GayPatriot

The Internet home for American gay conservatives.

Youtube/Google censorship: It’s real

by

Black Pigeon Speaks has the details.

YouTube Preview Image

By NO means do I agree with all of BPS’ positions or statements. To cite just one difference of many: he favors government-run health care (and I don’t).

But I have found that, even where I find his views silly, his videos are good-faith (if somewhat sarcastic) attempts to support his positions with science and facts. That Youtube (which means Google/Alphabet) would censor him – and other content creators who happen to be politically incorrect – while continuing to allow a ton of Islamist terrorist content, is disturbing.

It seems that 4chan pushed back with malware bots that generate fake ad traffic. The fake, extra traffic causes Google/Youtube to overcharge their advertisers, making trouble for everyone. I don’t endorse that tactic at all. Still, one can’t help but admire the goal: to remind Google/Youtube that they, too, depend greatly on the goodwill of others for their fragile existence.

Lots of people seem to be moving to BitChute and Vid.me. But I like the new YouTube: they’ve been letting me watch my favorite content ad-free (since the first step in the censoring the scapegoated content is “de-monetize” it).

Controlled Media watch

by

  • Congress readies a bizarre resolution against WikiLeaks.

    It is the sense of Congress that WikiLeaks and the senior leadership of WikiLeaks resemble a non-state hostile intelligence service often abetted by state actors and should be treated as such a service by the United States.

    “Resemble”? The resolution is saying that if you *look like* anything Congress doesn’t appreciate, they can strip your First Amendment protections and take the U.S. to war with you.

    WikiLeaks, remember, is non-profit journalist service. They publish leaks. The traditional, First Amendment approach is that *the leaker* commits a crime and can be punished, but *the journalist or publisher* does not. Someone wants an exception, it seems, for super-effective journalists whom the government can’t control.

    More from Julian Assange, here.

  • CNN endorses the undercover journalism of Project Veritas. Indirectly.

    A journalist snowed Breitbart employees by pretending to be someone they would trust. The journalist gave the story to CNN, who gladly reported it. Very embarrassing. But that is undercover “sting” journalism, like what James O’Keefe and Project Veritas do, and CNN and many lefties fulminate indignantly about them. Can you spell h-y-p-o-c-r-i-t-e-s? 🙂

  • Google and Apple ban Gab (a Twitter competitor), censoring what you can do with your own phone.

    “Whatever is permissible under the First Amendment is what Gab allows onto its site.”

    …Gab’s Android app was available through Google’s app store until yesterday, when Google banned it, citing violations of its hate-speech policy…

    While Android users can install unapproved apps, it’s a cumbersome process…

    It’s difficult to credit Gab as a white-supremacist site when its cofounder is a Turkish Kurd and Muslim…who says “I’ve never supported Trump for a minute in my entire life”…

    Google is being plain evil. They’re saying *you can’t use a non-Google app to say anything to anybody that Google would not like*. What’s next, Google censoring your private emails? Remember, email is a phone app.

  • Breitbart has more on Google’s other steps to punish conservative speech.

Flashback: When Facebook ex-employees admitted that Facebook routinely censors conservative news from their “Trending” section. Even if it was really trending.

Alt Left does violence & destruction; media silent

by

If you’re with the Alt Left Media, you’re outraged – outraged! – that anyone would compare the Alt Left to neo-Nazis. Because “One side is racist, bigoted, Nazi. The other opposes racism and bigotry. Morally different universes.” (Mitt Romney, lying for them)

In the real world, it’s different. Recent example: Alt Left injures reporter, then blames the reporter.

Antifa protesters assaulted a reporter filming in Richmond, Va., on Sunday night, and later defiantly blamed him for the attack on their Facebook page.

