Japan still frets over Trump despite assurances from Pentagon chief



As the first member of the cabinet of U.S. President Donald Trump to visit Japan, U.S. Defense Secretary Jim Mattis reassured Tokyo that the bilateral alliance is firm in the face of North Korean threats and Chinese maritime assertiveness.

But Tokyo still may not feel at ease as many uncertainties exist about Trump’s “America First” agenda and his confrontational rhetoric toward even close allies.

“It was a very good meeting. I think it was a big success,” a Japanese Defense Ministry official said after talks Saturday between Defense Minister Tomomi Inada and Mattis at the end of the Pentagon chief’s two-day visit.

“The two countries agreed fully on all kinds of issues,” the official said. “The defense chiefs were able to build trust with each other and I expect it to continue.”

Through a series of meetings in Tokyo, Mattis, a retired Marine Corps general, offered all the key security reassurances that Tokyo was waiting to hear from the Trump administration, including the U.S. commitment to defend the Japanese-administered Senkaku Islands in the East China Sea, which China also claims.

There was also what the Japanese official called a happy “surprise” as Mattis praised Japan at a press conference Saturday as “a model” of burden-sharing over the costs of stationing U.S. forces in the country. During the presidential campaign, Trump had portrayed Japan as a free-rider on security.

But some experts said the Japanese government must still worry whether the assurances offered by Mattis truly reflect what will be Trump administration policy toward Japan.

“There will always be concerns” that promises may be reversed by Trump, said Kazuhiro Maeshima, a Sophia University professor specializing in American government and foreign policy.

Maeshima also warned that Japan has to be careful not to let Trump use the defense commitment over the Senkakus as a bargaining chip to win concessions from Japan, for example, on economic issues such as direct investment in the United States. Trump considers himself a consummate dealmaker and concerns linger that he may try to negotiate security and economic issues in ways that resemble his real estate bargaining.

There are also concerns over how Washington will assess Japan’s financial contributions toward the costs of U.S. military forces stationed in the country.

Mattis did not raise the issue at any of the meetings in Tokyo, apparently to the relief of the Japanese side. But that does not mean Washington may not bring up the issue in the future.

Maeshima said Mattis may have wanted to avoid roiling the waters ahead of a summit meeting between Trump and Japanese Prime Minister Shinzo Abe on Feb. 10 in Washington, their first face-to-face talks since Trump took office on Jan. 20.

Trump has already stunned the Abe government by ditching the Trans-Pacific Partnership free trade deal, and by accusing Japan of devaluing the yen.

Ken Jimbo, an associate professor at Keio University, said Mattis may have avoided getting into specifics on such topics as the host-nation support issue, because the new administration has yet to work out a detailed foreign policy agenda among the president, White House staffers and the State and Defense secretaries.

Jimbo was also doubtful that Mattis’ visit to the Asia-Pacific itself was part of some “clear-cut doctrine” of the administration. “I rather think that a very pragmatic reason has brought Mr. Mattis to this region. And that is South Korea,” the expert on Asia-Pacific security issues said.

While many aspects of Trump’s foreign and security policies in the Asia-Pacific region remain vague, the White House webpage does cite the development of missile defense systems to counter attacks from countries like North Korea as among its “America First” policy priorities.

Seoul has agreed to deploy the U.S. Terminal High Altitude Area Defense anti-missile system. But Mattis, worried that the controversial plan may be interrupted following the impeachment of President Park Geun Hye in December, may have thought he should go to Seoul to give a fresh boost to the issue before an election is held to pick Park’s successor.

“And you can’t skip Japan (if you’re going to South Korea), so it was a practical decision for Mr. Mattis to also come to Japan,” Jimbo said.

As a result, the meetings held in Tokyo seemed to have centered on sharing a basic awareness of the alliance relationship and regional security challenges, leaving many issues for later discussion.

Attention is now shifting to the Abe-Trump summit, which Maeshima said has the potential to affect the fate of the decades-old alliance.

