
Women’s March Organizers Cancel California Rally Due to “Overwhelmingly White” Participants
December 29, 2018

This is rich.
California organizers canceled the women’s march in Eureka on January 19th because too many of the participants who signed up are white.

White women need not apply.
The press release stated the organizers will take time for more outreach:
“Up to this point, the participants have been overwhelmingly white, lacking representation from several perspectives in our community. Instead of pushing forward with crucial voices absent, the organizing team will take time for more outreach. Our goal is that planning will continue and we will be successful in creating an event that will build power and community engagement through connection between women that seek to improve the lives of all in our community.”
It’s that time of year again!
This is the third annual pussy hat march where angry gelatinous women will peel themselves off their couches just to scream at the sky and call for abortion on demand.
The Women’s March is less about empowering females and more about ‘social justice’ — it’s just another radical left-wing group masquerading as a women’s movement.
Pro-life and or Christian women need not apply — the Women’s March was led by hijab-clad, America-hating Palestinian radicals such as Linda Sarsour and Rasmea Yousef Odeh — Odeh is a convicted terrorist who was deported to Jordan after lying on her citizenship application in order to avoid jail time in the US.
The founder of the Women’s March recently called for hijab-clad Sharia law advocate Linda Sarsour and Farrakhan supporter Tamika Mallory to step down for their anti-Semitic and homophobic rants.
At the time of this publication, the Women’s March in Washington DC on January 19th is still on the schedule.
“On January 19, 2019, we’re going to flood the streets of Washington, D.C., and cities across the globe. The #WomensWave is coming, and we’re sweeping the world forward with us,” the Women’s March said on their official website.
Nancy Pelosi fights ‘Trump Shutdown’ with #Resistance luxury vacation in Hawaii

House Democratic leader Nancy Pelosi is so outraged about the shutdown that she is now defiantly relaxing at a sun-soaked Hawaiian resort. As for Trump, he decided to nix his holidays to protest the Democrats’ stonewalling.
With Washington paralyzed due to a partial government shutdown sparked by budget squabbles, the House Democratic leader is leading the #Resistance against Donald Trump and his border wall… by vacationing at a fancy resort in Hawaii. According to reports, Pelosi has been spotted at Hawaii’s Fairmont Orchid resort, where rooms prices start from $899 to $4,899 for the presidential suite.
ALSO ON RT.COMTrump to stay in Washington as government shutdown creeps over ChristmasWhile Pelosi sips on festive cocktails served in coconut-cups, her staff are issuing press statements about how the Democrats will swiftly end the Trump Shutdown.
“With the House Majority, Democrats will act swiftly to end the Trump Shutdown, and will fight for a strategic, robust national security policy, including strong and smart border security, and strong support for our servicemembers and veterans,” Drew Hammill, Pelosi’s deputy chief of staff, said Friday.
Pelosi’s hard-working staff are apparently forbidden from speaking about her Hawaii getaway, however.


Her trip to paradise elicited strong reactions among conservatives on Twitter, who accused the Democrat of not taking her job seriously.
“Pelosi spends government shutdown in Hawaii. Media silent. Trump spends government shutdown visiting the troops in Iraq. Media explodes,” conservative columnist and commentator Todd Starnes wrote.

CNN criticizes Trump supporters getting hats signed: ‘Completely inappropriate for troops to do this’
The mainstream media hates President Trump and will shame anyone who supports him — including our fighting men and women.
The Commander-in-Chief made a surprise visit to Iraq yesterday, and some service members enthusiastically showed their support.

One soldier told Trump he returned to the Army because of him.
“And I am here because of you,” the President responded, according to Sarah Sanders.
But the love was all too much for the media, and they sought to shame the Trump supporters.
Bloomberg’s Jennifer Epstein tweeted photos of red hats and a Trump flag in the room.
#maga hat contingent at Ramstein waiting for President Trump https://t.co/18wdP87vZK—
Jennifer Epstein (@jeneps) December 27, 2018

“She dropped it after she saw me taking a photo,” Epstein added in parentheses.
Meanwhile, CNN went so far as to accuse the Trump supporters of violating “a military rule.”

