music of the week
music of the week
‘Let’s face it ladies, if it wasn’t for men and their male drive, we would all still be living in thatch huts’.
This short video (made in 2009) presents a montage of still images set to music, attesting to the general brilliance of men. No video can fully cover the incalculable span of male achievement, but this is a small testament to men which is at least a start.
Yes, it’s a tad corny, and no, you won’t agree with some of the famous men depicted. Roll with it.
Some of the men included:
Sir Tim Berners-Lee, World Wide Web
Alan Turing, WWII code-breaker
Mark Zuckerberg, Facebook
Muhammad Ali, The Greatest
Sergey Brin & Larry Page, Google
Jerry Yang & David Filo, Yahoo! Inc
Jeff Bezos, Amazon
James Watson & Francis Crick, DNA
Chuck Liddell & Maurício “Shogun” Rua, MMA fighters
Bill Gates, Microsoft
Alan Sugar, Amstrad
Johannes Kepler, Planetary Motion
Thomas Edison, Phonograph
Michael Jordan, Basketball
John McEnroe & Jimmy Connors, Tennis
Bruce Lee, Jeet Kune Do
James Cameron, Filmmaker
Edwin Moses, 400m Hurdles
Anderson Silva, UFC fighter
Raymond, my brother
And men who sweep your street, maintain utilities to your home and risk their lives so that you don’t have to.
SWEDEN, STOCKHOLM. The total number of Feminist Initiative’s (F!) party members and supporters is increasing tremendously claims the Swedish media and F!’s press bureau. And that seems to be true. If one follows this link, one can for instance notice that F! just just recently got an injection of over 10,000 likes on its Facebook page from Turkey between June 16th and June 19th. These 10,000 likes now represent roughly 10% of the party’s total number of fans on Facebook which now is around 102,000.
by Geert Wilders
June 30, 2014 at 5:00 am
In several Western countries, the authorities are concerned about the security risk posed by young Muslim immigrants who went to Syria and Iraq to wage jihad and are now returning home. They are considered the most serious security risk in decades.
The risk is not just theoretical. Indeed, on May 24, Mehdi Nemmouche, a young Muslim with a French passport, went on a killing spree with a Kalashnikov assault rifle in the Jewish Museum in Brussels. He killed four people. Nemmouche had previously been in Syria, where he was trained in guerrilla warfare.
During the past three years, thousands of young Islamic immigrants from all Western countries, Europe, Australia, America and even Russia, have gone to fight in Syria, where they have committed the most horrible atrocities. Some of them were killed in action, while others have since returned home. They carry Western passports but they hate the West. They walk our streets as ticking time bombs, eager to cause as much havoc in our cities as they have caused in Syria.
The West cannot just sit idly by and wait for the next terror attack to happen. We must protect ourselves. If we do not, the barbaric scenes that play today in Syria and Iraq will soon be repeated in our countries. Ordinary people are well aware of the urgency of the problem. Last week, I proposed ten concrete measures to prevent Islamic terrorism in the Netherlands. A poll showed that a large majority of the Dutch support the plan.
The first measure I proposed was (1) automatically to strip immigrants with dual nationalities of their Dutch passports if they leave our country to fight for Islam in Syria. This way, they will not be allowed back into our country. Britain already uses such legislation. Last December, the British authorities stripped 20 people with dual nationality of their British nationality because they had traveled to Syria to fight. As Theresa May, the British Home Secretary, rightly declared: “Citizenship is a privilege, not a right.”
I also proposed (2) the immediate administrative detention of those fighters who have already returned, as well as (3) the reintroduction of border controls and (4) a halt to immigration of people from Islamic countries. International treaties prohibiting these measures should either be modified or terminated.
Another measure is (5) the encouragement of voluntary repatriation of people originating from Islamic countries. A survey shows that 73% of Dutch Muslims regard fighters in Syria as heroes. Such attitudes do not belong in the Netherlands. We should also (6) deal severely with the supporters of the fighters in Syria. Mosques, Islamic schools and other organizations that provide financial or other support to those who go to fight in Syria must be closed down immediately.
And we should (7) spend more money on security. Money that is currently being wasted on development aid would better be spent on the AIVD (the Dutch General Intelligence and Security Service).
