Category: Media fraud

Sandmann’s Crime: Smiling While White

~ Ann Corcoran ~ 4 Comments

This is some news you surely already know—teenager Nicholas Sandmann awarded big bucks from legacy media outlets who defamed and vilified him without the facts in that incident in Washington, DC following a prolife march in January 2019.

To the media losers, Sandmann, with his pleasant smile and Trump hat, represented the perfect punching bag for the release of their hatred toward America firsters.  The last laugh is Sandmann’s (for now)!

(Don’t miss the New York Post op-ed urging more conservatives to follow the young Kentuckians lead.)

I’m posting this story not so much to give you the news of Sandmann’s victory that you likely already knew, but to post the warning writer, John Zmirak, pens at the end of his story on the stunning slapdown of the Washington Post (and others).

From The Stream (hat tip: Meanymom):

Nick Sandmann Wasn’t Supposed to Survive. He Was Meant to End Up Like Mike Adams.

Nick Sandmann just turned 18 years old. And he’s settling a $250 million lawsuit with major media outlets that libeled him. Let’s send him our congratulations and prayers.

I was prepping Robert Oscar Lopez’s powerful piece on Mike Adams for publication when I realized something chilling. Reading how the left hounded that talented writer to suicide (if indeed he wasn’t murdered) I heard in my head the media headline that never ran. Thanks be to God.

“Racist Ringleader, Nicholas Sandmann, Dead at 17.”

That’s what the media mob wanted. They as good as admitted it.

When powerful reporters call a young man’s face “the most punchable in America,” that’s what they mean. When columnists and activists propose “doxing” him, contacting every college he ever applies to, or job he tries to get, that’s what they mean.

When Sandmann’s own Catholic bishop threw him to the wolves, when his school suspended him, when “conservative” columnists at National Review and other venues denounced him as “bigoted,” they were writing him off for life. They were branding him on his face with the most destructive charge available in America. The charge that’s now burning cities and getting Trump supporters murdered.

[….]

They’re Coming for Us

That’s where we stand in 2020, as leftists verbally tap dance on Mike Adams’ coffin. I wish Mr. Sandmann well, and advise him to take his money and move somewhere sane, like Poland. Maybe start a Catholic college there. Because the kind of leftists who dug up Adams’ columns from 20 years ago to goad him to his grave aren’t finished with Nick Sandmann. They can’t forgive his innocence, his victory, or his smile.

They’re coming for him. They’re coming for me. And then they’ll come for you and your kids.

Get yourself to the gun range. Make friends there. Organize local militias, to step in when the police (afraid for their pensions) meekly disband. We don’t need two Americans like the McCloskeys in St. Louis, but two million or ten million. That’s the only way this madness ends.

Read it all.

You might be interested in Tucker Carlson’s interview with writer Zmirak.

 

Reminder!  How is your prepping going?

New American Africans Believe they are Superior to Native Born African-Americans (who knew!)

~ Ann Corcoran ~ 3 Comments

Over the years, while writing at Refugee Resettlement Watch, an article would come my way that hinted at the problems within the African “community”  between the new African immigrants and our own African-Americans.

(Resettlement contractors loved to place the new Africans in predominantly African-American neighborhoods with, I suppose, the naive notion that since they are all blacks they would love and embrace each other!)

If there were tensions, it was always just hinted (or immediately swept under the rug if a reporter dared mention it) and I suspect that is because it goes against the narrative—how is it possible for a black immigrant to be bigoted against another black person?

Everyone knows only white people can be racists and bigots, right?

Much to my surprise here is an opinion piece at MinnPost published a few days ago by second generation Ethiopian immigrant Eskender A. Yousuf.

It took me a few minutes of reading and rereading to understand that he is basically saying that the new immigrant Africans look upon African-Americans, who have been here for generations, as riff-raff, inferior to the real Africans newly arrived.

What is going on, two big admissions in the space of a week about problems in the Minnesota immigrant “community.”

Don’t miss my post at RRW about how Somali culture dictates that women can be treated with abuse.

Police outside of Minneapolis South High in 2013. “The recent brawl at South High School in Minneapolis is said to have, at least partially, been caused by friction between Somali and African American communities.” https://www.mprnews.org/story/2013/02/25/daily-circuit-south-high-somali-african-american-tension

A call to address anti-Blackness within African immigrant communities

“I was on a recent conference call helping an organization put a statement together and this Sudanese brother says, ‘I don’t understand this Black Lives Matter stuff, I have never felt racism in this country.’

You know, I’m just letting people have it now … we [African-Americans] can sniff out anti-Blackness right when we step in the room, wherever we are. … I have never felt welcomed or comfortable in any African immigrant establishment in Minnesota.”

These words come from a recent conversation I had with a close connection of mine.

Eskender A. Yousuf.  I’m guessing the Leftists in MN are not too happy with Mr. Yousuf’s admission!

This was nothing short of our regular conversations and check-ins; however, this time it felt different. With the wake of the current racial uprisings, it provoked me to publicly call attention this issue.