CNN White House reporter Jim Acosta used the moment to scrutinize the actions of the military personnel.
“It is in fact a campaign slogan, that is a campaign item, and it is completely inappropriate for the troops to do this,” Retired Rear Adm. John Kirby, a former Obama administration spokesman-turned CNN contributor, said.
“Every time he’s around military audiences,” Kirby said, referring to Trump, “he tends to politicize it, and he brings in complaints and grievances from outside the realm of military policy.”
CNN reported Army guidelines state “active duty personnel may not engage in partisan political activities and all military personnel should avoid the inference that their political activities imply or appear to imply DoD sponsorship, approval, or endorsement of a political candidate, campaign, or cause.”
But CNN didn’t report on this:

Will CNN report on Melania Trump’s visit to Iraq — a first for a First Lady?
‘Humanity not mankind’: EU Parliament urges MEPs to adopt ‘gender-neutral’ language

Faced with a fracturing union plagued by internal squabbles, EU Parliament has taken decisive action to solve the bloc’s numerous real-world problems, issuing a pamphlet which urges MEPs to ditch words coined with “man”.
Officials and members in the parliament have been sent guidebooks on using gender-neutral language in all of their official EU-related work and communications, the Telegraph reported on Thursday. Under the new guidelines, European lawmakers will be strongly encouraged to say “chair” instead of “chairman”, “artificial” instead of “man-made”, and “humanity” instead of “mankind.”
“Gender-neutral or gender-inclusive language is more than a matter of political correctness”, the guidebook insists. “Language powerfully reflects and influences attitudes and perceptions.”
The decision has prompted reactions from the country where English originated, especially from those of its citizens who seem to support the UK leaving the bloc.
“Here it comes glad we are leaving,” one Brit on Twitter wrote.

“Thank f*** we’re leaving! What a load of old s****,” another quipped, using the gender-neutral word for “man-feces.”

Others have argued that the guidelines are an affront to the English language, and attempt to needlessly alter the roots and meaning behind certain words.

Some pointed that the words mean nothing if they are not supported by actions.

The guidelines first emerged in November but were geared more towards interpreters, who were advised to use gender-neutral terms when translating between languages.
The EU parliament is just the latest in a long line of Western institutions to strive for a completely inoffensive, neutral-everything world. Everything from Christmas songs to “anti-animal” language has been targeted by the PC police for hurting at least one person’s feelings on Twitter.

All corrupt on the Western front? Der Spiegel latest to fall from media mountaintops

By Robert Bridge
Once again, a reporter has been accused of writing fake stories – over a span of years – reinforcing the suspicion that we are living in a post-truth world where words, to paraphrase Kipling, “are the most powerful drug.”
This week, Der Spiegel, the German news weekly, was forced to admit that one of its former star reporters, the award-winning Claas Relotius, “falsified his articles on a grand scale.”
Indeed, it seems the disgraced journalist was motivated more by fiction writers John le Carre and Tom Clancy than by any media heavyweights, like Andrew Breitbart and Walter Cronkite.
Relotius, who just this month took home Germany’s Reporterpreis (‘Reporter of the Year’) for his enthralling tale of a Syrian teenager, “made up stories and invented protagonists,” Der Spiegel admitted.

There is a temptation to rationalize Relotius’s multiple indiscretions, not to mention the failure of his fastidious employer to unearth them for so long, as an unavoidable part of the dog-eat-dog media jungle. After all, journalists are not robots – at least not yet – and we are all humans prone to poor judgment and mistakes, perhaps even highly unethical ones.
That explanation, however, falls short of explaining the internal forces battering away at the foundation of Western media, an institution built on the shifting sand of lies, disinformation and outright propaganda. And what is readily apparent to those outside of the Western media fortress is certainly even more apparent to those inside.
A good example is Russiagate. This elaborate myth, which has been peddled repeatedly and without an ounce of 100-percent real beef since the US election of 2016, goes like this: A group of Russian hackers, buying a few hundred social media memes for just rubles to the dollar, were able to do what all the Republican campaign strategists, and all the special interests groups, with all of their billions of dollars in their massive war chest, simply could not: keep Democratic voters at home on the couch come Election Day – a tactic now known as “voter suppression operations” – thereby handing the White House to Donald Trump on a silver platter. Or shall we say ‘a Putin platter’?

