Milo: ‘Why Are We Surprised Muslims Are Blowing Things Up? That’s What They Do’

Posted on March 24, 2016 by Luke Ford

Breitbart Tech Editor Milo Yiannopoulos joined Dave Rubin on the Rubin Report Tuesday after the Brussels terrorist attacks, during which he discussed the implications of importing millions of Muslims into the west, and the reason why Islam, not just radical Islam, is part of the problem.

“This is sort of what liberalism has welcomed into Europe,” Yiannopoulos said. “This is the excuse making that’s being made for radical Islam that has prevented us from fighting this problem by people who lie about the source of these people and news stations who refuse to accept that these attacks have anything to do with Islam… this is preventing us from fixing the problem. This is preventing people from taking adequate security precautions, and looking after themselves.”

“Europe now is welcoming in millions of people from alien cultures whilst the establishment refuses to accept that these people’s belief systems are just dramatically incompatible with our own, and the regular citizenry are being lied to and lied about constantly, all the time by the media on this stuff,” Yiannopoulos said on the topic of the Brussels attacks.

“We have a population that is not able to protect itself, that is not adequately informed about the risks and dangers of radical Islam, and the problem in Europe is that this stuff is now happening everywhere,” he continued. “No one is safe, anywhere in Europe. It’s happened in Paris, it’s happened in London, it’s happened in Brussels, no one is safe from this stuff and what do our politicians leap to the airways to say? ‘I really want to make it clear that this has nothing to do with Islam’. Well it does. It does, and as a gay man I am terrified by the prospect of mass Muslim immigration into Europe. This is one of the reasons I spend so much time in America now, I don’t want to be there anymore.”

“Why are we surprised that Muslims are blowing things up? That’s what they do,” Yiannopoulos claimed. “I don’t care about that, you know it’s horrific for the people who are on the receiving end of this terrorist stuff, but is anybody surprised that ISIS blew something up? No.”

Rubin told Yiannopoulos that he was going to save him “a little bit of Internet hate” and reiterated that the conversation was about extremism, not about Muslim’s as a whole, clarifying that there was a distinction between peaceful Muslims and extremists.

“You don’t need to do me that favour. No, I don’t care about the distinction,” Yiannopoulos countered. “It is not extremists. It is not radical Islamists. It is not the people that the security service are worried about that’s the problem, it is the silent majority of Muslims who do nothing in this situation, have no peace movement, have no resistance to their own extreme elements, just like the progressive left in the West. Is it eleven countries that you and I could be killed for who we are? That’s not ISIS, that is mainstream Muslim culture, and we are importing that stuff into Europe in millions.”

“No, I don’t make a meaningful distinction between these things because I don’t care. I don’t see any reason to import these cultures into liberal Western democracies,” he continued. “I see no reason to do it whatsoever, and as Brigitte Gabriel once brilliantly said, ‘In any case, the peaceful majority are irrelevant.’ It is not the peaceful majority that blow up buildings, it is the extremists, and right now in the world all of this stuff is coming from one culture and one religion, and I don’t want it here.”

Upon being asked about how to sort out the problem and what the world needs to do to face this issue, Yiannopoulos responded: “We don’t have to welcome 1.4 million of them into Germany. We don’t have to lie to people about what Islam is, and what Muslims believe, which the press and our politicians do all the time. We don’t have to intervene in their counties where it’s not necessary and we don’t need to, and I supported the Iraq war, but some of the other things we do in the Middle East are not necessary and just drum up this Western hatred.”

“I mean look, the problem is not just radical Islam. The problem is Islam,” he argued. “There are structural problems with this religion that means it is incompatible with the modern free Western liberal democracy that we live in.”

Posted in Islam | Comments Off on Milo: ‘Why Are We Surprised Muslims Are Blowing Things Up? That’s What They Do’

The Ted Cruz Foreign Policy Team

Posted on March 24, 2016 by Luke Ford

Comments to Paul Gottfried:

* Republican presidential candidate Ted Cruz, has unveiled his new foreign policy team, stacked with some of the most aggressive hawks imaginable, saying they are a group of his “trusted friends” who believe in a “strong America.”

At the center of his team is neoconservative ultra-hawk Frank Gaffney, a loudly anti-Muslim figure who believes in a wild array of conspiracies, including that a number of top political figures from both parties of being part of a secret Muslim cabal plotting the conquest of America.

