Prager University (PragerU) Takes Legal Action Against Google and YouTube for Discrimination

Posted on October 31, 2017 by Luke Ford

Press release: LOS ANGELES — Prager University (PragerU) has filed a lawsuit in the United States District Court for the Northern District of California to stop Google and YouTube from unlawfully censoring its educational videos and discriminating against its right to freedom of speech.

The lawsuit cites more than 50 PragerU videos which have either been “restricted” or “demonetized” by Google/YouTube. The PragerU videos range on various subjects presenting a conservative point of view, and include a video by noted Harvard Law professor Alan Dershowitz on the founding of Israel. PragerU previously compiled a complete list of their restricted videos here, which includes: “Why America Must Lead,” “The Ten Commandments: Do Not Murder,” “Why Did America Fight the Korean War,” and “The World’s Most Persecuted Minority: Christians.”

In correspondence cited in the filing, Google/YouTube made it clear that the censorship of certain videos was because they were deemed “inappropriate” for younger audiences.

“Watch any one of our videos and you’ll immediately realize that Google/YouTube censorship is entirely ideologically driven. For the record, our videos are presented by some of the finest minds in the Western world, including four Pulitzer Prize winners, former prime ministers, and professors from the most prestigious universities in America,” stated PragerU founder Dennis Prager.

Prager added, “They are engaging in an arbitrary and capricious use of their ‘restricted mode’ and ‘demonetization’ to restrict non-left political thought. Their censorship is profoundly damaging because Google and YouTube own and control the largest forum for public participation in video-based speech in not only California, but the United States, and the world.”

The total number of people who currently use YouTube exceeds 1.3 billion people. Google and YouTube advertise YouTube to the public as a forum intended to defend and protect free speech where members of the general public may express and exchange their ideas. They have represented that their platforms and services are intended to effectuate the exercise of free speech among the public. According to Google and YouTube: “voices matter.” YouTube states that it is “committed to fostering a community where everyone’s voice can be heard.”

“However,” said Eric George of Browne George Ross, the firm representing PragerU, “Google and YouTube use restricted mode filtering not to protect younger or sensitive viewers from ‘inappropriate’ video content, but as a political gag mechanism to silence PragerU. Google and YouTube do this not because they have identified video content that violates their guidelines or is otherwise inappropriate for younger viewers, but because PragerU is a conservative nonprofit organization that is associated with and espouses the views of leading conservative speakers and scholars.”

“This is speech discrimination plain and simple, censorship based entirely on unspecified ideological objection to the message or on the perceived identity and political viewpoint of the speaker,” said former California Governor Pete Wilson of Browne George Ross. “Google and YouTube’s use of restricted mode filtering to silence PragerU violates its fundamental First Amendment rights under both the California and United States Constitutions. It constitutes unlawful discrimination under California law, is a misleading and unfair business practice, and breaches the warranty of good faith and fair dealing implied in Google and YouTube’s own Terms of Use and ‘Community Guidelines.’”

“There is absolutely nothing ‘inappropriate’ about the content of the PragerU videos censored by Google and YouTube; the videos do not contain any profanity, nudity or otherwise inappropriate ‘mature’ content and they fully comply with the letter of YouTube’s Terms of Use and Community Guidelines,” said Marissa Streit, PragerU’s chief executive officer who has engaged in a year-long-effort to try and persuade Google to stop censoring PragerU content. Streit continues, “It’s clear that someone doesn’t like what we teach and so they intend on stopping us from teaching it. Can you imagine what the world would look like if Google is allowed to continue to arbitrarily censor ideas they simply don’t agree with?”

“This is not a left/right issue. It is a free speech issue, which is why prominent liberals, such as Harvard law professor Alan Dershowitz, are supporting our lawsuit,” Prager concluded.

Posted in Dennis Prager, Google | Comments Off on Prager University (PragerU) Takes Legal Action Against Google and YouTube for Discrimination

Gay Jews

Posted on October 31, 2017 by Luke Ford

Audacious Epigone posts: Riffing off the previous post, the following table shows the percentages, by religious affiliation, who identify as gay or bisexual (N = 8,582):

Bear in mind that the Jewish sample, at 161, is small, as the question about sexual orientation has only been asked since 2008.

As in the case of condoning gay sex, Jews are gayer than those without any religious are. Stealing Feryl’s thunder, could that be a result of Jews tending to be born and raised in conurbation, and thus exposed to the pathogens that accompany high population density, rather than in sparsely populated flyover country?

Jews are effective eugenicists in part because Ashkenazis are afflicted with rare genetic disorders at rates far higher than non-Jews. Is part of the reason they are so favorable towards homosexuality because they are similarly ‘afflicted’ with homosexuality at higher rates than non-Jews?

COMMENTS:

Jayman: I suspect self-report bias. Though this could be legit.

* Nothing like the sub-headline: “Anal Cancer, the new gay epidemic the media won’t talk about” to endear people to queers.

Funny how they hide a report blaming rapid increases in STD infection on queers under a headline about the differences between states. Later in the report they admit that blacks have much higher rates of STD’s than whites, but attribute it to “poverty.” Nowehere do they admit that blacks males are more likely to engage in sex with other men, although they do note that blacks have more sex in general.

AUDACIOUS EPIGONE:

The GSS has a couple of questions on homosexuality. The percentages, by religious affiliation, who say “sexual relations between two adults of the same sex” are “not wrong at all” (N = 34,713):

Jewish condoning of homosexuality outdoes even that of those without any religious affiliation. Given that some percentage of those without affiliation are ethnic Jews–or “post-Jewish atheists”, as one blue checkmark puts it–that’s quite remarkable since ethnic Jews without any feeling of connection to Judaism presumably condone it even more overwhelmingly than religious Jews do.

