17 Aug 2015
MGM - Global Survey of Circumcision Harm
"She Smiled At Me" - MGTOW
Chairman Pao And The Ministry Of Truth
UK Labour's Jeremy Corbyn And The Jews
By Gilad Atzmon: The relationship between Jeremy Corbyn and British Jews can be summarized into a brief observation:
While Corbyn’s success represents a hugely popular shift within British political thinking, the orchestrated Jewish campaign against him is there to suggest that once again, Jews set themselves against the people they dwell upon.
The vastly growing popularity of Jeremy Corbyn amongst Brits can be easily explained. Following decades of cultural Marxist, divisive Identiterian politics and Zionist-Neocon domination within the British Left, Corbyn brings along a refreshing ideological alternative. Corbyn seems to re-unite the Brits. He cares for the weak. He opposes interventionist wars. He represents the return of the good old left as opposed to New Labour’s affinity with big money, choseness and exceptionalism. He cares for the students and the youth. He thinks about the future and promises to undo the damage created by Blair and Cameron. But as Britain sees the rise of a hugely popular ideological movement, many Jewish institutions see Corbyn as an arch enemy. They would prefer to see him gone and have used nearly every trick in the book to discredit him.
In the last few days we have noticed a tidal wave of Jewish institutional opposition to Corbyn. First it was the Daily Mail that attempted to throw Zionist mud in the direction of the man who is destined to take over what is left out of the Labour party. Surprisingly, not a single British media outlet picked the Mail’s dirt for a few days. Eventually the notorious Zionist Jewish Chronicle had to take the gloves off just ahead of Sabbath and lead the battle against the emerging socialist leader.
While Corbyn’s success represents a hugely popular shift within British political thinking, the orchestrated Jewish campaign against him is there to suggest that once again, Jews set themselves against the people they dwell upon.
In the last few days we have noticed a tidal wave of Jewish institutional opposition to Corbyn. First it was the Daily Mail that attempted to throw Zionist mud in the direction of the man who is destined to take over what is left out of the Labour party. Surprisingly, not a single British media outlet picked the Mail’s dirt for a few days. Eventually the notorious Zionist Jewish Chronicle had to take the gloves off just ahead of Sabbath and lead the battle against the emerging socialist leader.
Criticising Religious Practices, Al-Islam, Judaism
[Online title: "Islamophobia or fair
critique?"] By Brian D. Earp University of Oxford:
Abstract:
In 2012, a German court ruled that religious circumcision of male minors constitutes criminal bodily assault. Muslim and Jewish groups responded with outrage, with some commentators pegging the ruling to Islamophobic and anti-Semitic motivations. In doing so, these commentators failed to engage with any of the legal and ethical arguments actually given by the court in its landmark decision. In this brief commentary, I argue that a firm distinction must be drawn between criticisms of religious practices that stem from irrational prejudice and bigoted attitudes and those that are grounded in sound moral reasoning. Given that ritual circumcision is a pre-Enlightenment custom that elevates the inclinations of the community over the rights of the individual, it is hardly surprising that a growing number of post-Enlightenment philosophers and legal scholars are taking an ethical stand against it. As the "circumcision debate" continues, parties on all sides of the issue must remember to reason through the relevant considerations with care and respect.
In a now-notorious ruling, a regional court in Cologne, Germany decided that non-therapeutic circumcision of young boys violates their constitutional rights to bodily integrity and to self-determination - even if carried out with parental permission, and even for religious reasons (Landgericht Kšln, June 26, 2012).
In 2012, a German court ruled that religious circumcision of male minors constitutes criminal bodily assault. Muslim and Jewish groups responded with outrage, with some commentators pegging the ruling to Islamophobic and anti-Semitic motivations. In doing so, these commentators failed to engage with any of the legal and ethical arguments actually given by the court in its landmark decision. In this brief commentary, I argue that a firm distinction must be drawn between criticisms of religious practices that stem from irrational prejudice and bigoted attitudes and those that are grounded in sound moral reasoning. Given that ritual circumcision is a pre-Enlightenment custom that elevates the inclinations of the community over the rights of the individual, it is hardly surprising that a growing number of post-Enlightenment philosophers and legal scholars are taking an ethical stand against it. As the "circumcision debate" continues, parties on all sides of the issue must remember to reason through the relevant considerations with care and respect.
