The “Broad Born as Bradley” seems to be having a bit of difficulty going down under.
Chelsea Manning won’t be permitted to enter Australia for a speaking tour scheduled to kick off at the Sydney Opera House on Sunday after that country’s Department of Home Affairs deemed the American classified document leaker failed to meet character requirements. While the Australian government won’t address Manning’s case specifically, per the AP, a person having a criminal record could cause them to fail the character test. Manning, a former US Army intelligence officer, was convicted of leaking classified documents to WikiLeaks and served seven years in prison. Manning also has speaking dates scheduled in New Zealand. That country’s government is still considering whether to grant her a “special direction” visa, which she would need due to her conviction. In a statement, Amnesty International says Australia’s decision sends a “chilling message that freedom of speech is not valued.”
Bradley might not have what it takes to blow my skirt up, but it seems a bit much to deny what’s its name into a Westernized country. What’s good for the goose is good for the gander as they say. Bar silly girls like Bradly and they can bar people like me for not fearing a God. They will use the criminal aspect of what this idiot has done in the past, but I betcha there are people who have done far worse that have been let into the country.
Isn’t the whole damn country populated by the malaize of genetic stew from a bloody lot of criminals? Who is next, Candace Owens because she is too white? The “Broad Born as Bradley” will do about anything for a headline, he does not need to be encouraged. I have been rather proud of the fact that some thought I failed to meet character requirements…I ain’t the only low life around here either…you know who you are. Give a girl a chance… to stay in another country.
A political action committee founded by former Clinton staffer, Claude Taylor, has erected a sign in Pensacola, Florida that claims that the National Rifle Association is a terrorist organization, according to Pensacola News Journal;
Taylor, whose Twitter bio says he resides near Washington, D.C., said he’ll soon have an anti-NRA billboard up in Oklahoma and two in Texas. He said he personally stands behind the the message on the signs.
“The NRA is helping facilitate the introduction to the civilian marketplace of a broad range of military grade weaponry that is inappropriate, unsafe and unwise to have in civilian hands,” Taylor said. “And legislatively, the NRA owns the GOP.”
Um, the NRA is a grassroots organization with more than five million members. The NRA represents the 2nd Amendment interests of it’s membership in the halls of the legislature, just like every other grassroots organization. They don’t sell guns, they help teach gun safety to children and to adults.
But, Taylor isn’t known for his “truthiness”. According to the Washingtonian, he considers himself a “bomb thrower”.
“When all is said and done,” Taylor says, “I’ll be pretty comfortable if I hit 80 percent.” Of course, that would mean one out of every five of his reports is inaccurate.
Politico reports that the loose collection of Left-wing extremists known as Anti-fascists has been named a domestic terrorist organization by the Department of Homeland Security. This is not my surprised face.
Previously unreported documents disclose that by April 2016, authorities believed that “anarchist extremists” were the primary instigators of violence at public rallies against a range of targets. They were blamed by authorities for attacks on the police, government and political institutions, along with symbols of “the capitalist system,” racism, social injustice and fascism, according to a confidential 2016 joint intelligence assessment by DHS and the FBI.
Of course, this lends credence to Trump supporters who have charged the Leftists with violent episodes from two murders in Seattle to a bike lock in a sock in Berkeley. It goes back to the violence that they visited upon each other during the Occupy Wall Street episode a few years ago.
Of course, Politico can’t help but blame Trump, because they’re part of the media;
In interviews, law enforcement authorities made clear that Trump’s inflammatory rhetoric and policies — first as a candidate and then as president — helped to create a situation that has escalated so quickly and extensively that they do not have a handle on it.
“It was in that period [as the Trump campaign emerged] that we really became aware of them,” said one senior law enforcement official tracking domestic extremists in a state that has become a front line in clashes between the groups. “These antifa guys were showing up with weapons, shields and bike helmets and just beating the shit out of people. … They’re using Molotov cocktails, they’re starting fires, they’re throwing bombs and smashing windows.”
Yeah, Trump wasn’t around while the OWS people were raping and killing each other, crapping in the streets and making a general nuisance of themselves. If anything, OWS created the Trump campaign in reaction to their general childishness.
Dozens of armed anti-fascist groups have emerged, including Redneck Revolt and the Red Guards, according to the reports and interviews. One report from New Jersey authorities said self-described antifa groups have been established in cities including New York, Philadelphia, Chicago and San Francisco.
Yeah, well, when the folks on one side of the political spectrum start using terms like “fascists” and “rednecks” to identify their opponents, they’re looking to instigate a physical confrontation.
One of our frequent commenters made a comment the other day that caught my attention. I felt compelled to respond.
Why? Because that comment reached a new low, even for “That Guy”, in terms of fallacious argument. So I thought I’d point out to the individual the error of his argument, just in case he might possibly learn something from the correction. Based on past experience, I rather doubt he will; but you never know.
The comment in question can be found here. It purports to show, by giving examples of their behavior, that “of course the Nazis were right-wing” (or words to that effect).