Gaffney had previously been speculated to be a Trump adviser, as his dubious work has been cited by that candidate repeatedly in trying to back up his proposals to ban Muslim immigration. Gaffney’s overt hostility toward Muslims in general made him a virtual pariah during the 2012 campaign. Incredibly, a number of Republican hopefuls have courted him this time around, with Cruz declaring him “clear-eyed” and “a patriot.”

Also featuring prominently in the Cruz team is Michael Ledeen, the man at the center of the yellowcake uranium forgeries, among the pretexts for the 2003 US invasion and occupation of Iraq. Ledeen has been involved in a litany of scandals, dating all the way back to Iran-Contra. He was also, notably, the man who got Israeli spy Jonathon Pollard his job at the US Navy.

Of course speaking of Iran-Contra, one must inevitably discuss Elliott Abrams, who famously pled guilty to two charges of withholding information related to the scandal from Congress, and is likewise a central player in the new Cruz team. In addition to the Contra scandal, Abrams was involved in myriad ugly Reagan-era operations, and was a close ally of both former presidents Bush, receiving a pardon for his Reagan-era crimes by George H.W. Bush, and being appointed as a special adviser to George W.

During his tenure with the later Bush, Abrams was accused by The Guardian of being at the center of a failed 2002 US-backed coup attempt against Venezuela, and was said to have personally given the go-ahead for the effort.

Abram’s most recent media comments, interestingly enough, were railing against Cruz, accusing him of being anti-semitic for even using the term “neocon.” Now that Cruz is establishing himself as the neocon candidate of choice, that allegation has been quickly brushed aside.

With this team and more, Cruz is surrounding himself with warmongers and criminals of the highest caliber. While the attempt appears to center on making him a more straightforward Republican insider, to serve as a counter to Trump, the jingoist and xenophobic policies these advisers portend also threatens to sabotage any hope he has of presenting himself as a safer alternative.

Cruz hires liars,conspiracy theorist,ex,current and possible future felon – Abrams, but NYT allows the intentionally misleading mischaracterizing David Brooks to pen columns calling Trump liars,ignorant ,unprepared ,no capacity to learn,have no advisors and most dishonest.( in page A25 NYT -David Brooks 3/18/16)

Neocons are protected by the system promoted by Cruz,and purveyed to Ametican as good products who are not liars not misleading,not closed minded not criminal ,not unprepared by the media .
We have to wait to see if David Brooks helps America recognize the dangers that are inherent in the nature of the neo con beasts from the known display of their vile uncouth tribal behaviors in a few past administrations. Instead for reason unknown ( only to the unwashed clueless ) he tries to warn Americans of what could happen from someone who hasn’t hurt American interests or destroyed American life if he gets elected.

* Trump can indeed break the stranglehold that Jewish Americans hold on US policy in the Middle East and towards Russia – if he is determined to do so.

It should be part of a new US foreign policy that pulls back the American Empire.

If Trump articulates a clear and reasonable policy, and directs the money the US gives to Israel to truly American causes, it will be supported by most people, and the pro-Israel lobby will not be able to play one side against the other.

What are Jewish Americans going to do, withhold money from the Democratic AND Republican parties? Then they lose their influence with both parties.

* I’ve had the same exposure to the neo-con’s of the late 70s and 80s. At that time Irving Kristol’s and Nathan Glazer’s Public Interest seemed to be the pearl of the neo-con public intellectual universe. Norman Podhoretz’s Commentary was stridently anti-Soviet, pro-Zionist, but engaged in heavy ridicule of Leftist social experiments, and even went after pop-culture Leftism in their long movie reviews by writers like Richard Grenier. Midge Decter, Mrs. Norman Podhoretz, was scathing about the alternative family and sexual experiments of the New Left types. Irving Kristol’s articles in the WSJ were full of commonsense on economics and skeptical of social experimentation. However, underneath it all was a fear of any kind of nationalism or cultural conservatism based on the inherited traditions of Anglo-America. In the end it was their cosmopolitanism and their fear of distinct nationality that won out after the fall of Communism. I think it was also a generational thing, the original neo cons came from that Marxist/Old Left tradition which was basically ascetic and was distrustful of revolutionary and anti-bourgeois sexual experimentation. The neo-Wilsonianism is a replacement for the universalist ideology that was lost when the Marxism of their youth sputtered out and with the fall of Communism the vacuum had to be filled with a replacement.