The story is a similar one with same-sex marriage. The percentages agreeing with the right for members of the same sex to marry, with “neither agree nor disagree” responses excluded (N = 9,689):

…It is this reality that makes it hard for those on the dissident right who are relatively favorably inclined towards Jews to provide a firm answer on the JQ. We want to give them the benefit of the doubt, but man, Every. Single. Time. Or damned near it, anyway.

COMMENTS:

* BTW, there’s a distinction between condoning something and actually participating in it. Most Jews don’t want to be in the porno industry on any level(let alone “act” in it), but most Jews instinctively gravitate towards “tolerance” of weird crap often on the grounds that WASPs historically bore a grudge against it.

Posted in Homosexuality, Jews | Comments Off on Gay Jews

The Myth Of The Proposition Nation

Posted on October 31, 2017 by Luke Ford

From the blog Those Who Can See:

David Brooks has a history lesson for Donald Trump (via Steve Sailer):

“The Trump story is that good honest Americans are being screwed by aliens. … This is a tribal story.
Somebody is going to have to arise to point out that this is a deeply wrong and un-American story. The whole point of America is that we are not a tribe. We are a universal nation, founded on universal principles, attracting talented people from across the globe, active across the world on behalf of all people who seek democracy and dignity.”

This lovely fiction from Mr. Brooks is as quaint as it is ahistorical. But it does go back a fair way. Not as far as our founders, bequeathing a nation ‘to ourselves and our posterity.’ Not as far as our first naturalization act, in 1790, extended to ‘free white persons of good character.’

Not as far as Thomas Jefferson, quoted by Alexander Hamilton:

‘The opinion advanced in [Jefferson’s] The Notes on Virginia is undoubtedly correct, that foreigners will generally be apt to bring with them attachments to the persons they have left behind; to the country of their nativity, and to its particular customs and manners.
‘They will also entertain opinions on government congenial with those under which they have lived; or, if they should be led hither from a preference to ours, how extremely unlikely is it that they will bring with them that temperate love of liberty, so essential to real republicanism?
‘There may, as to particular individuals, and at particular times, be occasional exceptions to these remarks, yet such is the general rule.’

Posted in America | Comments Off on The Myth Of The Proposition Nation

God Game

Posted on October 31, 2017 by Luke Ford

From the Chateau: Bonus God Game routine: After dressing in your Sunday best, kneel at the foot of your bed while she’s still in it half-asleep, wondering if you’re for real, and pray, “Dear Lord, wash the taint of carnal sin from me, and spare this woman your divine retribution. Show mercy on your wayward flock. Amen….Oh darlin’ there’s leftover pot roast in the fridge if you get hungry later.”

Why does this work?

Chicks dig the jerk with a heart of gold. (Bust expectations to crest poon vibrations.)

The bigger reason is that sheilas get all confuse’d-like and tingly when their man ignores them for a higher purpose.

The beta mangina’s credo is “there shall be no other god above me than the goddess whose pussy pedestal I swear to polish unto my last day”, and we can see how arousing that is for women. (Not very.) But the jerkboy who knows the value of God Game has placed a higher power above pussy power.

In fact, I’m convinced that the abandonment of Christianity and rapid secularization of the West removed a critical pillar supporting the natural hierarchy from women -> man -> God. When man no longer had God’s pearly gates to polish, his worship was redirected to the pussy below him. But women are constitutionally repulsed by men who worship them (being the object of worship goes against the inclination of women to submit to a sexy, dominant power), so secularism has had the knock on effect of hardening women’s feelings toward the growing brigade of supplicating secular beta manginas. Women have become resentful of the pussy pedestals onto which their areligious men have placed them, and they have reacted to this unnatural state of no-affairs by lashing out at feeb betas and by themselves masculinizing to fill the masculinity void.

Natural born alpha male jerkboys who haven’t lost that supernatural feeling know that God is the perfect foil for wanton woman, serving the role of the “other woman” who incites romance-intensifying jealousy and neediness in his earthly woman. God is an HB10 who shuns careerist cuntery for nurturing femininity and boundless few-strings-attached love. That’s the source of some serous mortal female envy.

Posted in Dating | Comments Off on God Game

Ground Floor Girls

Posted on October 31, 2017 by Luke Ford

From an email to the Chateau:

In case there are younger guys reading, I want to (re)tell the story about what got me to think about this subject (I’ve written this before elsewhere). One of the sad aspects of growing old is that when you look back at your life, people and things that once seemed trivial become more important than you realized in retrospect.

The first time I ever set foot on college campus, at Freshman Orientation, I met a sweet, very inexperienced girl from a small town. Within hours we were “together.” That night at the sleepover in the dorms we kissed — which I practically had to teach her to do.

But she was “cute” and not sexy or beautiful. She also looked about 12 years old and had no sense of style. All of this and her “small town-ness” put me off. I wanted the hot chick(s).

Which I did get. When I returned home after orientation I started dating a high school hottie I’d been after for a while. I also blew off Orientation Girl without a second thought and without any apparent guilt (until now, ironically enough).

I had a lot of fun in college and dated the aforementioned high school girl as we went through college. But she left for California after graduation. After that I was thrown into the early ’20s dating market. And by then you start to get jaded and meet people who are even more jaded: The women with multiple abortions, countless partners, strange diseases and habits, etc.

Decades later, I was able to track Freshman Orientation Girl down on Facebook. She got married and stayed married (to someone who is a lot like me, funny enough). She looked too young back in college, which was bad. Now that quality is good.

My advice to any young guy reading this is that you probably already know the woman who would make a great wife, but you’re passing her up to ride the male version of the carousel. Unless women like these become young widows, you won’t have the chance to meet them again because they get pulled off the market and stay off the market. Forever.

Posted in Dating | Comments Off on Ground Floor Girls