The Right-o-sphere is rife with personal stories of Facebook, Google/Youtube and Twitter either de-monetizing, restricting, throttling, censoring or banning conservative and libertarian voices.

Facebook seems happy to do it – while allowing Islamists the run of the place, to the point where PM Theresa May called for Internet censorship after the recent Islamist mass murders in Manchester.

Earlier this year, Mark Zuckerberg said:

[Terrorist attacks are] carried out with a goal to spread fear and distrust, and turn members of a community against each other. I believe the only sustainable way to fight back against those who seek to divide us is to create a world where understanding and empathy can spread faster than hate, and where every single person in every country feels connected and cared for and loved. That’s the world we can and must build together.

This is so misguided that, coming from a nominally-intelligent man, one must almost wonder if some evil force possesses him? Because it happens to be what the wolf would say to the hounds if it could; or what Satan might say when cornered.

Newsflash, Mr. Zuckerberg: terrorist attacks are carried out with a goal of killing infidels and establishing the supremacy of Islam. Period. You have to admit a problem’s true nature, before you can solve it.

I don’t want to “fight back against those who seek to divide us.” Because that makes zero sense. Anyone who ever does anything good or new, or who takes a stand (be it true or false) on anything, “seeks to divide us.” It happens. It makes much more sense to fight back against those who seek to subjugate and/or kill us.

The terrorist losers use your own platform, Mr. Zuckerberg, and it’s not clear if you make much effort to stop them. Much less, an effort greater than what you put into stopping U.S. conservatives, or other critics of Hillary or the Big Government that you love so much.

Recently, a Pakistani man was sentenced to death for alleged blasphemy – on his Facebook page. Facebook claims innocence; “we do not provide any government with direct access to people’s data. We will continue to protect our community from unnecessary or overreaching government intervention.”

But I don’t know if I can believe that. Because:

• Pakistan asked Facebook’s help to fight blasphemy.
• Reports exist that Facebook assisted them.
• Which are credible because of Facebook’s track record. When Angela Merkel pressed Zuckerberg to crack down on posts critical of Germany’s Muslim refugee crisis, he told her yes, they’re working on it.

Is Facebook an accessory to Pakistan’s judicial murder of Taimoor Raza? We need to know. I couldn’t find any recent statement about it.

And of course, that Facebook would ever give a hoot about anti-Jewish or anti-Christian blasphemy is unimaginable. (As it should be; the point here is Facebook’s extreme double standard.)

Right now it appears that Facebook puts WAY more into stopping conservatives and libertarians – people who stand for life and liberty – than it puts into stopping various kinds of Islamic murderer. That’s evil.

Hat tip Steven Crowder. By the way, his Painting Muhammad video is must-see.

The first step to solving a problem for real, is: Naming it honestly.

As Mark Steyn points out (hat tip V), our leftie-globalist-academic Superiors want us to believe that “sowing division” is what’s wrong with the endless stream of mass murders by Muslim terrorists. Because the desirable opposite is “unity”, led by those same Superiors.

Thus, they subtly equate their critics with Muslim terrorists. If, say, you’re a free-market populist who rejects the elite consensus, you’re as bad as a Muslim mass murderer. Because you’re also “sowing division”.

It’s similar to how the Left represents “hate speech” (i.e., criticism or rejection of the Left) as a form of violence, unprotected by the First Amendment. Under such insane terms, the Left is allowed to attack you with physical violence because they are only protecting themselves from the “violence” that you were about to think, or say.

Re: the London attacks, British media says they were done by “men of Mediterranean coloring”. It has a courtroom precision to it, which is nice, but also don’t say Muslim.

London’s Muslim mayor, Sadiq Khan, did at least call them “cowardly terrorists”. And Prime Minister Theresa May slammed the “evil ideology of Islamist extremism” – but then went back to calling for “unity”, plus Internet censorship. As opposed to, say, deporting the UK’s known Muslim radicals and improved vetting of Muslim immigrants, or better enforcement of the UK’s existing laws against inciting violence.

It’s beyond question that the murderers were doing it for Allah. One can only hope that the good people of the UK will wake up.

Yesterday I wrote a lot of text on this. Thanks to all commenters who made helpful additions.

Today I want to give the short version. With short sentences. For lefties.