Finally, there are three measures with an international rather than a domestic impact. We should (8) stop Dutch military intervention in the Islamic world and focus on the protection of the Netherlands. We should (9) support Israel and stimulate economic relations with the Jewish state. Israel is the front line in the fight against jihad. If Israel falls, the West falls. And (10) we should break diplomatic relations with countries, such as Saudi Arabia and Qatar, that support terrorist groups such as ISIS
The proposals were well received by the public. An opinion poll this week showed that 82 per cent of the Dutch believe that jihadists returning from Syria and Iraq increase the risk of an attack in the Netherlands. 76 per cent favor stripping jihadists of their Dutch nationality, 67 per cent want to introduce border controls to prevent them from returning, and 75 per cent want additional manpower for the AIVD. 65 per cent of all Dutch believe that Islamic culture does not belong in the Netherlands. Even a majority of the voters of Labour and the far-left Socialist Party share this opinion.
There is an acute awareness among the Dutch that in order to have a safer Netherlands we need to exclude jihadists from our society. We have become so indoctrinated with political correctness that we might consider this as wonderful and surprising news, although it is just plain common sense. Those who travel abroad to kill people for the sake of Islam should not be allowed to walk our streets again.
Geert Wilders MP is a member of the Dutch parliament and leader of the Party for Freedom (PVV). He is the author of Marked for Death: Islam’s War against the West and Me (Regnery).
In this episode Tariq talks about the impact of #HC3Movie
feminazi liar and thief claim 501 c 3
anita scammer claims of 4chan harrasment debunked she was or a supporter posted on 4chan begging for money for her victimology kickstarter campaign
Hong Kong’s former central banker Joseph Yam Chi-kwong has warned that the city could lose its status as China’s top financial centre if political developments unnerve the country’s leaders.
The Hang Seng index dropped 389 points yesterday, its biggest fall in three months, amid growing concerns about political instability.
And Chow Chung-kong, chairman of Hong Kong Exchanges and Clearing, weighed in by warning that the increasingly tense political atmosphere could shake the confidence of international investors.
In the preface of his new book, Gui On Si Ngai, Yam writes: “The politics of finance is already complex … It may well be that political developments in Hong Kong are eroding the willingness of the leadership to rely too much on Hong Kong as a venue for the conduct of international financial activities of the mainland. If so, this would be regrettable.”
The book, in which Yam comments on global financial affairs and looks back at his time as chief executive of the Hong Kong Monetary Authority from 1993 to 2009, is published this week. Its title roughly translates as “In Prosperity, Think of Adversity”.
The warnings come amid growing tensions over electoral reform. More than 720,000 ballots have been cast in the controversial Occupy Central “referendum”, which has riled Beijing.
Yam, now an adviser to the People’s Bank of China, also calls on local leaders to guard against the risk of Hong Kong being marginalised as a result of financial liberalisation on the mainland, and points out that Hong Kong is losing ground to Shanghai and Singapore. He says it is inevitable that the Hong Kong dollar will pale in significance in the long term, with the yuan bound to play a bigger role.
“It is unrealistic to expect that a significant proportion of the international financial activities between the [future] largest economy in the world, now with 1.3 billion people, and the rest of the world be conducted using the currency of merely seven million people,” he writes.
Yam notes that the city’s leaders face the imminent task of enhancing the “utility” of Hong Kong as a global financial centre for the mainland and creating a critical mass of financial activities that “is big enough to pre-empt Hong Kong, as the middle man, from being marginalised”.
Referring to rising competition from Shanghai as it becomes a free-trade zone and from other regions running offshore yuan centres, he says: “Hong Kong interests are being pushed aside.”
Meanwhile, Chow said the city needed to worry more about the political situation than competition from mainland cities.
“I hope there will be no Occupy Central. We would like to see people use legal ways to discuss the way forward for our political situation,” he said.
“I would like to see a situation in which international investors would not lose confidence in Hong Kong due to political risk.”
music of the week
Police: Bus Driver Lied About Race-Fueled Attack By Three Black Youths
Ohio bus driver Rickey Wagoner‘s (pictured) claim that three Black teenagers shot and stabbed him has been unfounded by lack of evidence and a police investigation, according to the Dayton Daily News.