“If the president does not pledge the U.S. defense commitment over the Senkakus, the alliance will start to drift,” the professor said, adding that the consequence of a frayed relationship is an increasingly assertive China and instability of the region.

He also said Japan and the United States should continue to cherish shared values such as democracy, free trade and the rule of law, which serve as the basis for the present alliance, or otherwise they could see the alliance end up based on self-interests.



Is VICE A Safe Space For Pedo Perves?


Apparently, the ratings or hits-obsessed Vice.com and its other platforms are only concerned about the volume of their readership and not the well-being of children.Of course, any publication or site would wish for optimum public support, but for the sensational VICE no trick, style or approach is cheap and appalling enough not to employ so long as they get to be read. It does not matter if they are basically churning out rubbish. What could they be thinking? Some of their “shocking” articles last year practically support pedophiles, project pedophiles in a-gasp-romantic fashion, make the dangerous aberration seems oh so practically normal! Simply disgusting!

Worse, VICE even try to “legitimize” their taking up the cudgels for pedophiles with supposed studies and academic arguments. Have the world run out of worthy advocacies and campaigns that VICE would take on the welfare of pedophiles? How could they pretend there’s nothing wrong- whatever one’s faith, race, social status or educational attainment- with people who view children with lust and malice, or have the conscience to even consider harming them sexually, or worst, actually abusing them?

In one article titled “Most Child Sexual Abusers Are Not Pedophiles, Experts Say”, aside from this sensationalized headline which the rest of the article failed to back up with credible studies, facts and figures from valid and official sources, many disturbing statements were also forwarded. VICE’s article claimed that “pedophiles might not have a choice in the matter”- how absurd can they get? As if they are not rational individuals incapable of discernment or separating what is true from what is false, and what is right from wrong. As if they can not control their minds, feelings or conscience. Is this to absolve them of accountability should they commit abuses in the future? Is that the intent of the article, and of VICE? That is, to offer a preemptive defense for pedophilia and pedophiles for their future criminal acts, to condition the mind of the readers? Unbelievable! Harassment, exploitation and abuse of children are criminal acts.

In other point, the article even compared pedophilia with the same dynamics as homosexuality. What deplorable crap? Adults in homosexual relationships are -even if others do not agree with them- at least thinking, consenting adults capable of deciding for themselves. While pedophilia abuses are simply inexcusable, condemnable because it involves often times defenseless children, in circumstances and acts that involve force and inflict pain and harm to kids.

While it may be true that not all cases of child sexual abuse were perpetuated by pedophiles, it does not make child sexual abuses perpetuated BY PEDOPHILES correct, or any less wrong. It does not make pedophiles any less disgusting.

The article reserved their biggest defense to pedophiles “who do not act on their urges”, as if they are instead the “victims” of society who deserve our understanding and support. Sure, even if it’s a stretch, if they seek medical support and intervention so as not to cause harm to any children-victims, that is. By itself, though, this defense or even ” separation” or

“distinction” between pedophiles who commit abuses and harm children, and pedophiles who “do not act on their desires” is dangerous, because who’s to tell of the real, tangible difference, really? Any pedophile can always claim it’s just on his mind, anyway. And what if this is used as misleading or deceptive defense in the future? A pedophile caught abusing a child can simply cry “but you knew I was the type of pedophile who do not act on my desires right? Therefore, I am innocent!” Imagine? Deplorable!

Or could VICE be forwarding an agenda? That of supporting the decriminalization of pedophilia?