• The Paris Agreement did not control CO2. It let China, India and Russia do what they wanted. Oooh, Russia! Bad!!!!1!! Right?
• The Paris Agreement did not control CO2. Even the UN scienticians agreed that it made almost no difference to their Global Warming projected temperatures.
• The Paris Agreement was a krazy-bad deal. It made the U.S. almost the only leading country that has to wreck its workers’ lives and futures.
• The Paris Agreement was a krazy-bad deal. It made the U.S. almost the only leading country that has to give away many tens of billions of dollars annually, to pay Third World kleptocrats to hold back their countries.

Hey lefties: If you didn’t know these things, I’m sorry you’re so gullible.

I bet you’re gullible enough to think CNN or WaPo “fact checkers” are real, and not just fellow lefties trying to keep you on the plantation.

And, one more time: If Paris “imposes nothing on us” or is non-binding – then why should withdrawing from it be a crisis?

Think. If it’s true that any party can blow it off (note IF) – then it’s worthless, in yet another way.

On a recent episode of Law and Order: SVU (which I was amazed to learn is still in production), the storyline concerned… I am not making this up… a Christian church that encourages teenagers to rape other teenagers to keep them from turning gay.

SVU’s writers saved their coup de grace for the final minutes of the episode. In those last moments, the audience learns that Lucas himself is a closeted homosexual, and the priest told him to have sex with Ann as penance for his own homoerotic thoughts.

Yeah, because Christian ministers *always* encourage teenagers to engage in premarital sex to ward off Teh Ghey.

It’s like everything Hollywood knows about Christianity comes from The Handmaids Tale: which is nothing but a paranoid fantasy of what the world would be like if Christians acted like Muslims.

The Federalist has a run-down of pathetic, whinging, crybaby males tweeting and instagramming their support for pussy-hat feminists. They bizarrely seem to believe this will make them more attractive to women… or perhaps, men.

Seriously, why would any guy want to be in a relationship with a woman who blames men for every problem, setback, and sadfeel she has ever sadfelt? What self-respecting gay dude would want to be in a relationship with a guy whose main concern was appeasing women who see Ashley Judd as a role model?  What kind of man views his own masculinity as “toxic,” and thinks he should be subjected to feminist reprogramming to cure himself of manhood?

The conceit of “Toxic Masculinity” is the idea that women … specifically feminists… will decide and dictate to men the acceptable ways for them to express their masculinity. You can imagine the outcry if men asserted that they would decided how to limit the ways in which women could express their identity.

CNN illustrates “Russian Hacking” using a screencap from FALLOUT.

A left-wing Norwegian politician was raped by a Somalian immigrant. Now, *he* feels guilty for… I don’t know… being European and stuff.

“I got a strong feeling of guilt and responsibility,” Hauken wrote. “I was the reason he wouldn’t be in Norway, and instead be sent to an unknown future in Somalia. He had already done his time in prison. Would he get punished again, and this time much harder?”

Kind of the Eurotopian left in a nutshell: “We feel so much guilt because our ancestors had colonies and because we have money that we’re going to bring in uncivilized people to rape us and take our welfare; because we deserve it.”

“In his culture, sexual abuse is about power, not lust,” Hauken said. “And it’s not considered a gay action to be the one who engages in power and violence.”

“I don’t feel anger against my rapist, because I look at him as a product of an unjust world. A product of an upbringing full of war,” Hauken said.

What this all means, according to Hauken, is that refugees need our help more than ever.

I can’t even.

 A Quebec aboriginal man who repeatedly burned a five-year-old girl with a cigarette, leaving permanent scars on her face, arms, legs and genitalia, has been given a lenient sentence after a judge determined he is a “collateral victim” of residential school abuse.

“The court imposes a less severe sentence on Mr. Bellemare considering the consequences experienced by the community because of residential schools and the aboriginal reality,” Lambert ruled.

The Left wants to make sure everyone knows who the *real* victims of the terror attack in Brussels were; and it wasn’t the nearly three dozen dead, or the hundreds that were maimed by shrapnel (because the peaceful Mohammedans loaded their peaceful bomb with thousands of peaceful nails so that they could peacefully maim the infidels who survived).  I mean, they were kinda sorta victims, but they aren’t the one who are *really* going to suffer because of this act of what the Obama Administration calls “Random Violence.”

