Over 90% of plastic waste comes from Asia and Africa.
By Shane Trejo
In a profile published in the New Yorker about the future of conservatism, French gave a full-throated endorsement for the grooming operation that has given pedophiles and other cross-dressing perverts intimate access to young children across the country.
“There’s this idea that victory is the natural state of affairs and defeat is the intolerable intrusion,” French said, demonstrating the mindset that has caused mainstream conservatism to conserve nothing throughout the decades.
“What I’ve been trying to tell people is that none of this stuff is fixed. There is not necessarily an arc to history, and you don’t have to surrender first principles to fight over stuff that you care about. The day is not lost in any way, shape, or form. And, oh, by the way, you can’t define victory as the exclusion of your enemies from the public square,” French added.
This is when French went completely off the deep end, making statements that are an affront to every principle that the founding-era revolutionaries put their lives on the line to protect.
“There are going to be Drag Queen Story Hours. They’re going to happen. And, by the way, the fact that a person can get a room in a library and hold a Drag Queen Story Hour and get people to come? That’s one of the blessings of liberty,” French said.
French has gone on many Twitter tirades in favor of drag queen story hour in recent months, making justifications for the obscene practice at every turn.
“Disney should rehire James Gunn. We’re rapidly reaching a point where we’re telling our most creative and interesting people that they can never, ever speak outside the lines,” he wrote after Gunn was fired. French eventually got his wish, and Gunn was re-hired to direct “Guardians of the Galaxy Vol. 3” despite his vile comments.
Making matters worse, French and his wife adopted a young foreign child from Ethiopia in 2010. The craven opportunist has frequently used his daughter to virtue signal and attack the President and his supporters. With his support of a glorified grooming operation for pedophiles and a man who make remarks in favor of pedophilia, one can only imagine the horrors this child is subjected to within this monster’s household.
By Jim Hoft
In August Boyles went with her husband to a Trader Joe’s and she suffered a severe meltdown after a Trump supporter entered the store in a Trump 2020 T-shirt.
Cheryl started panicking. She said the entire mood of the store “shifted.”
Cheryl was so traumatized by the experience that she wrote the local paper to share her horrific story.
This was posted in the Green Valley News in August.
Boyles even asked their cashier to convey to the management the anxiety she and her husband experienced at “suddenly finding ourselves in a confined space with a man who looked the part of a typical Trump terrorist.”
This crazy woman suffered a major anxiety attack from a Trump T-shirt.
What a nut!
The Green Valley News later reported that they printed 24 letters to the editor, all destroying Cheryl’s overwrought description of a visit to Trader Joe’s in Tucson where she was reduced to, well, snowflake status. The paper received 50 letters to the editor. The good news is that not one single letter supported this local nutcase.
Hopefully Cheryl will get some medication for her severe TDS – Trump Derangement Syndrome.
Hat Tip Emmett
She posted a link on her Twitter account to a crowd-sourcing page for ANTIFA to raise bail money for the terrorists who attempted to stop the lawful event from taking place with force:
Law enforcement personnel in Boston are outraged at Pressley for supporting the domestic terrorist group, and are calling her out for her despicable actions.
Boston Police Patrolmen’s Association president Michael Leary wrote her a scathing letter on Tuesday, demanding that she stop fundraising for ANTIFA terrorists who viciously attacked law enforcement:
Dear Representative Pressley:
I am writing on behalf of the Boston Police Patrolmen’s Association to strongly protest your decision to urge your constituents to contribute to a bail fund for protesters arrested this weekend during the Straight Pride rally in downtown Boston. The Police are assigned to work at these kind of events in order to keep the peace and control any crowds or disorder. Whether someone was there as part of the rally or as a counter protest, the Boston Police officers are there to treat all the same and to maintain order. My members have informed me that the individuals who were arrested on Saturday were not peaceful protesters but were committing crimes of assault against Boston Police Officers. In fact at least four officers were injured by actions of some of the protesters. These officers were screamed at, abused and fought by these so-called peaceful protesters. Your actions in support of these individuals serves only to encourage criminal and disruptive behaviors such as those suffered by my members this weekend. This attitude also further contributes to the growing we/they attitude against police officers in this Country. As an elected official and particularly as someone who has historically worked with the Boston Police Department and the BPPA as a member of the Boston City Council you should be working to encourage Boston city residents and visitors to respect and cooperate with Boston Police officers who are there to serve and protect. The BPPA supports the right of free speech, but free speech does not include the right to abuse and assault the men and women who are appointed to keep the peace.