The unnamed reporter at WTVR CBS 6 was filming the marchers, who were protesting a monument to Confederate general J.E.B. Stuart, when he was hit with a blunt object, WTVR reports. The protesters believed they could stop him from filming by “denying consent” even though they were in public, and video shows them blocking his iPhone camera before striking him in the back of the head…

An ambulance took the reporter to a hospital where he received four staples in his head…

According to the Antifa Seven Hills, the marchers were the real victims of the reporter who was “perpetuating rape culture” by ignoring their “denial of consent.”…

Antifa also argued that his presence as a white man was suspect…

“Due to the intensity and context of this time people are very scared of white men running full speed at them with iPhones as this is the exact behavior of a white supremacist [ed: or a responsible law enforcement officer]…,” Antifa Seven Hills wrote…

Antifa argued that the media does not have a right to report on them in ways they do not consent to.

Hey, Antifa: If you’re doing a public protest, by that action alone, you consent to be filmed. Too late to “deny consent”.

The media told us that, if Trump were President, reporters would be in danger! There it is…from the Left.

A quick search did not show this story covered on CNN, NYT, WaPo or any big-time outlet.

RELATED:

  • Missouri State Senator, Maria Chappelle-Nadal, calls for Trump’s assassination. To their credit, leading Missouri Democrats have called for her resignation. But she refuses.
  • A bust of President Lincoln is burned in Chicago. Locals say that locals did it, back on July 4. To his shame, a Chicago Democrat alderman now blames Trump via a fanciful tale of outside white extremists doing it.
  • Alt Left website, Vice, calls for the destruction of Mt. Rushmore.
  • Numerous Confederate monuments are attacked or destroyed.

    Remember, these monuments were put up to heal the vast wounds of the Civil War, making a statement that both sides were American and had fought well, with history worth remembering. To pull them down is to take a stand against national healing – and against America. Pat Buchanan is scathing about it:

    Two years ago, Virginia Gov. Terry McAuliffe called the giant statues of Lee and “Stonewall” Jackson on Richmond’s Monument Avenue “parts of our heritage.” After Charlottesville, New York-born-and-bred McAuliffe, entertaining higher ambitions, went full scalawag, demanding the statues be pulled down as “flashpoints for hatred, division and violence.”

    Who hates the statues, Terry? Who’s going to cause the violence? Answer: The Democratic left whom Terry must now appease.

Barcelona car attacks

by

As you know, terrorists killed at least 14 people in Barcelona on Thursday with cars, and injured at least 100 more in multiple attacks.

A group called “Islamic State” claimed responsibility, making them explicitly political and Islamic attacks.

By any objective measure, this is a much worse tragedy and problem than what happened in Charlottesville last weekend, although our thoughts and prayers are with all victims of both.

The LA Times article above phrases it oddly. LAT’s title says the attack is “blamed on ‘jihadi terrorism'”. The internal scare-quotes are theirs. The body says:

Spain’s Prime Minister Mariano Rajoy said Barcelona was the victim of “jihadi terrorism”…

In other words, LA Times won’t call it jihadi terrorism; it will only report neutrally the fact that, oddly, for some strange reason that one might not be able to fathom, others choose to leap to that conclusion.

This fits in with the [Left] Media Complex Playbook that V mentioned a couple days ago.

  • If the car is driven by a mentally-ill white supremacist and kills 1 person, it’s proof that Republicans are Nazis, America is in the grip of an epidemic of racism, Trump is the KKKing of racists, and lefties are correct to physically bash their opponents.
  • But if the cars (multiple) are driven by consciously-religious Muslims and kill 14 people, it’s not proof of anything except that Muslims are victims of hate crimes by Republicans – and lefties are correct to physically bash their opponents.

Now, every 1st Amendment advocate is a Nazi

by

As V pointed out earlier, Now, Everybody Who Isn’t a Radical Is a Nazi. The same goes for First Amendment supporters.

Here is the First Amendment:

Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof; or abridging the freedom of speech, or of the press; or the right of the people peaceably to assemble, and to petition the Government for a redress of grievances.

Among other things, it means that horrible Nazi-leaning citizens get to peaceably assemble and demonstrate. So do horrible Commie-leaning citizens (Antifa) – if it’s done “peaceably”.