Screaming NYU Protester Woman Identified as Anti-Trump Porn ‘Artist’



The highlight of Thursday’s protest against Gavin McInnes’s appearance at New York University was a woman who screeched at the police:

Who’s protecting NYU from this bulls**t? Why are you here? You’re not here to protect these students from Nazis. No, you’re not! This is completely f***ed up. And these students had to f***ing face them on their own. You should be ashamed of yourselves! You should be standing up to those Nazis! You should be protecting students from hate! This is hate! These are f***ing assholes . . . you are a joke. You’re grown boys! You’re grown boys . . . and I’m disgusted! I’m a professor! How dare you! How dare you f***ing assholes protect neo-Nazis? F*** you! F*** you! F*** you! These are kids who are trying to learn about humanity! They’re trying to learn about human rights and against racism and xenophobia and LGBTQ rights, and you’re letting these f***ing neo-Nazis near here! You should kick their ass! You should! You should be ashamed of yourselves! You should! F*** that s**t. F*** that s**t. It’s not up to these students to kick the ass of a neo-Nazi! They don’t have to raise their fist! They were taught to be peaceful! F*** you! F*** you. I’m a professor. God f***ing damn it … you’re here to protect neo-Nazis! So f*** you! God f***ing damn it! Those kids should not have to take fists up to neo-Nazis, and you’re putting them in that situation! Go to hell. F*** you NYPD!

Click here to watch the video of her unhinged meltdown.

In case you lost count, that was 16 F-bombs in less than two minutes, and she twice identified herself as a professor, prompting curiosity as to whether she taught at NYU and what subject. However, online investigators say she is in fact an artist named Rebecca Goyette, an adjunct professor at Montclair State University in New Jersey.

Professor Boyette’s online biography:

Rebecca Goyette creates persona-based works that poke holes in Puritanical sexual mores. . . .
Situated within a largely queer, fantasy paradigm, her work is able to embrace a fruitful multiplicity of sexual desire and engage a panoply of non normative gender roles. . . .
For Goyette, sex is one gateway into the rich territory of psychology and human interaction, into the remotest ranges of the subconscious mind.

Well, her subconscious mind is definitely a non-normative panoply, eh?

Works in Professor Goyette’s “queer, fantasy” oeuvre include “Lobstapussy,” “F–k Platter,” “Ghost Bitch” and “Masshole.”

It appears that “non-normative” is a synonym for crazy and, if you suspect that Professor Goyette’s mental illness is hereditary, you might not be surprised to learn that she claims to be the descendant of a woman who was hanged as a witch in Salem in 1692:

Goyette, haunted by the horrific tale of her ancestor’s death, has long dreamed of making an artwork in her honor. Her summer exhibition at Freight and Volume marks the realization of said dream. Of course, as those familiar with Goyette’s radical feminist practice might have anticipated, this will be no orthodox tribute. Rather, to honor her martyred ancestor, Goyette made a pornography. . . .
The Salem witch trials, Goyette explained in an interview with The Huffington Post, were fueled, above all else, by an erratic hatred and fear of feminine power. A panic had spread amongst the Puritan pilgrims, who became suspicious of sexuality, empowerment, and the other, leading little white men in tall black hats to accuse over 200 individuals of witchcraft, when their only crime, much of the time, was standing out.
Though the trials officially ended in 1693, the odious assumptions that permitted them still persist today, manifested in various forms of sexism, xenophobia and racism. “Donald Trump is the perfect pilgrim,” Goyette said, “he’s spewing all kinds of hate. He has the freedom to do whatever but he imposes arbitrary rules onto everyone else.”
Goyette believed the best way to send a big “f–k you” to pilgrims past and present, who go to wildly unconscionable lengths to silence otherness in all its forms, was to make an irreverent, nasty, hilarious, empowering feminist porno.

How many times must we refute this feminist myth of witchcraft as “empowerment”? After feminists seized upon this theme in the 1970s, they enjoyed several years of unimpeded myth-making, with Mary Daly, Andrea Dworkin, Barbara Ehrenreich and others cobbling together a narrative composed of a cherry-picked selection of fact woven together by theories of women’s intuitive nature and male oppression. Feminist “research” included picking through 19th-century works by such authors as the anti-Catholic French writer Jules Michelet (La Sorcière, 1862) and the anti-Christian suffragette Matilda Joslyn Gage (Woman, Church and State, 1893). Michelet was the primary source of the claim that witches were skilled practitioners of the healing arts, possessed of an arcane knowledge of herbal medicine, who were wrongly persecuted by an envious Catholic hierarchy. Gage was the source for the claim that 9 million women were killed during three centuries of witch hunts. There is no actual evidence for Michelet’s claim, however, and reputable historians now estimate the actual number of witchcraft executions in Europe as 100,000 or less, and at least a quarter of the victims were male, so that Gage’s number was a 90-fold exaggeration.