As a second-generation Ethiopian immigrant who is ethnically Oromo, I was born and raised in the Twin Cities. I never imagined that the place I call home would become the epicenter of historic racial uprisings and protests that sparked a fire across the world.

Stood in solidarity

Amongst the sea of protesters that stood in solidarity in the streets of Minneapolis in the wake of George Floyd’s death were 1.5 and second-generation African immigrants (1.5 generation immigrants refer to those who came to America before they reached 12 years old; second-generation immigrants refer to those who were born in America).

Minneapolis, in fact, is home to a diverse population of racially Black individuals and a large fraction of them are African immigrants and refugees. We have the largest population of Somali immigrants, a vast number of Ethiopians, as well as immigrants from other African countries like Eritrea, Sudan, Liberia, and Nigeria. While African immigrant communities showed up in large numbers to protest police brutality and racial injustices, an oft-neglected nuance is the prevalence of anti-Blackness within these very communities.

The support for the Black Lives Matter movement from the African immigrant community demands that we address and correct the racist practices within our own community that are often left unquestioned.

For us to truly support the call for racial injustice, we must take the step eradicate anti-Blackness within our own communities.

Growing up in the Twin Cities, I have witnessed countless anti-Black sentiments, expressions, attitudes, and practices from close relatives and community members. Some examples include: looking down on marrying African-Americans, addressing and treating African-Americans and their communities by negative racialized stereotypes (i.e. lazy, not hardworking, criminals) and our perpetual disassociation with the African-American community in order to distinctly identify ourselves as African immigrants and not “Black/African-American.”

This identification process has been heavily documented and proved as a mechanism for us to distance ourselves from African-American communities for various reasons, including social stratification.

I didn’t want to post the whole thing, but there is more good stuff, so continue reading here.

Wouldn’t it be great if the politically incorrect Mr. Yousuf and the Sudanese “brother” he quotes made it to cable TV news.  I can dream can’t I!

I Might Just Have to Read “Hatemonger!”

~ Ann Corcoran ~ 2 Comments

Of course its a lefty book aimed at vilifying the President and Stephen Miller, but there is some important advice in it (according to this excerpt at Politico) that the Republicans generally have failed to heed—you must fight like the Left fights!

And, that comes from none other than David Horowitz who was about as far left as you can get, but woke up one day (after a friend was murdered!).

Here is Politico:

Jean Guerrero is an investigative journalist and author of Hatemonger: Stephen Miller, Donald Trump and the White Nationalist Agenda, forthcoming from William Morrow (HarperCollins) on August 11, from which this article is adapted.

The Man Who Made Stephen Miller

In December 2012, with the Republican Party reeling from a brutal election that left Democrats in control of the White House and the Senate, the conservative activist David Horowitz emailed a strategy paper to the office of Alabama Senator Jeff Sessions.

Former Senator Jeff Sessions and David Horowitz. There is nothing the Left hates more than one of their own, as Horowitz once was, exposing their strategies.

 

Horowitz, now 81, was a longtime opponent of immigration and the founder of a think tank and a campus freedom-of-speech advocacy group. He saw in Sessions a kindred spirit—a senator who could reawaken a more nationalist fire in the Republican party. The person he emailed it to was a Sessions aide: Stephen Miller. Horowitz, who recalled the episode in an interview and shared the emails with me, had known Miller since the aide was in high school.

Sessions with aide Miller

Horowitz encouraged Miller to not only give the paper to Sessions but to circulate it in the Senate.

Miller expressed eagerness to share it and asked for instructions. “Leave the Confidential note on it. It gives it an aura that will make people pay more attention to it,” Horowitz wrote. The paper, “Playing to the Head Instead of the Heart: Why Republicans Lost and How They Can Win,” included a section on the political utility of hostile feelings.

Horowitz wrote that Democrats know how to “hate their opponents,” how to “incite envy and resentment, distrust and fear, and to direct those volatile emotions.” He urged Republicans to “return their fire.”

“Behind the failures of Republican campaigns lies an attitude that is administrative rather than combative. It focuses on policies rather than politics. It is more comfortable with budgets and pie charts than with the flesh and blood victims of their opponents’ policies,” Horowitz wrote, adding that Democrats have the moral high ground.

“They are secular missionaries who want to ‘change society.’ Their goal is a new order of society—‘social justice.’” He argued that the only way to beat them is with “an equally emotional campaign that puts the aggressors on the defensive; that attacks them in the same moral language, identifying them as the bad guys.”

Horowitz wrote that hope and fear are the two strongest weapons in politics. Barack Obama had used hope to become president. “Fear is a much stronger and more compelling emotion,” Horowitz argued, adding that Republicans should appeal to voters’ base instincts.

It is perhaps the most compact crystallization of the relationship that propelled Miller, now a senior policy adviser and speechwriter in the Donald Trump administration, to the White House and of the importance that relationship has had in the administration.

Much more here.

This is long, but an important read.  I’ve been arguing against spending a lot of time reading and thus feeling like something has been accomplished, but this article is extremely valuable because it helps reconfirm what I suspect you already know—Republicans have been fighting (if you can call it that!) all wrong for most of our lives.