And what does “peaceably” mean? It does NOT mean smiles, rainbows, unicorns, or coming all unarmed. Nope. It means:

  1. The demonstrators co-ordinate with local authorities to prevent problems. Including (but not limited to) them getting a permit.
  2. If problems occur anyway, they obey lawful commands to disperse (and can be prosecuted if they don’t).
  3. Others can show up and counter-demonstrate, but…
  4. those others have NO superior rights or authority. For example, counter-demonstrators have no right to attack. It is NEVER “understandable” or “justified” if they attack, no matter how odious are the demonstrators’ opinions, signs or speeches.

Under those terms: Nazis, KKK, or even Commies (Antifa) are allowed to assemble and do a little march. This is why, in 1978, the ACLU successfully defended the right of neo-Nazis to march in Skokie, IL.

Here’s the point: EVERY American, no matter their color or background or life experience, must accept this. Because, that’s America. It’s how America rolls.

Now, what happened in Charlottesville last weekend?

  • Various groups, not limited to white racists, got a permit to assemble in a park.
  • They began to assemble peaceably.
  • BEFORE anything bad happened – indeed, even before the start time on their permit – Democrat Governor McAuliffe declared them unlawful and ordered them to disperse.
  • Counter-demonstrators did not have a permit, assembled anyway and, by many first-hand accounts and videos, physically attacked the demonstrators as they were dispersing.
    • Correction: The counter-demonstrators were permitted for 2 nearby parks; still NOT the park nor the streets where the demonstrators were.
  • After an hour or two of that: one person, possibly with the demonstrators or possibly mentally ill, rammed a car into the counter-demonstrators.

Horrific as that final crime was, are those counter-demonstrators who attacked people somehow “understandable” or “justified” or “morally better”? Not under the terms of the First Amendment.

So, should President Trump call out the demonstrators alone and give them all the blame? Not under the terms of the First Amendment.

Either you support the First Amendment, or you don’t. If you do, then you have to put your focus on neutrally defending everyone’s First Amendment rights, as President Trump does.

This goes for the colossal dummies Rubio, Romney, McCain, and all you Democrats and SJWs out there. If you believe in the First Amendment, you’ll unite behind the President’s approach. If you don’t, we know the truth about you.

It’s time to remember your Constitution and rally behind First Amendment rights (and other rights, like due process) for all citizens, especially the ones you can’t stand.

UPDATE – Icing it: Atlanta leftie mob tears down a Peace Monument. Because, yes, mobs are that stupid.

Triggering the media

by

I keep hearing that the media is heavily filtering President Trump’s comments yesterday. So let’s get a bit closer to the real thing.

Trump says why his statements on Charlottesville were the right statements, in the right way at the right time. A triggered melee of voices strives to interrupt him.

YouTube Preview Image

[before the extract above] “I didn’t wait long. I wanted to make sure, unlike most politicians, that what I said was correct…It takes awhile to get the facts. You still don’t know [all] the facts.”

“I think the driver of the car is a disgrace to himself, his family and his country. You can call it terrorism, you can call it murder… The driver of the car is a murderer, and what he did is a horrible, horrible, inexcusable thing.”

“Senator McCain? You mean, the one who voted against Obamacare [replacement]? The one who voted against us getting good health care?”

“What about the Alt Left, that came charging at the Alt Right? …They came charging with clubs in their hands, swinging. Do they have any problem? I think they do… That was a horrible day…You had a group on one side that was bad, and you had a group on the other side that was also very violent. And nobody wants to say that, but I’ll say it right now. You had a group on the other side that came charging in, without a permit, and they were very violent.”

“This week, it’s [protesting a traditional statue of] Robert E. Lee. I notice that Stonewall Jackson’s coming down. I wonder, is it George Washington next week? And is it Thomas Jefferson the week after? You really do have to ask yourself, where does it stop?”

“You had a group on one side and you had a group on the other and they came at each other with clubs and it was vicious and it was a horrible thing to watch…I think there’s blame on both sides, and I have no doubt about it, and you don’t have any doubt about it either, and if you reported it accurately, you would say it.”