Posted in Neoconservatives, Paul Gottfried | Comments Off on The Ted Cruz Foreign Policy Team

The Trump Way

Posted on March 24, 2016 by Luke Ford

Comments: Cruz’ surrogates post a nude picture of Trump’s wife online.
Trump responds threatening to reveal something nasty about Cruz wife if Cruz doesnt stop.
Your analysis: Trump is the villain in this affair

Trump’s style is to give back twice as nasty as he gets.

He’s not Bush or Romney letting the left sh*t on him without any response.

From McClatchy:

Since last August, in fact, when many were calling Trump’s entry a clown candidacy, the “Dilbert” cartoonist was already declaring The Donald a master in the powers of persuasion who would undoubtedly rise in the polls. And last week, Adams began blogging about how Trump can rhetorically dismantle Clinton’s candidacy next.

Adams, mind you, is not endorsing Trump or supporting his politics. (“I don’t think my political views align with anybody,” he tells The Washington Post, “not even another human being.”) And he is not saying that Trump would be the best president. What the Bay Area-based cartoonist recognizes, he says, is the careful art behind Trump’s rhetorical techniques. And The Donald, he says, is playing his competitors like a fiddle – before beating them like a drum.

Most simply put: Adams believes Trump will win because he’s “a master persuader.”

The Manhattan mogul is so deft at the powers of persuasion, Adams believes, that the candidate could have run as a Democrat and, by picking different hot-button issues, still won this presidency. In other words: Trump is such a master linguistic strategist that he could have turned the political chessboard around and still embarrassed the field.

“Psychology is the only necessary skill for running for president,” writes Adams, adding: “Trump knows psychology.”

Within that context, here is what Candidate Trump is doing to win campaign hearts and minds, according to Scott Adams:

1. Trump knows people are basically irrational.

“If you see voters as rational you’ll be a terrible politician,” Adams writes on his blog. “People are not wired to be rational. Our brains simply evolved to keep us alive. Brains did not evolve to give us truth. Brains merely give us movies in our minds that keeps us sane and motivated. But none of it is rational or true, except maybe sometimes by coincidence.”

2. Knowing that people are irrational, Trump aims to appeal on an emotional level.

“The evidence is that Trump completely ignores reality and rational thinking in favor of emotional appeal,” Adams writes. “Sure, much of what Trump says makes sense to his supporters, but I assure you that is coincidence. Trump says whatever gets him the result he wants. He understands humans as 90-percent irrational and acts accordingly.”

Adams adds: “People vote based on emotion. Period.”

3. By running on emotion, facts don’t matter.

“While his opponents are losing sleep trying to memorize the names of foreign leaders – in case someone asks – Trump knows that is a waste of time … ,” Adams writes. “There are plenty of important facts Trump does not know. But the reason he doesn’t know those facts is – in part – because he knows facts don’t matter. They never have and they never will. So he ignores them.

“Right in front of you.”

And stating numbers that might not quite be facts nevertheless can anchor those numbers, and facts, in your mind.

4. If facts don’t matter, you can’t really be “wrong.”

Trump “doesn’t apologize or correct himself. If you are not trained in persuasion, Trump looks stupid, evil, and maybe crazy,” Adams writes. “If you understand persuasion, Trump is pitch-perfect most of the time. He ignores unnecessary rational thought and objective data and incessantly hammers on what matters (emotions).”

“Did Trump’s involvement in the birther thing confuse you?” Adams goes on to ask. “Were you wondering how Trump could believe Obama was not a citizen? The answer is that Trump never believed anything about Obama’s place of birth. The facts were irrelevant, so he ignored them while finding a place in the hearts of conservatives. For later.

“This is later. He plans ahead.”

5. With fewer facts in play, it’s easier to bend reality.

Steve Jobs famously aimed to create “reality distortion fields” to meet his needs and achieve his ends. Trump employs similar techniques, and apparently can be similarly thin-skinned when his “reality” is challenged. “The Master Persuader will warp reality until he gets what he wants,” writes Adams, noting that Trump is “halfway done” already.