Nope, the real victims of the attack are the Mohammedans, because, as a result of the attack people may be less sociable toward them, perhaps even rude.

While many have raised security concerns over the hundreds of thousands of Syrians and migrants from elsewhere who have crossed into Europe in recent months, Muslim communities across Europe have come under growing scrutiny.

Growing scrutiny? How awful for them. No one deserves growing scrutiny. I wouldn’t wish growing scrutiny on anyone!

Oh, and the other *real* victim is, of course, Barack Obama.

Obama just can’t move his focus away from the Middle East/terrorism. His Cuba trip now overshadowed by today’s events.

Gosh, that sucks. I hope the people who are bleeding in Belgian hospitals keep our president in their thoughts in prayers.

He has suffered so much.

Over New Year’s Eve, at least 60 German women were sexually assaulted by over 1,000 Mohammedan migrants in Cologne.

Previously, German women were instructed to dress modestly to avoid offending their new Mohammedan overlords.

Don’t hold your breath waiting for the Rolling Stone to do a big story on this. Also for the American Feminist Branch of the Democrat-Media Complex to raise any alarms about the Regime’s plan to add hundreds of thousands of additional Momhammedan “refugees.”

They’re too busy planning the theme for the next ‘Slut-Walk.’ I think they’re going with “Smash the Patriarchy.”

A group of sanctimonious left-wing dhimmis has started a movement called #NotMyAmerica because of their outrage over people who provoke Mohammedans to acts of violence and terror by drawing pictures of their prophet Mohammed.

“In our America, freedom of speech should not be used to trump freedom of religion,” she told The Huffington Post. “All Americans have the right to worship free of fear and intimidation.”

When free speech provokes, threatens, incites, it’s no longer productive or safe. That’s what #PHXmosque rally is. That’s #NotMyAmerica

So, I am certain they will be showing up at the next San Francisco Gay Pride Parade to protest these people then, right?

In response to this morning’s Mohammedan terror attack, Leftist Lesbian Media Person Sally Kohn asserts that Islamic terror is just as bad as Christian and Jewish terror.

Excuse me, sir… *what* Jewish and Christian terror are you referring to? Are the MFM in a huge conspiracy to cover up how militant Latter Day Saints have been firebombing performances of The Book of Mormon? Because I certainly did not hear anything about that.  Nor have I heard anything about Roman Catholics going on rampages because “edgy” artists get taxpayer grants to defile Christian iconography.

The truth is, Christians, Jews, Buddhists, and so forth do not systematically commit terroristic acts in retribution for alleged “offenses” to their religious sensibilities. They simply don’t. Nor are rare and isolated acts of violence condoned by the leaders of those sects.  But leftists are so fully invested in the dogma that Christianity is evil and intolerant, and Western Civilization is evil and intolerant, and Mohammedans are fellow victims of this oppression … they simply have to generate more lies to maintain the narrative; even if it requires total denial of reality.

Update: Sally Kohn says Muslims shouldn’t be blamed for terrorism, says Christians should be blamed for “everything.”

Remember when Barack Obama socialized the student loan industry? Remember how leftists thought this was great because instead of greedy capitalist banks, loans would now be run by a compassionate and wise Government bureaucracy.

Guess what? They’re not happy. They think their Womyn’s Studies and Queerism Studies should be fre e.

From the Occupy Democrats Facebook page.

Perhaps Obama should do to higher Ed what he did to health care; add 20,000 pages of regulation to it, cap professor salaries, limit the number and types of courses people can take, and raise taxes on textbooks and people with college degrees.

On a related note, Mohammedans in Minnesota are demanding that the Free Food they get from taxpayers and productive people be  Shariah-compliant.

“It’s about human rights also, basic human rights to get the proper food and also healthy food,” said Hassan Mohamud, the protesters’ imam.

While the American Media curl up at Obama’s feet, compose odes to his Wonderfulness, and make asses of themselves trying to get a glimpse of the “Great Leader,” it is left to the foreign media to cover the atrocities being committed in the name of Islam and the Caliphate in Iraq and Syria. This is what real genocide looks like.