There are, however, still a few months left to get it right!

Tucker Carlson: Big Tech Censors Busier Than Ever

~ Ann Corcoran ~ 5 Comments

In case you missed it, Tucker Carlson had a great opening monologue last night about how Google and Facebook are, more than ever, blocking your ability to see anything that goes against the Leftwing narrative about Donald Trump’s presidency and especially his handling of the Chinese Virus panic.

Normally I try not to post information that is widely available, but you need to see this (surprisingly as of this writing it has only 122 views).

I was especially interested in the discussion with Breitbart editor Alex Marlow that begins at the 9:40 mark where he explains how the tricky b******* at Google have limited Breibart’s reach.

 

And, I guess you have already seen how the Leftwing media has viciously attacked the African doctor speaking on the video that was taken down yesterday.  Just a reminder that ALL Black Lives Do Not Matter!   Clearly, she is one African immigrant the Left would love to deport!

And, one more thing.  I have argued for years that you all should consider setting up blogs and websites of your own.  You know if Biden wins that most alternative media will be wiped out, probably me too.  But, I’m thinking if thousands of you are blogging, they might not be able to silence everyone.

So Much for the So-called Fact-Checkers!

~ Ann Corcoran

The Capital Research Center posted a humorous piece a few days ago demonstrating how through simply parsing words, the Leftists at Snopes tried to wiggle out of their “fact-checking” that had concluded that convicted terrorists had not helped fund Black Lives Matter.

(I sure hope none of you rely on Snopes!)

Snopes Avoids Truth of BLM Ties to Terrorism by Torturing Language

In the public policy world, where part of CRC’s mandate is calling out the hypocrisies and fabrications of the other side—hopefully to effect change toward the better—there may be no better measure of success than when the other side is forced to start redefining terms to make their lies sound like truth.

Last week, Capital Research Center achieved that measure of success. Not since President Bill Clinton wrestled with the meaning of what “is” is has America witnessed such tortured verbal parsing.

A Terrorist’s Ties

Rosenberg is on the board of Thousand Currents https://www.influencewatch.org/non-profit/thousand-currents/

It began with a well-received June blog post from CRC President Scott Walter telling the tale of Susan Rosenberg, a convicted terrorist who spent 16 years in a federal prison:

Rosenberg . . . started out as a member of the 1960s revolutionary group Weather Underground, graduated into even more violent, and arguably successful, forms of terrorism in the 1970s and 1980s—including bombings at an FBI field office in Staten Island, the Navy Yard Officers’ Club in Washington, DC, and even the U.S. Capitol building, where she damaged a representation of the greatest of the Democrat defenders of slavery, John C. Calhoun.

At some point after President Bill Clinton commuted her sentence in 2001, Rosenberg landed on the board of Thousand Currents, the 501(c)(3) nonprofit that fiscally sponsors the Black Lives Matter (BLM) Global Network Foundation.

Cut to July 14, when suspected less-than-unbiased fact-checking site Snopes decided it needed to set the record straight about Rosenberg and BLM. Snopes likely weighed in because CRC researchers had done several high-profile media appearances—including appearing on the Mark Levin Show—discussing the piece, and formidable cable news pundits such as Tucker Carlson covered the Rosenberg saga as well.

Poor Snopes. In trying to debunk the Rosenberg connection to Thousand Currents, they found that it was, in fact, all true. So, they consulted their Orwellian playbook and simply questioned the definition of the word “terrorism.”

Then they could rate the claim as only half true. Which is exactly what they did in an odd post (see below) that seems to move backward in time.

More here.

So while we are on the subject of fact-checking.  One of my local friends (Dick) sent me a youtube video (see it below before it disappears, he warned).

(You may have already seen it since it has been circulating since the beginning of the month.)

After watching it, the first thing I did was look for so-called ‘fact-checkers.’  I found two.

Perhaps the most interesting of the two was the one from the Associated Press which asserts this at the end of its fact check of ‘Insurgency-911.’

This is part of The Associated Press’ ongoing effort to fact-check misinformation that is shared widely online, including work with Facebook to identify and reduce the circulation of false stories on the platform.

Here’s more information on Facebook’s fact-checking program: https://www.facebook.com/help/1952307158131536

LOL! Follow that link and see that Facebook uses ‘third party fact-checkers’ which immediately raises the question, so who are they and are they unbiased (of course not!)?

There is another ‘fact-check’ by highly suspect ‘Lead Story’s’ Eric Ferkenoff who is one of Facebook’s independent (ha! ha!) fact-checkers.

So this is what you do. Watch the video, read the fact-checks (consider how they parse words) and see what you think.

BTW, one of my favorite things the Left does is at the outset they say that we think the virus is a “hoax.”  By using that word they immediately signal readers/viewers not to believe what they are about to read or see.

I don’t think the virus itself is a hoax and I doubt you do either.  The question is whether it has been blown way out of proportion, and has the panic response been warranted.

Decide for yourself (but LOL! if you go to youtube to get the video, you will see that they try really hard to keep you from seeing it and that tells you all you need to know!)