Now, people who are even passingly familiar with logic probably already see the problem with that argument. Since That Guy often seems to have a problem grasping simple concepts, I’ll spell things out for his benefit.
The major fallacy in that argument is that it assumes that a particular behavior by government is reliably indicative of whether that government is “right wing” or “left wing.” That is, “If a government does a certain thing (‘X’), then it is a ‘right wing’ government.” If that assumption is incorrect, the argument falls apart completely.
Unfortunately, that assumption is not universally true. Given similar circumstances both “right wing” and “left wing” governments often behave similarly. Therefore, any argument that “because a government did “X”, it is therefore “right wing” (or “left wing”) is invalid – because here the “if” doesn’t invariably lead to the “then”.
In order to demonstrate just how asinine this particular false argument really is, I’m going to have a bit of fun. Below, I’m going to use literally the individual’s own bogus argument to “prove” that the government of the Soviet Union was “right wing”. I’ll do so by making minor revisions to the individual’s comment – which will be presented in italics – but I’ll leave the original logical structure, and most of it’s original language, completely intact.
Enjoy.
(Note: the grammatical errors and awkward/incomplete sentence structure in what follows are present in the original; I left them in place because I wanted to make as few changes as possible to the original. I’ve marked many of those errors carried over from the original appropriately, but I won’t guarantee I got them all.)
. . .
[BEGIN RE-WRITTEN ARGUMENT]
So lets (sic) look that (sic) the characteristic (sic) of SOVIET SOCIALISM based on what THEY ACTUALLY DID. Not merely the rhetoric of speeches made during the decades after they rose to power. (sic)
Powerful and Continuing Socialist Symbology: They used symbols of Soviet Socialist unity everywhere. Flags, slogans, songs, pins, banners, and other regalia. (sic)
Disdain for the Recognition of Human Rights: The Soviets approval (sic) the use of torture, and summary executions of prisoners. Their disdain for human rights was particularly true when targeting political dissidents or ethnic minorities desiring autonomy.
Identification of Enemies/Scapegoats as a Unifying Cause: The Soviets were notorious for blaming foreign influence, capitalists, and “reactionary elements” for the problems in the nation.
Supremacy of the Military: The Soviet military was given a disproportionate amount of government funding. Soldiers and military service were glamorized.
(Sidebar: there’s a very good reason the Soviet Union during the Cold War was on occasion referred to as “Upper Volta with Missiles”. Outside the larger cities, the infrastructure and civilian economy of the Soviet Union reputedly was closer to third-world than first-world standards during much of the Cold War. The reason? An absurdly huge fraction of the Soviet Union’s economic production was going towards the nation’s military.)
Rampant Sexism: Soviet Leadership was almost exclusively male-dominated (one member four members in Politburo history were female). While either gender was in theory free to “be all they could be”, in practice traditional gender roles remained traditional and largely unchanged. Rampant homophobia and anti-gay legislation and national policy. (sic)
Obsession with National Security: The Soviet government’s use of fear and the constant rhetoric of threats post (sic) domestic and international as a motivational tool by the Soviet government over the masses was ubiquitous.
Religion and Government were Intertwined: The Bolshevik leadership was overwhelmingly Atheist and when they took power the (sic) persecuted Orthodox Christians and Muslims. Lenin, Stalin, and later Soviet leaders attempted to substitute State Atheism as a de facto state religion and unifying force. That failed, but notions of a unified and pure Atheist Soviet Socialist State obsessed Soviet leadership. They thought religion was a corrupting and dividing influence on the purity and strength of Soviet Socialism and it (sic) needed to be replaced for the good of Soviet Socialism. Their long game was a ubiquitous state-sponsored Atheism that would replace religion and become a source of unity in the country rather than one of division.
Labor Power was Suppressed: Because the organizing power of labor (particularly independent worker movements) was a threat to Socialist government, in the Soviet Union labor unions were either eliminated, co-opted, or controlled by the Soviet government.
Disdain for Intellectuals and the Arts: In the Soviet Union, free expression in the arts was openly attacked. Intellectuals and artists were targeted and jailed.
Obsession with Crime and Punishment: In the Soviet Union, police and other internal security personnel were given almost limitless power to enforce laws – and if necessary, to act completely outside them. Physical abuse and violence by police and other government security agents was overlooked because it was very unwise to criticize the government because it was regarded as taking the side of “reactionary elements”. (awkward, run-on sentence structure from original)
It is clear that in actual ACTIONS that SOVIET SOCIALISM was a RIGHT WING movement.
[END RE-WRITTEN ARGUMENT]
. . .
Astute readers will note one omission in the above. The paragraph in the original comment beginning, “Corporate Power is Protected: . . . .” is not addressed.
That was by design. I didn’t address that paragraph because it was absurd on its face. “Central control via a combination of coercion, intimidation, appropriation, and regulation” is decidedly not the same as a “partnership”.