“George Washington was a slave owner. So, will George Washington now lose his status? Are we going to take down statues of him? How about Thomas Jefferson? …You’re changing history, you’re changing culture, and you had people – I’m not talking about the neo-Nazis and the white nationalists, because they should be condemned totally – but you had many people [who just wanted to keep the traditional statue], and the press has treated them absolutely unfairly. Now, in the other group also [who wanted the statue to come down], you had some fine people, but you also had troublemakers…with the baseball bats.”

“There are two sides to a story. I thought that what took place was a horrible moment for our country.”

UPDATE: Added some highlighting, to help the cognitively-blind.

The one thing that I would regret in the above, is that President Trump should (and didn’t yet) call for a universal, national pledge against political violence, that Left and Right alike would be required to take – if they want to be regarded as moral or responsible.

The media (like CNN) and the Democrats must be made to disavow the violence and bigotry of Antifa and #BlackLivesMatter.

Having the Right disavow the violence and bigotry of the #WhiteLivesMatter types is easy, a small price to pay, something that I’m happy to do. Because anyone who believes in tradition or God or liberty for real will know instinctively that #AllLivesMatter. (Plus the fact that the #WhiteLivesMatter types are crypto-leftists anyway.)

More Google updates

by

Just to round out today’s earlier post, we also have new interviews in Breitbart’s Rebels of Google series.

UPDATE – Everyone we don’t like is Raaaaaaaaaysist: CNN falsely smears the planned March on Google as a “White Nationalist”, “Alt Right” event.

To begin with, the organizers of March on Google are known to be pro-peace, anti-racist and anti-Alt Right. But they also say it pointedly, at this link.

Code of Conduct for March on Google

The March on Google condemns and disavows violence, hatred, and bigotry and all groups that espouse it such as White Nationalists, KKK, Antifa, and NeoNazis.
We will not use messages that are designed to incite anger, hate, or violence.
We will respect the law and the police and cooperate in all matters.
Any violation of these tenets will not be tolerated.
Is this an “Alt-Right” event? The answer is no. This is an event for First Amendment supporters from across the country, from all backgrounds, ethnicity, and walks of life.

CNN could have checked it easily. Instead, CNN published a complete falsehood – once again attempting to smear anyone who challenges them, or Google or the hard Left, as racists.

Hey, lefties: This is why Trump won (be that good or bad). This is why rational, honest people reject and despise the Left.

UPDATE: Peaceful March on Google is postponed, due to Alt Left terrorist threats following the CNN slanders.

Google updates

by

A fair argument from Tucker that Google can no longer be trusted and, due to its out-sized influence, should be regulated as a public utility:

YouTube Preview Image

I don’t necessarily agree; competition to Google could still punish their evil ways. But I found Tucker’s case interesting.

An editorial from James Damore himself, in The Wall Street Journal.

In my document, I committed heresy against the Google creed by stating that not all disparities between men and women that we see in the world are the result of discriminatory treatment.

The March on Google is still on for this Saturday, August 19.

  • List of cities here and here.
  • Explicit disavowal of the so-called “Alt Right” – and Antifa – here.

Racism and violence are left-wing, part II

by

Our leftie commentors’ response to yesterday’s post on this was interesting – by what they never said. First, only 2 showed up. (Not that we have many to begin with, but on something big and controversial, usually they’ll support each other a bit more.) Second, they made zero effort to address the post’s main points:

  • that Nazis were/are socialists.
  • that, in all of American history (including today), the Democrats/Left have been the side of racist thinking (or racial categories), racial segregation, so-called “eugenics”, etc.
  • that there is nothing right-wing about the so-called Alt Right of 2017; excepting alone their choice to *claim* that they are somehow rightist.
    • (In 2016 or earlier, some actual rightists did adopt the “Alt Right” label thinking it was kicky and fun, but discarded the label when the #WhiteLivesMatter racists took it over.)
  • that, despite appearances, it’s ideologically and psychologically easy for white supremacists and hard leftists/Democrats to change into each other, pretend to be each other, etc.
  • Because the essence of both sides is tribal collectivism and the desire to punish one’s dissenting or dissimilar neighbor.