I urge you to reconsider your support of the protest bail fund. Instead, I hope you will make it clear to your supporters that you don’t approve of violent behavior against public safety personnel.
Boston Police Patrolmen’s Association
As of Tuesday night, Pressley still has the tweet up in defiance of Leary’s wishes. State Sen. Dean Tran of Fitchburg is proposing a ban on masked activism to prevent violent displays from ANTIFA terrorists and other gangs of thugs in the future.
“I’m a big supporter of the freedom to assemble, but the freedom to assemble does not guarantee you the right to disguise yourself and inflict harm on others,” Tran said to the State House News Service on Tuesday.
“I’ve seen actions that have been taken by ANTIFA and I compare those actions to the same actions as groups like the KKK,” Tran added. “We’re in a different era; back then the KKK did not agree with other races and they used violence to convey their messages. Now we’re seeing groups similar to that, and that is the ANTIFA, now they use the same tactics but against people who don’t share the same beliefs and views.”
More animus is building against ANTIFA on a national level, as people are becoming alarmed about the violent threat that these terrorists pose. Once President Donald Trump designates them as a terrorist group at the federal level, principal organizers can be arrested and funding sources can be punished.
The pair are demanding that the Hollywood Reporter prints a full list of attendees for an upcoming Trump fundraiser in Beverly Hills – an appeal which has drawn natural comparisons to the late Sen. Joe McCarthy’s efforts in the 1950s to rid Hollywood of “Communist sympathizers.”
The difference is, this time the calls for a political blacklist are coming from the Hollywood left itself.
McCormack was the first to request a list of “everyone attending” the upcoming Beverly Hills fundraiser, “so the rest of us can be clear about who we don’t wanna (sic) work with.” Messing soon joined in, tweeting that the “public has a right to know” who is supporting Trump.
The public does indeed have a “right to know” who a political candidate’s donors are – particularly when those donors are rich and powerful. This is exactly why campaign finance information is made publicly available online. Few would argue against this kind of transparency in a democracy, because voters are entitled to know how their elected officials are being influenced on policy matters.
The motivation behind Messing and McCormack’s blacklist, however, is entirely different and even sinister. They are not concerned that Hollywood celebrities might be influencing Trump on policy. It’s far simpler than that: They want those who disagree with their politics to be publicly shamed and punished for it.
Responding to criticism, Messing tweeted that she would be“happy to be listed”when she attends a political fundraiser. Why wouldn’t Trump supporters feel the same? she asked.
Perhaps because of people like you, Debra, who advocate for those people to be targeted for public harassment, intimidation and shaming while demanding professional repercussions for their political views.
If voters aren’t happy with their favorite celebrity’s political leanings, they are absolutely free to abstain from viewing their movies, listening to their music or reading their books etc. That’s the risk public figures take when they make their political views public.
The difference is, when Messing and McCormack contribute to the candidates of their choosing, no one demands that they are placed on a list to make it easier for their industry colleagues to avoid working with them.
The Trump blacklist is reminiscent of ‘Red Channels’ – a 1950s pamphlet on “communist influence in radio and television” that listed 150 industry figures whose loyalties to the US were questioned because of their leftist political beliefs. Red Channels was published in the right-wing Counterattack journal, the purpose of which was to “expose” the alleged communists to the wider public.
Messing and McCormack’s crusade is empty activism emblematic of the ‘Resistance’ celebrities. It requires no courage or effort to “expose” Trump supporters in Hollywood on Twitter. It does not help to produce political change – and serves purely as an egoic exercise for those who crave public approval and pats on the back from their colleagues.
Messing has become known for lobbing ad hominem Twitter attacks at those who fall foul of her own political agenda in a craven effort to fit in with the Hollywood crowd.
She has been one of those leading the attacks against fellow actress Susan Sarandon since 2016, delusionally attempting to pin blame on the vocal Bernie Sanders supporter for Hillary Clinton’s defeat. Messing’s disturbing obsession with Sarandon indicates she is more interested in grandstanding and condemning others for wrongthink than she is in engaging in substantial, impactful activism.