Yet, the American Progressive Left can muster very little outrage when Mohammedans commit genocide. There are no “die-ins” in Boston or Berkeley. No mass protests. No calls for the supporters of ISIS to be banned from college campuses.  No reports of Democrats comparing ISIS to Nazis.

It is almost as if the Progressive has an enormous moral blind spot when it comes to atrocities committed by Mohammedans. It is as if they cannot be bothered when genocide is committed by people who hate America. It is as if they have never been bothered when genocide is committed by people who hate America.

Meanwhile, Obama authorizes a few pinprick airstrikes and drops some bottled water, then heads off for his Tee Time.*

I also note that Boko Haram has not #BroughtBackOurGirls. Michelle Obama and Jen Psaki might want to check on that.

(more…)

What struck me, reading the lefty responses to a tweet in support of Israel, is just how childish the lefty position on Israel is.

The moderate left position (the hard left position on Israel being indistinguishable from Stormfront’s) seems to be “Of course, Israel should be allowed to defend itself but only if no one gets hurt, not even accidentally.” (This is the expressed position of the Obama Administration, which mouths moderate left rhetoric even though it is ideologically hard left.)

This position is so unrealistic it’s childish. It is literally something a child might wish for; because it is childish to believe that wants can be fulfilled without effort, and that actions can take place without consequences. They want some kind of magical war where Israel can defend itself from barbarians hiding behind children without hurting anyone.

Lefties apparently confuse “Iron Dome” with “Ironman.” The latter is a movie, lefties. Not real.

And the mainstream press practices their own form of moderate left camouflage. Their true hard left ideology tells them that all the conflict in the world is the result of oppressors taking from the oppressed. But in order to not be so obviously Marxist, they have to default the childish, moderate left position, that there really aren’t any bad guys among nations, and that each side must be equally wrong and culpable in any conflict. They don’t report the barbarism of Palestinians… using children as human shields, or shooting rockets loaded with ball bearings and razor blades at Israeli schools. To truly and honestly report on the barbarity of the Palestinians would violate the moderate left dogma that neither side in any conflict is morally superior to the other.

Very, very immature people are in charge of the USA at this juncture. Want proof? Here’s your proof.

(more…)

Just kidding, they only go after the religion that *doesn’t* kill you for offending them.

Despite condemnation by the Archdiocese of Boston, Harvard Chaplains, student religious groups, and many alumni and students on campus, an organization of Harvard Extension School students will move forward with plans to host a staging of a satanic “black mass” on campus on Monday.

A black mass ceremony is a ritual performed by satanic cults to parody the Catholic Church Mass. Historically, the ceremony features a ritual of sacrilege of the Catholic host, or the sacred bread used in the Eucharist, which becomes the body of Jesus Christ upon consecration.

But remember, mocking the beliefs of Mohammedans is “racist” and “intolerant.”

Update: Canceled… with whiny little note from the organizers.

“The point of this event is to challenge the stigmatization of marginalized groups.”

They’re still claiming that any opposition to leftism could only be motivated by racism. Here, Rep. Steve Israel (D) says it back-hand style:

Candy: Do you think your Republican colleagues are racist?

Israel: Not all of them, no. Of course not. But to a significant extent, the Republican base does have elements that are animated by racism.

They’re still demanding that their failures be subsidized and bailed out. Here, a “green” solar company sues the government for only having dished it $250 million of taxpayer money, instead of millions more.

They’re still using highly questionable statistics to demagogue the issue of equal pay for men and women.

They’re still fighting their ‘war’ on Fox News, and failing – sometimes with hilarious results. The video shows Greta van Susteren cornering an aggressive Democrat into admitting that he lied about his resume.

They’re still racially divisive with amazing double standards. Here, a Democrat belittles her African-American GOP colleague for being only “half” black. Which, remember, happens to be what President Obama is.

They still have amazing double standards on the issues of Islam, free speech and women’s rights. Last week, leftists hit a triple (the wrong positions on all three) when Brandeis snubbed Ayaan Hirsi Ali after considering her for an honorary degree.

They’re still screeching “McCarthyism!” to deflect attention from their misconduct, as Rep. Elijah Cummings (D) did last week, when questions arose over his own staff’s collusion with the dangerously out-of-control IRS.