By contrast – What is it, to be conservative or right-wing? I’m no expert but the answers usually given will boil down to:

  1. Standing up for tradition. E.g., Catholic or other Christian rightists (whom, by the way, the Nazis hated). In the UK, it could mean monarchists supporting the Queen.
  2. Standing up for Liberty under the Rule of Law. In America, this means a love of everyone’s constitutional rights to life, liberty and property.

Neither are what white supremacists stand for. What they stand for is their approximation of racism-with-socialism; in other words, left-wing politics.

When will we start labeling them, not on the basis of what they *claim* to be (for some horrible marketing purpose of their own), but on the basis of their actual views? “Alt Left” would be closer.

For dessert: Steven Crowder on The Top 3 Ways in which Antifa and white nationalists are the same. In brief:

  1. Both readily disregard the law and Constitution.
  2. Both promote identity politics and play the Victim card.
  3. Both support Big Government / left-liberal policies (e.g., both want nationalized / single-payer health care).
  4. Bonus round: Both hate Israel.

Also, V the K’s comment:

The other truth that must not be spoken: The left is absolutely thrilled and delighted with what happened in Charlottesville.

The only way it could have made them happier is if their Antifa protesters had been shot by an NRA member.

The truth that must not be spoken: Racism and violence are left-wing

by

Commenter Sarah kindly pointed us to this report about Jason Kessler, a leader of the #WhiteLivesMatter Charlottesville march.

Rumors abound on white nationalist forums that Kessler’s ideological pedigree before 2016…point[s] to involvement in the Occupy movement and past support for President Obama.

You do have to take it with a grain of salt, because it comes from the highly-dysfunctional Southern Poverty Law Center. Still, it’s plausible when you remember that in 2008, white supremacists tended to support then-Candidate Obama. (Original Esquire article here; in case that ever goes away, my comment here captures some bits.)

OK, so why would white supremacists (whether full-fledged, or just potential ones) align with left-wing causes, such as Occupy Wall Street and Barack Obama? The answer is in the linked Esquire article. In brief,

  • White supremacists know a fellow racist when they see one. (They admired President Obama’s “racial consciousness”.) And,
  • They admire fellow socialists.

That’s right. Racism and socialism go together, as the Nazis proved. The Nazis were socialists; if you don’t believe me, check out the list of evidence in this earlier post.

We also know it from American history. Democrats fought to preserve slavery (whereas the Republicans freed the slaves). Democrats formed and manned the KKK; instituted the Jim Crow laws; invented Planned Parenthood specifically to abort black babies (look into Margaret Sanger sometime); and defended racial segregation well into the 1970s. And the youngest, most “progressive” lefties are bringing back racial segregation, here in the 2010s.

At some point, Democrats did flip the racist script and turn into brown supremacists (rather than white supremacists), but the dynamic is the same: An obsession with racial categories and race preferences/stigmatizing. It stems from Tribalism, which goes hand-in-hand with Collectivism, which is the philosophical root of socialism.

That’s why racism is left-wing. As to the violence: The essence of the socialist or “progressive” project is the use of force – that is, violence – to punish one’s neighbor for being better-off AND/or for not submitting enough to leftist nonsense and virtue-signalling.

In other words: leftism is violent inherently. In its nature, left-wing politics is a wish to see violence being done to those of your neighbors who won’t be or do or say what you want. Whereas pro-liberty or genuine right-wing politics is a wish for people to be able to avoid each other when they want.

All of this makes it wrong to claim that violent racists are from the Right. And that is part of why I keep calling the Charlottesville march a #WhiteLivesMatter thing, rather than using the false and misleading “Unite the Right” name given by its organizers. What those guys stood for has nothing to do with the Right’s love of life, liberty and property.

But leftists will claim that violent racists are rightists anyway. Because every American knows instinctively that racism and political violence are both bad. To stay in business, the Left must, at all costs, deflect and project-away the blame for it.

Thus we get the accusational, virtue-signalling frenzies like the one against President Trump today, which I just noted.