(Among the persuasive techniques that Trump uses to help bend reality, Adams says, are repetition of phrases; “thinking past the sale” so the initial part of his premise is stated as a given; and knowing the appeal of the simplest answer, which relates to the concept of Occam’s razor.)

6. To bend reality, Trump is a master of identity politics – and identity is the strongest persuader.

“Do you think it is a coincidence that Trump called Megyn Kelly a bimbo and then she got a non-bimbo haircut that is … well, Trumpian?” Adams writes. “It doesn’t look like a coincidence to this trained persuader.”

One way to achieve this is by deploying “linguistic kill shots” that land true, and alter perception through two ways.

“The best Trump linguistic kill shots,” Adams writes,”have the following qualities: 1. Fresh word that is not generally used in politics; 2. Relates to the physicality of the subject (so you are always reminded).”

Writes Adams: “Identity is always the strongest level of persuasion. The only way to beat it is with dirty tricks or a stronger identity play. … (And) Trump is well on his way to owning the identities of American Alpha Males, and Women Who Like Alpha Males. Clinton is well on her way to owning the identities of angry women, beta males, immigrants, and disenfranchised minorities.

“If this were poker, which hand looks stronger to you for a national election?”

Posted in Donald Trump | Comments Off on The Trump Way

RIP Gary Shandling

Posted on March 24, 2016 by Luke Ford

Comments to Steve Sailer:

* One thing about the clip that bugs me is how Shandling starts talking about/making fun of “ugly kids.” I’ve seen many a comedian do this. Is this a Jewish thing? I’ve never looked at a child and seen ugly. Some kids are funny-looking, sure, but they all seem pretty cute to me. I seem to note that comedians seem to have a standard bit of “what do you say when someone’s kid is ugly?” routine that never sells with me. It’s really mean, since kids can’t defend themselves and its almost a literal definition of punching down.

I say Jewish comedians because I’ve noted that Jewish guys seem to have this large insecurity about their looks. Almost every Jewish comedian had some bit or part of their biography where they talk about themselves being some “ugly little Jew” , especially when they talk about some shishka broad they want to get with (In his films, Woody Allen has portrayed this memorably). So attacking the kids as ugly really comes off as projection. And I can’t recall black comedians or other-ethnic comedians doing routines about “ugly kids of others.”

Jewish women have this insecurity as well about being less attractive than goyim, hence why they make so many blond jokes. But it makes more sense in women, since their main power is their looks, and the shishka-fever among Jewish men is a cliche. In Jewish men, however, this insecurity comes off as creepy and weird—why, as a man, are you so concerned about it, Schlomo?

Posted in Comedy, Jews | Comments Off on RIP Gary Shandling

Why Did Amanda Carpenter Create The Blacklist?

Posted on March 24, 2016 by Luke Ford

Because she had an affair with Ted Cruz?

unmasking

CeWduTyWEAAWOvd

CeWW-GbUEAAfKrK

cruz-tabloid

Carpenter and Cruz got matching tattoos.

Tweet: “Both have it on the same day, and it’s only sold in sets of 2.”

CebDP1xUAAAnbEr

Cea-ZHZWEAAc5Qg

Amanda Carpenter writes March 18, 2016:

It’s time to make a list.

A list of those so-called conservatives and Republicans endorsing Donald Trump, the megalomaniac who regularly threatens his opponents and the press, raves about making members of our military adopt ISIS-like tactics, has funded Obamacare and Gang of Eight Democrats, promises to forcibly relocate American companies to his liking, and has demonstrated again and again he intends to govern as a tyrannical King rather than a President.

Call it a boycott, call it a blackball, call it a blacklist, call it whatever you want. I’m done with these folks and other conservatives should be, too.  Anyone who will defend a man condoning random acts of violence at his rallies has lost his morals; he will defend anything at all.

So, I’d like to remember who supported Trump so I never give any kind of credence to their judgment. “Never Trump” means never those who support him as well.

Here is the list of current federal and state GOP officials, former Republican officials, and private citizens who have formally endorsed Trump if anyone else is interested in joining me.  Each and every one of his endorsers should be held accountable in their future elections or political ventures.

Posted in Journalism | Comments Off on Why Did Amanda Carpenter Create The Blacklist?