A cursory review the 1931 National Socialist Program – particularly points 11-17 – clearly shows that the Nazis envisioned government control over the means of production if and when they gained political control. After they attained power, they took action to achieve this. They were so successful that none other than Albert Speer himselfopined that “a kind of state socialism seemed to be gaining more and more ground”, and further warned that Germany’s industry was becoming “the framework for a state-socialist economic order.” In short: the Nazis were actively working to gain central control of Germany’s means of economic production – and were succeeding.
Oh, and starting in 1936 the Nazis also instituted “Four Year Plans” for the German economy. Sound familiar? It should – and it also sounds to me as if they were trying to “one-up” the Soviet Union’s well-known Five Year Plans.
Bottom line: that paragraph in the original comment was so absurd on its face that IMO it was already a parody of historical reality. So I didn’t bother to even attempt to re-write it as parody.
. . .
As I said above, I hope most readers have enjoyed this article. Or, if you’re a leftist tool who doesn’t like looking like an idiot . . . maybe you’ll take it’s lesson to heart, learn to think – and use logical reasoning – before you wax ignorant once again. But I’m not holding my breath.
Especially if you’re going to imply, inaccurately, that I’m lying the next time you wax ignorant, clown. For that bit of mendacity, let me pass along to you a message from TG – which I heartily endorse.
Let me know if you need that translated.
(Author’s Note: Edited to account a minor factual error in the original article. Later research showed that three women besides Yekaterina Furtseva had briefly been members of the Soviet Politburo/Central Committee – one during the immediate post-Revolutionary period, and two others near the end of Gorbachev’s regime.)
According to the Washington Examiner, Noam Chomsky doesn’t like the so-called “anti-fa”. Chomsky has had a hard time not liking anything on the political US Left, but these criminals seem to rub him the wrong way;
[Chomsky] says the anti-fascists feed the fire they seek to extinguish.
“As for Antifa, it’s a minuscule fringe of the Left, just as its predecessors were,” Noam Chomsky told the Washington Examiner. “It’s a major gift to the Right, including the militant Right, who are exuberant.”
Many activists affiliated with the loosely organized Antifa movement consider themselves anarchists or socialists. They often wear black and take measures to conceal their identity.
Chomsky said, “what they do is often wrong in principle – like blocking talks – and [the movement] is generally self-destructive.”
That’s further than the US Civil Rights Commission was willing to go when they had an opportunity to condemn the violence committed by “anti-fa” in a vote, according to Fox News;
On “Tucker Carlson Tonight,” [Commissioner Peter] Kirsanow said the commission unanimously agreed that white nationalists and neo-Nazis should be condemned for their role in the violence, but the Democratic commissioners resisted including Antifa in the resolution because of their own political leanings.
“That type of viewpoint discrimination is antithetical to the U.S. Commission on Civil Rights,” Kirsanow said. “You could easily say that if the situation were reversed 50 years ago, where would the United States Commission on Civil Rights be?”
Watch this video of a San Diego middle-school teacher who staged and picked a fight with the US Border Patrol at a border checkpoint in New Mexico just north of the border. She had her kids in the car and it appears she had one of them video the confrontation that occurred when she refused to say whether she is an American citizen. The reason I can identify her politics as liberal becomes quite evident if you watch far enough into the video.
Just think, this immature asshole is teaching someone’s kids…
According to Philly.com, those Anti-fascist protestors intend to create a stir at the Gettysburg Battlefield this coming weekend during the 154th anniversary of the Civil War battle.
Reports that the anti-fascist group Antifa plans to burn Confederate flags and desecrate graves have prompted calls on social media for other groups to gather in Gettysburg to counter those protesters.
The anniversary of the battle, which raged from July 1 to July 3, 1863, comes at a time when there is a growing movement to remove Confederate symbols from public spaces.
“There just seems to be a focus on that issue, when there has not been in the past,” Lawhon said.
There are no plans to change any of the 1,300 monuments on the park grounds, she said.
I guess they figure it’s easier to bully dead people than live folks.
This is what happens when we give in to their petty demands. They’ve been trying to alter history by tearing down all remembrances of the civil war south and because grownups would rather get along than get a backbone, these little twits want to make names for themselves and this seems like an easy way for the little stank-ass hippies to accomplish that.
Eric Clanton, a former professor at East Bay Community College, was arrested for the above-linked attack on a Trump supporter last month at Berkeley. According to Heat Street, he used a bicycle lock as a weapon in the assault while he was bravely wearing a mask, because that’s how the anti-fascists roll;
Following footage of the bike lock assault by a masked attacker, which drew widespread attention on social media, members of 4chan mobilized their “weaponized autism” to sift through hours of video footage and hundreds of photographs of the protests to identify the masked attacker. Police say that 4chan managed to identify three separate victims who were injured by an attacker suspected to be Eric Clanton. In all three cases, the victims were struck in the head or neck with a bike lock.
Clanton was arrested early Wednesday morning in Oakland and booked in the Berkeley Jail on suspicion of assault with a deadly weapon that is not a firearm. He is being held on $200,000 bond and is due in court at 9 a.m. Friday.