Unfortunately, by the time serious scholars began debunking these feminist claims in the 1990s — I highly recommend Ronald Hutton’s The Triumph of the Moon: A History of Modern Pagan Witchcraft — the mythology of the witch as an “empowered” woman had acquired a vast bibliography produced by Women’s Studies professors. Long on theory and short on facts, this ideological myth-making had taken root in academia, so that every October, we find journalists cranking out Halloween-themed articles that recycle the feminist witch narrative.

This is not merely coincidental to Rebecca Goyette’s insane rage. Her “art” is a sort of pornographic “queer, fantasy” cosplay, with her “non-normative” expressions of perverse sexuality intended to challenge the alleged misogyny and “puritanical” fear of sex that are peddled as historical truth by the feminist witchcraft myth:

Goyette addresses the seeds of hatred and fear that have prevented America, in her opinion, from becoming truly great. She does so in a feminine language all her own, where trauma and desire are not mutually exclusive, but wound up in the same, messypsychosexual playground.

As I explained last April: “Feminists have long understood, far better than most of their opponents, that destroying Christianity is necessary to feminism’s success.” This project seeks to impose on society a new feminist “morality” that is a neo-Gnostic inversion of scripture:

A blasphemous denial of God’s sovereignty and righteousness, Gnosticism rejected the idea of Original Sin and thus rejected also the significance of Christ’s atoning sacrifice. If humans are sinless, we need no Savior, and what is necessary instead is for humans to get in touch with their inner divinity, to “become part of the universal whole by a process of self-knowledge and self-realization,” as Professor Peter Jones explained in his 1992 book The Gnostic Empire Strikes Back: An Old Heresy for the New Age.

Making “self-knowledge” the basis of religious truth, of course, is entirely consistent with the feminist claim that “the personal is political.” The result of this self-obsessed worldview is not only Rebecca Goyette’s obscene adventures in the “messy psychosexual playground,” but also her shrieking irrational rage toward Trump supporters.

In February 2016, Professor Goyette produced “Trump/Palin Performance Art Rally,” a work of political obscenity, and her partner in that performance, artist Brian Andrew Whiteley, subsequently produced a Donald Trump grave stone in Central Park, which earned Whitely a visit from the Secret Service, and also, free publicity.

Did I forget to mention that Professor Goyette’s “Ghost Bitch” exhibit included her fantasies of castrating a certain Republican?

A highlight of the exhibition, the video aptly entitled Ghost Bitch U.S.A., couples Ghost Bitch with none other than misogynistic, fear-mongering (presumptive) Presidential candidate Donald Trump. We see Trump bound to a tree, allowing Ghost Bitch to have his way with him, ultimately leading up to his castration.

“Fear and Loathing of the Penis” is, as I have said, the psychological inspiration of feminist ideology and, also, bad feminist art.

7 Reasons To Never Date A Girl Who Attends A Protest


When a girl yearns to lose herself in a crowd, it indicates psychological issues no man wants in a girlfriend. As such, the only usefulness of the Women’s March—besides it giving fat girls exercise—is it shows us which girls to never date. Specifically, here’s why it’s a deal breaker if a girl attends a protest.

1. She’s in a bubble

A girl who protests is exceedingly angry at the world. This level of anger can only be cultivated in an echo chamber. If she isolates from other people then it’s an indicator she isolates her consciousness from her latent emotions, which leads to neuroticism you’d inevitably need to handle at some point. A healthy girl wouldn’t be too angry one way or another, and would rather connect with friends than lose herself in a mob.


2. She consumes too much news

We’re healthy to the extent we focus on what we can control and put aside that which we don’t control. A girl who has a sense of what it means to be happy wouldn’t be online reading news, the only purpose of which is to stoke her fear and anger. The most feminine girls I’ve known have come from different backgrounds, but they all had one thing in common: limited media consumption.


