fail.

The NY Times wants to ban Trump from Twitter:

It’s important to stress that what Mr. Trump is doing is no different from what various autocrats and haters around the world are doing with social media platforms to push their malevolent agendas. With this latest move by the troller in chief, with no reaction from Twitter, it’s official that the medium has been hijacked by those who want to take advantage of its porous and sloppy rules.

What about all the newspapers that are reporting that Maxine Waters says she wants to put Trump in solitary confinement?

Some guy named Hunter says:

I had a very long discussion with Christopher Cantwell this evening about Donald Trump, the Deep State, the 2020 election and the meltdown of The Daily Stormer which is a Jewish performance art website that was created to control and discredit the Far Right.

Really? A performance art website?

The Daily Stormer does have troll articles, and humor. Sometimes I think it is just being silly. Sometimes I think it is being deliberately offensive, to drive away the normies. Or maybe it is a false flag operation to discredit the Far Right.

The site says that it is the most censored site. I believe it.

Regardless of Trump's Twitter feed, reading either the NY Times or the Daily Stormer might lead you to believe that we are headed towards Civil War 2.0. They are saying the same thing, in different ways.

The Left threatens Civil War 2

NY Times opinion writer Charlie Warzelwrites:

As outlandish and extreme as it is, warning of a looming civil war is a familiar talking point across the pro-Trump media. It’s part of a growing tradition of right-wing fearmongering ...

The threat of a civil war often comes up in discussions of an assault weapons ban. A proposed gun buyback program? “What you are calling for is civil war,” Tucker Carlson said on Fox News. The conservative writer Erick Erickson tweeted, “It is not a stretch to say there’d be violence if the gov’t tried to confiscate” AR-15s.

No, this is not just right-wing fear-mongering.

Democrat candidates really are talking about confiscating AR-15s, the most popular American rifle. They threaten to oust a popularly elected President because he asked a foreign official for information. They threaten to abolish all border controls, and to allow invasions of migrants and refugees. They threaten to abolish private medical insurance. They push to censor non-leftist political views. Democrat-controlled California increasingly tries to disassociate itself from the rest of the USA.

The "pro-Trump media" is only 5% of the news media. It is really just Fox News in the evening, and Rush Limbaugh during the day. Trump-haters control all the other networks, as well as Hollywood and the computer platforms.

The Left is pushing for war, not the Right.

Ousting Pres. Trump would be a Deep State coup.

Maybe ousting Pres. Nixon should have been considered a coup, as we now know that it secretly led by a disgruntled assistant FBI director who committed felonies to set up Nixon.

But Nixon was at least accused of some illegalities. Trump is not even accused of anything illegal.