If ‘Resistance’ Hollywood was really interested in fighting Trump on the issues, they wouldn’t waste their time on vindictive witch hunts and personal vendettas, designed to plump up their own profiles.
There is a big difference between political donors having their names publicly available online in the appropriate context and actually demanding an industry blacklist with the express purpose of damaging careers and reputations.
That is the very definition of McCarthyism.
By Allum Bokhari
The “social credit” system assigns all Chinese citizens a “social credit score.” A citizen’s score drops if he engages in a range of disfavored activities, ranging from littering to supporting political dissidents.
Citizens whose score drops low enough can find themselves subject to strict punishment, including bans from the use of public transport, exclusion from top jobs, and prohibitions on their children attending top-rated schools.
This may sound alien and Orwellian, but as Fast Company notes, Silicon Valley is bringing a version of this grim reality to America.
Many Westerners are disturbed by what they read about China’s social credit system. But such systems, it turns out, are not unique to China. A parallel system is developing in the United States, in part as the result of Silicon Valley and technology-industry user policies, and in part by surveillance of social media activity by private companies.
The articles goes on to note a range of ways in which western citizens are being systematically rated, and in some cases excluded, by corporate America. These include insurance companies scanning the social media feeds of applicants, an app called “PatronScan,” that logs the face and name of troublesome bar and restaurant clientele, and the growing tendency of services like Airbnb, Uber, and WhatsApp to ban users for arbitrary reasons.
The comparison to China’s social credit system is similar to the one this reporter made on Breitbart News Daily in June:
In China, they have what’s called a “social credit system” — in which, if you engage in behavior that the regime doesn’t like, they’ll assign you a score, and when it drops below a certain point, they’ll exclude you from certain basic services, like transportation, they might not let your kids go to good schools — all sorts of basic services, they’ll cut you off from.
We have a corporate version of this already evolving. So if you don’t do the things that Facebook approves of, they’re going to cut you off from their platform, which is now essential for maintaining a social network, building a business, running for office. We rely on Facebook and other social media platforms for so many things. Uber and Lyft will also ban you now — they’ve started to ban people for political viewpoints, so you think China is the only one that’s going to cut you off from transportation for having the wrong opinions — well, Western corporations are now doing that, too. Airbnb, Amazon, they’re all doing it.
One other comparison from the Fast Company article deserves note — the Chinese communist government’s partnership with tech platforms like Weibo, the Chinese version of Twitter. Far from aiding dissidents, Chinese social media companies like Weibo and WeChat aid and abet the government in the persecution of its citizens.
That too, has eerie parallels with the West, where social media platforms have become a means of extra-judicial censorship for politicians. Because America has the First Amendment, politicians can’t pass laws suppressing speech or punishing dissidents against the established order — but they can, and frequently do, bully tech companies into doing their dirty work for them.
What could go awry with human editors in charge? Facebook should know, since the company was forced to fire its last team of human content-pickers over revelations of bias against conservative viewpoints.
The platform said Tuesday that the new team — which will likely be fewer than 10 employees at the beginning — will choose the content for the ‘Top News’ section of the News Tab. Stories found in the other sections will be chosen by algorithms and determined by specific user interests, the New York Times reported.
Facebook said it made the decision to go after human curators after discussions with publishers convinced them that algorithms would not be capable of “news judgement” the way real journalists would and that it would take too long to train an algorithm to that level.
But there are pitfalls to consider with human editors, too. Facebook ditched its ‘Trending Topics’ section last year after being plagued by accusations that it was politically biased and amplified “fake news.”
An explosive Gizmodo story put the spotlight on Trending Topics in 2016, revealing that human editors, independently contracted by Facebook, were asked to suppress conservative news and even stories about Facebook itself.
The contractors were also told to artificially “inject” preferred stories into the trending module, even if they were not trending organically. Rather than relying on algorithms (as it claimed), Facebook was acting like a traditional news organization and reflecting the personal biases of its employees.
The Wall Street Journal reported earlier this month that Facebook is planning to pay publishers “millions of dollars” to include their content in its News Tab.
A source told Digiday that the new batch of curators will be given the option to include that content in the Top News section, but they will not be obliged to. The new hires will be full-time employees, unlike the contractors used for the doomed Trending Topics section.
As Facebook rolls out the News Tab, users will no doubt be waiting to see if it has learned its lesson after the last debacle.