UPDATE: At least there’s hope for Wisconsin:

Wisconsin Governor Scott Walker has had a good run lately. He signed a major tax relief package into law, his controversial budget reforms have put the state back in the black…A new poll from Wisconsin Public Radio suggests that voters are appreciative of the governor’s accomplishments. Walker leads Democrat Mary Burke by 16 points in the survey (56/40), with Walker’s approval rating soaring to just shy of 60 percent — an all-time high in the series. (President Obama’s job approval is underwater at 48/50 in the poll). Walker’s lead is fueled by a 19-point advantage among independents…

It seems Jeff and I have been doing more than a few posts lately cataloguing the angry derangement of the left. All of this anger, shrillness, violent pathology, intolerance, rage, and rejection of logic coming from those who claim to be the most peceaful, tolerant, and rational members of society creates a paradox. How can a progressive claim to be rationale, and yet consistently favor discredited and unsustainable economic policies? How can a progressive claim to be tolerant, yet demand that all contrary opinion be shouted down and dissidents be jailed? How can a progressive claim to believe all races are equal, but demand that blacks and hispanics be treated as inferiors that need to be condescended to and acccommodated because they just can’t be expected to perform as well as white people if all are treated equally?  And the greatest paradox of all; how are progressive leftists so blind to their own contradictions and hypocrisy?

(Progressive Leftist: “Um, because You’re a RACIST!!!”)

John C. Wright Attempts to explain:

The theory must explain, first, the honest decency of the modern liberals combined with their astonishing indifference, nay, hostility to facts, common sense, and evidence; second, it must explain their high self-esteem (or, to be blunt, their pathological narcissism) combined not merely with an utter lack of accomplishment, but with their utter devotion to destructiveness, a yearning to ruin everything they touch; third, it must explain their sanctimoniousness combined with their applause, praise, support, and tireless efforts to spread all perversions (especially sexual), moral decay, vulgarity, and every form of desecration; fourth, their pretense of intellectual superiority combined with their notorious mental fecklessness; fifth, it must explain both their violence and their pacifism; sixth, the theory must explain why they hate the very things they should love most; seventh, the theory must explain why they are incapable of comprehending an honest disagreement or any honorable foe.

The essay attempts to arrive at this theory, and as such, has to cover a lot of ground, and uses a lot of big words and philosophical concepts that would be utterly lost on the typical progressive Obama-voter. But it sort of comes down to this.

How can anyone continue to be a Leftist for a week, much less for a lifetime?

The answer, allow me to remind the patient reader, grows out of their theory. Again, their theory of knowledge is that there is no knowledge, no truth, only bigoted opinion. The only way to avoid bigotry is to avoid judgment and the use of reason. Avoiding reason necessitates a theory of morality that denies cause and effect. No vice causes loss, no virtue causes happiness. Hence life is a random roulette wheel. If there are no vices and virtues, not even the intellectual virtues of honest thinking, then no independent thought is desired or permitted. Instead, all thoughts are determined by social cues. Thought is collective.

…

The whole point of Liberal theory from start to finish is to form earplugs to smother the ringing of that alarm clock called reality.

…

The Leftists are people who abandon their innate intelligence and moral stature and who  deliberately make themselves to be stupider than average, less moral and upright and decent than average, who at once combine the worst features of a self-deceived fool and a self-deceiving conniving con-man. The only thing that saves them from the constant pain of the dentist drill of their conscience, the constant clamor of their wretched self-esteem telling them that they do not deserve to live, the only thing, indeed, keeping them alive, is their false and inflated sense of sanctimony.

Some quick links.

• More LGBTQ harassment stories had to be recanted? Sadly, yes. One hoax by a teen in CA, another hoax by a teen in the UK.
• In more UK news, the BBC censors a LGBTQ question about free speech(!), lest homophobic Muslims be offended. America’s future?
• In more Islamic news, it appears that CODEPINK founder Medea Benjamin was harassed…by the police of a Muslim country’s airport jail. She was traveling to help the Palestinians, against liberal and highly-tolerant Israel. Ironic?
• Depressing: CDC warns that gonorrhea is on the verge of being untreatable.
• Something lighter: chicks have officially discovered the pastime of “groin gazing”. (cough)

Thanks to reader Peter H, for about half the items!