Don’t believe me? Here’s the opening line of a recent Washington Post article that should be rated ‘R’ for racist: “One difference between Russian and Republican efforts to quash the black vote: The Russians are more sophisticated, insidious and slick,” wailed Joe Davidson, who apparently watched too many Hollywood films where the Russkies play all of the villains. “Unlike the Republican sledgehammers used to suppress votes and thwart electorates’ decisions in various states, the Russians are sneaky, using social media come-ons that ostensibly had little to do with the 2016 vote.”
Meanwhile, Der Spiegel, despite being forced to come clean over the transgressions of Claas Relotius, will most likely never own up to its own factual shortcomings with regards to their dismal reporting on Russia.
For example, in an article published last year entitled ‘Putin’s work, Clinton’s contribution,’ the German weekly lamented that “A superpower intervenes in the election campaign of another superpower: The Russian cyber-attack in the US is a scandal.” Just like their fallen star reporter, Der Spiegel regurgitated fiction masquerading as news.

However, there is no need to limit ourselves to just media-generated Russian fairytales. The Western media has contrived other sensational stories, with its own cast of dubious characters, and with far greater consequences.
Consider the reporting in the Western media prior to the 2003 Iraq War, when most journalists were behaving as cheerleaders for military invasion as opposed to conscientious objectors, or at least objective observers. In fact, two reporters with the New York Times, Michael Gordon and Judith Miller, arguably gave the Bush administration and a hardcore group of neocons inside Washington, which had been pushing for a war against Saddam Hussein for many years, the barest justification it required for military action.
Just six months before the bombs started dropping on Baghdad, Gordon and Miller penned a front-page article in the Times that opened with this stunning claim: “Iraq has stepped up its quest for nuclear weapons and has embarked on a worldwide hunt for materials to make an atomic bomb, Bush administration officials said today.”
The article in America’s ‘paper of record’ then proceeded to build the case for military action against Iraq by quoting an assortment of anonymous senior administration officials, anonymous Iraqi defectors, and anonymous chemical weapons experts. In fact, much of the story was based on comments provided by one ‘Ahmed al-Shemri,’ a pseudonym for someone purported to have been connected to Hussein’s chemical-weapons program. The authors quoted the mystery man as saying: “All of Iraq is one large storage facility.”
Gordon and Miller also claimed their source had said that “he had been told that Iraq was still storing some 12,500 gallons of anthrax.” Several months later, just weeks before the US invasion of Iraq commenced, US Secretary of State Colin Powell invited the UN General Assembly to imagine what a “teaspoon of dry anthrax” could do if unleashed on the public.
Powell, who later said the testimony would be a permanent “blot” on his record, even shook a tiny faux sample of the deadly biological agent in the Assembly for maximum theatrical effect.
Shortly after the release of the Times piece, top Bush officials appeared on television and alluded to Miller’s story in support of military action. Meanwhile, UN inspectors on the ground in Iraq never found chemical weapons or the materials needed to build atomic weapons. In other words, the $1-trillion-dollar war against Iraq, which led to the deaths of tens of thousands of innocent civilians, was a completely senseless act of aggression against a sovereign state, which the US media helped perpetrate.
Aside from the question of whether readers really put much faith in these fantastic media stories, complete with pseudonymous characters and impossible to prove claims; there remains another question. Does the Western media itself believe its own stories? The answer seems to be no, at least not always.
With regards to the Russiagate story, for example, an investigative journalism outfit, Project Veritas, caught a few Western journalists off-guard about their true feelings in relation to the claims against Russia, and their feelings in general about the state of the media.
“I love the news business, but I’m very cynical about it – and at the same time so are most of my colleagues,” CNN Supervising Producer John Bonifield admitted, unaware he was being secretly filmed.
When pushed to explain why CNN was beating the anti-Russia drum on a daily basis, things became clearer: “Because it’s ratings,” Bonifield said. “Our ratings are incredible right now.”
In the same media sting operation, Van Jones, a prominent CNN political commentator who has pushed the anti-Russia position numerous times on-air, completely changed his tune when caught off-air and off-guard. “The Russia thing is just a big nothing burger,” he remarked.
This brings us back to the story of the fallen Der Spiegel journalist. It seems that a deep cynicism has taken hold in at least some parts of the Western media establishment. Journalists seem increasingly willing to produce extremely tenuous, fact-challenged stories, many of which are barely held together by a rickety composite of anonymous entities.
And why not? If their own media bosses are permitting gross fabrications on a number of major issues, not least of all related to Russia, and further afield in Syria, why should the journalists be forced to play by the rules?
Under such oppressive conditions, where the media appears to be merely the mouthpiece of the government’s position on a number of issues, those working inside this apparatus will eventually come around to the conclusion that truth is not the main priority. The main priority is hoodwinking the public into believing something even when the facts – or lack of them – point to other conclusions.
Thus, it is no surprise when we find Western reporters imitating the greatest fiction writers, because in reality that is what they have already become.
Think your friends would be interested? Share this story!
Politician reprimanded for using the word “illegal migration” in the European Parliament