Wagoner initially told police the attack happened February 24th as he was checking outside his trolley bus to see why it had lost power.
According to Wagoner, he stabbed one of them with his pen knife and fired a handgun he as he wrestled from one of them.
Afterward, he radioed to a dispatcher and claimed a religious book inside his shirt pocket stopped two of the bullets fired his way.
But Dayton Police Chief Richard Biehl said that it was “not credible” that the book would’ve stopped the bullets from penetrating Wagoner’s torso. Biehl also added that Wagoner’s interpretation of events and ballistics testing on the gun showed major holes in his story.
“After conducting a comprehensive investigation that has spanned nearly four months, the police department has concluded Mr. Wagoner fabricated his statements,” said Regional Transportation Authority Executive Director Mark Donaghy. “All of us at the RTA are angry at the thought that an employee would allegedly mislead the police, the public, and us and use ugly racial stereotypes in doing so.”
Wagoner also told officers that one of the suspects said they were there to “shoot a polar bear,” which is apparently slang for a Caucasian person.
Biehi said Wagoner’s wounds were inconsistent with defensive ones; rather, they were hesitation wounds. In addition, the knife Wagoner allegedly used to stab one of the attackers has never been found.
Though the department concluded Wagoner lied about the incident, he will not be charged with any crimes. He also remains on paid administrative leave, having violated the RTA’s Employee Standards Of Performance. The RTA will grant him a chance to explain his position and provide evidence at a later time.
Biehi said financial woes may have factored into Wagoner’s false report. An auditor office’s records show he owes Dayton County over $100,000 in property taxes on his multiple homes.
Wagoner declined comment outside his house to reporters Wednesday, saying, “Do what you need to do.”
like the #killallmen hashtag which is currently trending with no outrage from the feminazis a new anti-male hastag on the twitter which was designed and invented by men is just started and like the #killallmen hashtag, it doesn’t take long to see tweets calling for killing and maiming men
Lana Del Rey has dismissed gender equality as ‘boring’.
The singer, who has hundreds of thousands of female fans worldwide, told Fader that she is ‘not really that interested’ in feminism.
Instead, the 27-year-old Video Games hitmaker would much rather discuss important things like ‘intergalactic possibilities’.
In an interview with the June/July issue of the magazine, Lana went into great detail on an array of personal issues, but not before she made clear what she does and does not have time for.
‘For me, the issue of feminism is just not an interesting concept,’ she told the publication, before going on to explain what did in fact tickle her fancy as worthwhile conversation.
‘I’m more interested in, you know, SpaceX and Tesla, what’s going to happen with our intergalactic possibilities,’ the singer gushed.
Why are men on top? Why are they the vast majority of CEOs, politicians, education administrators – essentially all of our most important leaders? It’s really quite simple: although girls tend to be more mature than boys (as we are so often told), men are naturally more mature than women. As Satoshi Kanazawa, Reader at the London School of Economics, states in this article in Psychology Today:
You can peruse the studies he cites for evidence of this claim. Alternatively, you can simply take a look around you.
In academia the hard sciences (i.e. the real sciences) are all dominated by men – STEM (science,technology, engineering, math). But even if you get a degree in the humanities (as I did) you see this phenomenon playing out in your field of study through the historic examples of “The Greats.”
Beethoven, for example, went deaf not after he composed his masterpieces, but before. Milton went blind before he wrote his infamous Paradise Lost and relied on an amanuensis to transcribe his verses. Ovid, author of the great Roman epic The Metamorphoses, wrote it in political exile. And the greatest musicals and operas – which are now characterized as “feminine” – have overwhelmingly been composed by men.
The notions of “work/life balance” and “fulfilling careers” are distinctively feminine constructs. Discussion of such things was never mainstream before the 1960s, when the conversation on women’s workplace equality began to reach critical mass. If you asked a young man in the 1800s how much “work/life balance” he wanted in his “fulfilling career,” he would laugh – right before he told you that he would be working in a coal mine twelve hours a day, breaking big rocks into little rocks, until he was dead at 35 from black lung disease.
Like his father before him, and so on.