I had a lunch discussion recently with two former co-workers. Both of these men are engineers in their 30s who are fairly hard-working, competent and successful, pulling six-figure salaries. In the free and dynamic America of yore, these men would be proud of where their choices in life had taken them. But this is 2014, they are white, and they are MSDNC-watching left-liberals in a “Blue” area.

“Mark” started saying how lucky he feels to be an engineer because the work is physically so much easier and safer than being a field worker or factory hand, and pays more. I agreed, while reminding Mark that the work is mentally exhausting, something much-demanded by society (the market), and something most people wouldn’t even attempt. In other words, reminding Mark that he deserves his salary.

As if to answer me, “Ross” instantly went into a description of himself as “born into privilege”, saying how he had never really chosen anything in his life, but his course has always been determined by the social forces pushing him along and granting him privilege. This was strange, because I know for a fact that Ross works hard, which is a choice right there. So I reminded him of the constant stream of choices that he faces – be it as simple as “go back to work after this lunch, or not?” – and how those choices affect his results, like having a salary or not.

I won’t bore you with too many details. The conversation continued as a debate of Free Will implying self-responsibility and pro-liberty politics, vs. Social Determinism implying “you didn’t build that” and re-distributive, left-wing politics. We didn’t get into politics much; it lurked in the background.

But I want to tell you about the discussion’s ending. Here’s the short version: I was nice enough, yet Ross and Mark were red-faced with anger and embarrassment – because they didn’t “win”. I punctured their bubble.

At first, Ross could not process my point that all people have choices, by which they determine their own success. Asking near-childlike questions, he had me explain the concept over and over. “What if a person is born in poverty?” I’d explain how poverty is indeed a circumstance shaping the person’s life; but they still choose their *response* to it. Poverty may limit a person’s range of choices, but even poor people still face a stream of choices, that only ends when a person dies.

If a poor person joins a gang or develops a drug habit – and sticks with it, in adult life – that’s a series of choices they made. Likewise if, for better success, they work hard to get a G.E.D. and become a shift manager at the local McDonald’s, it is a series of choices they made. Likewise, my life-long self-education has been a choice. Thus I explained.

As Ross caught on, he correctly saw the implication that the McDonald’s shift manager would *deserve* her success being greater than the gang member’s or drug addict’s – just as he, Mark and I each deserve our success. And Ross didn’t like that idea. Smiling his best “Jane, you ignorant slut” type of patronizing smile, he suggested that I was out to rationalize backward, unjust notions.

With a smile right back, I pointed out that nobody was rationalizing anything; my success having come from my hard work and personal choices was not a rationalization, but a fact; and a fact that his determinist philosophy badly needed to deal with. That was the exact moment when Ross turned beet-red.

His words turned sarcastic (suggesting anger), while his voice turned quavery (suggesting anxiety). I could see that Mark, now silent, was also getting red – with a deer-in-the-headlights look of uncertainty around his eyes.

Mind you, nobody raised voices in this discussion; nobody called names or made the least of personal attacks. All I did was display my moral confidence, my certain knowledge that I had earned my success – and imply that Mark and Ross should also be morally self-confident, as they had earned theirs.

My doing that alone, nothing more, made these two men visibly feel both uncertain and violated. The interaction ended there, as we’d run out of time. I think it says a lot about left-liberals.

Lefties live in a world where lack of moral self-confidence is a required personality trait. Humility is not required; leftists usually proclaim their beliefs with arrogant certainty. But among those beliefs is a dogma to the effect that no one, including the leftie, *deserves* to have any confidence or any certainty, since no one is ever better than the worst “poor” criminal out there. Any educated, enlightened person must genuflect and display his official, dogmatic lack of confidence that he could ever be right about anything. THEN he can go on to make arrogant proclamations (provided they are left-wing).

If someone shows a different way of being – if someone thinks differently from the leftie, and has moral confidence in doing so – showing, for example, confidence that her success is deserved – many a leftie will find that person threatening. Tactic A is to smile and patronize the person as benighted; perhaps tactic B would be ridicule. If neither works – if the tables are turned, if the left-liberal’s worldview is punctured or exposed as the hollow thing it is – then the average leftie will go into fear and anger.

Sad!