3. She has too much baggage

We attend protests for one reason and one reason only: to cover up psychological issues we cannot manage on our own. We fabricate an impending social change because the real reason for our march is horrifying. In this sense, treat a girl who goes to a protest like a girl who has an addiction to pain killers. To anyone who isn’t in pain, vicodin doesn’t feel good—it feels like a low-grade death.


4. She doesn’t read

I appreciate a girl who reads—not xoJane but books. Reading indicates the ability to have and express thoughts, not opinions. It indicates the desire to learn, not consume. It indicates an interest in museums, not night clubs. It indicates the ability to sit and be okay with yourself, not get a hit from the world’s most powerful benzo—the self-righteousness of the mob.


5. She lacks self-awareness

It’s only when we begin to understand our issues that we can manage them in pro-social ways like cultivating a skill, being honest, and creating healthy friendships. Therefore, a girl who protests is unable to sit down and think about her psychological issues. Relationships are difficult enough when people have a grasp on who they are and what motivates them.


6. She’s anti-social

Part of being a socially-adjusted human is to understand other people have different views and to still be civil. This requires the minimum empathy to walk around in another’s shoes. We may indeed be as correct as we think we are, but listening to others quells the urge to act out.

7. She has low-quality friends

A destructive relationship is like two crabs in a bucket, and a million woman march is a million crabs in a bucket. It’s a validation station of each other’s obesity and loneliness. A girl without healthy friendships is like a man without a purpose—she cannot be trusted, even for a woman.


When one person stomps and screams like a toddler, it’s a temper tantrum. When a thousand people stomp and scream, it’s a protest. Let’s not confuse these tantrums as being intelligent, progressive, or caring. Instead, let’s call them what they are: unhappy people who mistake strong emotions for truth.

Red Fascists Storm an Event with Ezra Levant at the University of Toronto


This week will be remembered with a series of event that embarrassed some of the best-known universities in North America. It started with the Milo Yiannopoulos’ attempt to speak at the University of California at Berkeley, which was cancelled after violent anarchists trashed businesses and public buildings. That was followed by an assault on Gavin McInnes’ event at NYU.

Today, it was the University of Toronto’s turn to show that psychopathic lefties have the upper hand when deciding who can speak. An event, which included the media personality and founder of The Rebel Media Ezra Levant, was stormed by a deranged crowd, which managed to interrupt it.

It happened at the Toronto Action Forum, organized by GenerationScrewed.ca – a student organization promoting free speech and political activism. Levant was the last one of a few distinguished speakers who spoke on various issues regarding current politics, economics and free speech. Prof. Jordan Peterson, Prof. Janice Fiamengo, Anthony Furey, and several economists.

Even though the organizers received a few threats via Facebook, the forum started and proceeded smoothly. It was sold out completely and the participants enjoyed the discussion panels.

Things changed drastically after Ezra Levant arrived at about 5 p.m. As soon as he took the microphone, we heard screams from the hallway. It turned out that a crowd of “social justice warriors” stormed the building and occupied the hallway, blocking both main exits.

We were trapped for a while and nobody was allowed to exit. Obviously, the campus security couldn’t handle those savages and we had to wait for the police. Then, one of the invaders pulled the fire alarm. Ezra was determined to continue his presentation, but the police came in urging everybody to leave. They promised that as soon as the Fire Marshall determined that there is no fire, we will be allowed back in.

We left the building and Ezra continued his speech without microphone. The red fascists kept screaming and shouting on the other side, but were unable to do any damage. Unlike the US, in Toronto, the police took them seriously – over 20 officers showed up and kept them under control.

While the police acted properly and kept the order, the university administration didn’t miss the chance to show its cowardice. While Ezra was speaking, one of the organizers approached Ezra and said that the administration cancelled the event and we had to disperse. Once again, censorship by the vile and violent lefties was enforced with the help of one of the major Canadian universities.