Heather Mallick wrote a column last week criticizing the government’s prostitution bill, specifically the part outlawing solicitation where children may be present. If you’ve not done so already, you might give it a read: “Why did prostitution bill go off the rails?”,Toronto Star, June 10.
Prostitution laws are one rare issue where I’ve essentially no opinion. I have never even thought of visiting a prostitute, let alone amassed the knowledge or committed the time to adequately consider this complex issue. In general, though, I think that such activities debase sexual relations—the proper preserve of committed, emotionally-invested couples—whatever this might imply for its legality. So I’m not here to discuss the bill, but rather to point out Mallick’s heartless characterization of men, which undergirds her belief in punishing johns but not prostitutes: “[It] promotes gender equality,” she writes, “and shifts a legal burden from exploited women directly onto the pathetic men who buy sex.”
She goes on:
[The bill’s] online reactions were almost entirely from men . . . one letter writer saying the law should cater to men without access to “mainstream sexual outlets” like spouses or friends.
Here’s a tip. “Hi, can I buy ya a drink? I don’t have access to mainstream sexual outlets” is not a great line. It is known in the mainstream women’s crowd as a “red flag” and will result in loneliness and possible late-night weeping into a little corral of crème de menthe glasses at the bar. . .
The “need” to buy women is not a “law of nature,” as he wrote, presumably with a straight face. Me? Arrested? The overall level of male entitlement was striking.
Call me sensitive, but I detect a seething hostility here, which reflects Mallick’s modus operandi of blaming men first, for everything. It is ridiculous to say that prostitution simply amounts to “buying women”, as if prostitutes had no agency and could place no limits on what occurs in the transaction. But the conclusion drawn from her prejudice is actually less concerning than the prejudice itself.
Heather Mallick is a sexist. Her habitual derogations would almost certainly land her in a human rights court if they were directed at women instead of men. And you can forget the lame excuse that sexism by women, and this woman in particular, cannot exist because of men’s “institutional power”, code for the belief that men control everything and cannot therefore be subjects of stereotyping. Mrs Mallick has had numerous bylines—at the Globe and Mail, the Star, Chatelaine, Britain’s The Guardian, and the CBC—and is afforded an astounding level of deference. Oppression, indeed.
According to her world view, men cannot have opinions worth addressing because they are unable to empathize with women. But clearly Mallick is impervious to the way that her condemnations of others actually apply to her own prejudices.
Doubtless owing to her unchecked privilege, Mallick is incapable of empathizing with anxious and depressed men who’ve had misfortunes with the fair sex. So she dismisses the real angst of thousands, perhaps millions of men in this
country, almost all of whom don’t go to prostitutes. None of them should, of course, though perhaps we might forgive them the temptation.
For Mallick to cherry-pick some guy’s tactless comment about “mainstream sexual outlets”, and then mock all of these people on its account, is callous. In fact, the tone of her words suggests that she rather enjoys, like a schoolyard bully, making fun of men’s misfortunes. This is a truly hateful person, in other words.
A handful of male friends have confided in me their experiences with prostitution. (I guess I’m a good listener.) These guys were motivated not by a plain desire for “action”, but by perpetual female rejection in romantic, as well as sexual, relations. This rejection did not produce a mere lack of sexual fulfillment, but also an emptying of their male self-worth, which is naturally attuned to the role of protector and provider. So their johning served a desire for attention and a simulacrum of intimacy. One even paid the woman to just sit for a couple of hours and talk with him, as a caring wife would for her husband.
Some of these men didn’t possess the confidence to walk up to a woman and ask her out for a drink, a diffidence which Mallick would view as pathetic. Others had been laughed away by all women who interested them. Either way, they evidently weren’t moral monsters who derived pleasure from “owning women”. Clearly, then, the issue isn’t as black and white as Mallick believes.
Finally, it is unsurprising but noteworthy that feminism’s innate man-hating, of which Mallick is representative, has reached this irrational apex. It started out raging against the jocks, the classic chauvinists, the macho men—chaps who could survive the breakdown of chivalrous courtship into today’s vulgar “sexual marketplace”. But now feminism has turned on the very nerds who invariably helped to midwife it. For the most part, these guys genuinely care about the status of women and wish, often desperately, that even one of them would care back. It’s a shame that misandrics like Mallick unfeelingly insult them.