18 Feb 2016

The Oxford University Labour Club Is What The Left Should Stand For

By Gilad Atzmon: Last week we read on Corbyn's capitulation to the UK Jewish Lobby . This week, a new Labour scandal is emerging and once again the Jews are at the centre. The Oxford University Labour Club (OULC) is ‘antisemitic’. Its members were in the habit of casually referring to Jewish students asZio’.
They repeated ‘tropes’ about the ‘Zionist lobby’ and ‘high net worth Jewish individuals’. Alex Chalmers, the chair of Oxford Labour students, resigned. He confessed thata large proportion of both OULC and the student left in Oxford more generally have some kind of problem with Jews.”  I was always convinced that opposing Zion and ‘Zios’ makes one into an anti Zionist rather than an anti semite. Seemingly referring to the disastrous impact of the powerful Jewish lobby is not appreciated in Corbyn’s new ‘radical’ party.
The Guardian reported today that the Labour party’s national student organisation has launched an inquiry into allegations of antisemitic behaviour and intimidation at the OULC. Apparently 'Zio' Ed Miliband, the former Labour leader who was due to address the club’s annual John Smith memorial dinner in a few weeks’ time, said he was “deeply disturbed”

The Case For Electoral Reform

"Research shows us in very conclusive terms that the male and female vote are not the same thing, they are very different animals. The genders display very distinct and measurable voting habits. A gun in the hands of a trained soldier tasked with defending a border is a very different tool compared with a gun in the hands of a bank robber. Same instrument different outcomes." CS MGTOW


Why I stopped slapping my boyfriend in the face
& the influence of the media in our relationships.

Drafting Miss Daisy

By : When I was in college (Class of 1971) I had occasional dates with a small-town girl who was a senior in high school. She was an aspiring journalist, so she was up on current events.  Inevitably, the topic of women’s lib came up. I remember her narrowing her eyes and proclaiming in a lilting Tidewater Virginia accent, “It’s not the kind of thing you want to take too far.” I’m sure that in her mind conscription would have constituted a bridge too far.
As I write these words (February 2, 2016), the Selective Service System web site has a headline that shouts: “REGISTER: It’s What a Man’s Got to Do.” It accompanies a picture of a young man with a backpack gazing into a mountain panorama (ironically, it evokes a feeling of freedom). If women are forced to register for the draft, that headline will have to be reworked. Maybe the guy in the backpack will get a photoshopped female companion.
However it shakes out in the future, registration has been a longstanding fact of life for American men. The Selective Service System we know today was originally set up in 1917 to provide manpower for World War I. It went away after the war only to return in 1940, and remained in place not only through World War II, but also the Korean War, the Cold War, and Vietnam.

When Men Leave

"I believe what's needed at this stage is an evidence based challenge to this notion that the gender with the superior intellect and will to erect an advanced post industrial civilisation, that is men, are superfluous once the system is built. This meme is partially based absolutely on hostility towards men. It's also just as equally based on a false notion that the idea of civilisational perpetual motion, the idea that civilisation is a form of machine which once activated will run forever..." Said CS MGTOW.

Cuntsplaining From "The Establishment" + Pro-life & Secular

"Who the fuck writes for something called "The Establishment"? Was this the brainchild of some intellectually unemployed ne'er-do-well who could not be bothered to take a look at modern political realities to come up with something better than that? ...That explains a little bit about who she's writing for." Paul Elam

Apple Vows To Defend Its Customers As The FBI Launches A War On Privacy And Security

Some would argue that building a backdoor for just one iPhone is a simple, clean-cut solution. But it ignores both the basics of digital security and the significance of what the government is demanding in this case.
In today’s digital world, the “key” to an encrypted system is a piece of information that unlocks the data, and it is only as secure as the protections around it. Once the information is known, or a way to bypass the code is revealed, the encryption can be defeated by anyone with that knowledge.
The government suggests this tool could only be used once, on one phone. But that’s simply not true. Once created, the technique could be used over and over again, on any number of devices. In the physical world, it would be the equivalent of a master key, capable of opening hundreds of millions of locks — from restaurants and banks to stores and homes. No reasonable person would find that acceptable.