By EMMA R. 19 December 2018
An EU Commission official was put in place when he spoke in Parliament’s LIBE committee last week.
He used the term “illegal migration” repeatedly regarding people who come to Europe without legal basis.
Claude Moraes, a British member and chairman of the group, gave him a reprimand.
“The correct terminology is irregular, not illegal. You are not illegal until you are convicted,” he said.
The Danish People’s Party member of the committee, Anders Vistisen, asked Claude Moraes to explain where it says that one must not say illegal.
“The word illegal immigrant is used in the Lisbon Treaty, so why can’t we say it in Parliament?”, Vistisen wanted to know.
Morales replied that it has been Parliament’s “position” for the last 10 years.
Anders Vistisen finds it appalling that the EU Parliament bans certain words:
“It clearly shows that the EU is unable to solve its migration problems. The first prerequisite for dealing with a problem is to talk about it. If we can’t even talk freely and call things by their proper name, we have an extremely long way to go.”
Anders Vistisen calls the debate in Parliament “out of touch with reality” and “severely contact phobic”:
“It is a parallel universe where certain attitudes are frowned upon and words are banned because they don’t fit the agenda.”
“And Danish politicians who are talking about EU solutions in the field of migration therefore feel that there is censorship of the debate and denial of the problems”, he says.
DEMOCRAT NY STATE SENATOR TELLS TWITTER USER TO KILL HERSELF, TWITTER GIVES HIM A FREE PASS

Parker’s unhinged tweet isn’t even the most disturbing part about this story
Mess Of Media – DECEMBER 19, 2018
Earlier today, NY state Senator Kevin Parker told a Twitter user to kill herself in response to a tweet she sent. Parker was reacting to a tweet written by Candice Giove, the deputy communications director for the New York state Senate’s Republican majority. Giove accused Parker of illegally transferring his parking placard to a different vehicle, and then parking it in a bike lane. Here is Parker’s response to the tweet:


Parker’s unhinged tweet isn’t even the most disturbing part about this story. What’s truly unsettling is that Twitter is refusing to enforce their own policies against Senator Parker. Not only was Parker’s tweet completely against Twitter’s code of conduct, but Parker continued to post another two tweets further targeting Giove.
Although Parker deleted his tweet telling Giove to kill herself, he continued to attack her on Twitter. Parker’s original tweet was clearly against Twitter’s code of conduct, but continuing to target Giove after his deleted tweet was another blatant violation of Twitter’s policies. This begs the obvious question, why is Twitter refusing to enforce its own policies against Parker?
For many reading this article, the answer is already clear. Twitter is refusing to enforce their policies simply because Parker is a Democrat. After all, what other reason could there possibly be?
While Twitter has chosen to ban numerous controversial conservative users, they do not seem to have the same appetite for banning left-leaning offenders. Numerous people have pointed out that Twitter refuses to enforce their code of conduct against Louis Farrakhan, who has used the platform to compare Jewish people to termites. Clearly, Farrakhan isn’t the only one on the left getting a free pass from the social media company.
Considering Senator Kevin Parker’s history of this type of behavior, it makes Twitter’s refusal to punish the lawmaker that much more alarming. In 2005, Parker assaulted a traffic attendant in response to receiving a parking ticket. The charges were dropped when Parker agreed to take an anger management class. In 2010, he was convicted of assaulting a photographer from the New York Post.
Parker’s tweet today wasn’t just vile, it was incredibly hypocritical. Senator Parker strongly supports a proposed law in New York that would require citizens to submit to a background check of their social media posts in order to obtain a permit for a firearm. However, based on Parker’s history, it is unlikely he expects to be held accountable to the same standards as his constituents.
After the tweet today, Parker spoke to New York’s the Times Union about the incident. During the interview, Parker chose to double down on his attacks against Giove. Concerning his deleted tweet, Parker said, “I’m sure people in my district don’t care… Come on, people don’t care about that.”
If you care about what Senator Parker said on Twitter today, and would like to let him know, you can contact his district office at (718) 629-6401 or his Albany office at (518) 455-2580.