In a now-notorious ruling, a regional court in Cologne, Germany decided that non-therapeutic circumcision of young boys violates their constitutional rights to bodily integrity and to self-determination - even if carried out with parental permission, and even for religious reasons (Landgericht Kšln, June 26, 2012).
Ding A Ling-Ling
16 Aug 2015
Iris Scanners Are Coming To College Campuses
By Michael Krieger: Last week, I highlighted a couple of articles to hammer home just how fast technology seems to be invading our every day lives, whether we like it or not. In case you missed them, I suggest taking a read now:Turning Humans Into Algos – The Trend of Employees Wearing “Biosensing Wearable Devices” at Work
“Minority Report”-esque Big Brother Billboards are Coming to England
Today’s article related to iris scanners and their increased popularity on college campuses. Virginia Commonwealth University is the latest school to roll out these entirely unnecessary and creepy devices, following the lead of George Mason University and University of New Hampshire.
The Huffington Post covered the story recent, here are some excerpts:
Virginia Commonwealth University in Richmond is the latest institution to jump aboard the biometrics bandwagon. On Wednesday, the school announced it had added two iris cameras to the campus dining hall so that students can use their eyes instead of their ID for access. “Students won’t need their ID to enter the dining center anymore,” Stephen Barr, VCU director of campus services, said in a statement Thursday. “With iris identification, it’s as simple as a camera taking a picture of their eyes and two seconds later they walk through.”
Slate: Straight Women Are Terrorizing Gay Men In NYC
By According to an article in the online magazine Slate, gay bars in New York City are under siege from hordes of desperate straight women who are so starved for male attention that they are seeking it from men who, being gay, have no sexual interest in women at all. Gay men are noticing and a backlash is starting. From the opening paragraph of the Slate piece by a self-described drag queen:
Now, I’m a supporter of gay men and gay marriage but even I can note the irony of this opening paragraph – it seems to echo the style of those traditionalist groups who oppose gay marriage:What’s the purpose of a gay bar? For starters, they offer gay men… a hunting ground where they can chase people with similar desires. But perhaps more important [sic], gay bars also provide a haven from the heterosexual gaze. In small towns and big cities alike, these spaces allow queers to talk, flirt, and unwind without drawing sneers, slurs, curious stares, or even unwanted support—My son is gay, too! Gay bars are the one space that an LGBTQ person can enter without scanning the crowd for potential trouble. At least, that’s the way it was until a sudden influx of straight partiers changed the terrain.
Misandric UK Rule Gives Half Of Peerages To Poorer Quality Women To Save Reputation Of The Lords After Sewel Scandal
- Lords insiders say the ‘every other new Tory peer must be female’ diktat is a response to the Lord Sewel prostitutes-and-cocaine scandal
- Sources say the Prime Minister believes that announcing 40 new Tory peers, with up to 30 of them male, would provoke a feminist backlash
- Michelle Mone, Debbie Wosskow and Kate Fall all tipped for peerage
By Simon Walters: David Cameron faces a revolt from male Tory ex MPs after ruling that half of up to 40 new Conservative peers must be female.
They criticised him after claims that several retired Tory politicians are to miss out on Lords seats to be announced this month, to make way for up to 20 women peers.
Lords insiders say the ‘every other new Tory peer must be female’ diktat is a response to the Lord Sewel prostitutes-and-cocaine scandal.
The US Is The Leading State Of Terrorism In The World
By Ken O'Keefe. Given the recent tactics of the Empire to instigate the escalation of violence in Syria and move closer to the goal of full scale World War III, this expose remains completely relevant. The audio feed is frustrating at times, but again the content is worthwhile.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)