Why I am not putting The Red Pill Report on YouTube.

YouTube appears to be banning, suspending and plane just disappearing more and more people, accounts and content. Jerome Corsi has 33,025 subscribers… All content now gone.

https://platform.twitter.com/widgets.js

It appears to be… I was going to say mostly right wing and conservative views that are being suspended, but it probably goes even further, non-left-wing, non-progressive would probably a be better description.

Lots of people are saying, “the purge has begun!” The truth is that there has been a great deal of censorship for a long time now, but it appears to be deepening. YouTube is apparently using as trusted partners in its judgment on videos that break its “community guidelines,” organisations like, the Southern Poverty Law Center.

The Southern Poverty Law Center claims to monitors hate groups and other extremists throughout the U.S. and exposes their activities to law enforcement agencies, the media and the public, and that they teaching tolerance.

The truth is more like, the Southern Poverty Law Center is completely intolerant of any view that is not far left and “progressive” and anti-Christian.

A great many of the “Strikes” that YouTubes monitors put on videos and organisation are overturned on appeal, but for many many videos, this is too late and the opportunity to lead the news and gain views and spread the truth about a topic is over by the time the review is compleat.

Am I missing something?

Humm. I was passing some time this morning looking at BBC NEws videos on the new section and noticed this video, “Ikea founder: Five things to know.” Just over 30 seconds in it says that he was a member of two far-right groups and has the logos for the New Swedish Movement and the National Socialist Workers Party (Sweden). Now I know that people often refer to nazis far-right, but when did Socialist become right wing?

Is this just more progressive newspeak designed to stop us talking probably about where people stand on issues. Today, if you are conservative or stand for traditional values you are often labelled as a Nazi or Fascist, but Nazis and Fascists have their roots in socialism not conservatism.

Or am I missing something here?

Double Standards?

If Sadiq Khan had once touched a woman’s knee without permission in triplicate, he would be unfit for office. The media would, (well for now), destroy him. Yet you can be a supporter of terrorism and violent jihad and as long as you wrap it up in a little “human rights” speak… you are a hero of the liberal left.

https://platform.twitter.com/widgets.js

What does this mean? Fake News?

As many of you will know, I work a few nights a week at a hotel as a night porter. This morning I was putting out the newspapers in the guest lounge and noticed this headline, “Russia could initiate hostilities sooner than we expect.”

“Russia could initiate hostilities sooner than we expect.”

Now I have not really had time to look fully into this article, but as I understand this, this is a quote from Sir Nick Carter the Chief of the General Staff. But what I really wanted to ask was, “What does this mean?”

“Russia could initiate hostilities sooner than we expect.” well, of course, they could… But when you put the word could in a newspaper headline or in an assessment of a military threat it immediately become a nonsense. Of course, they COULD,  initiate hostilities sooner than we expect. Well unless we expect them to initiate hostilities immediately. Vladimir Putin COULD appear on TV dressed in a pink leotard riding a hobbyhorse and singing I’m a little teapot short and stout… but it is rather unlikely.

“It will start with something we don’t expect”

“It will start with something we don’t expect.” The very fact that they have said that they… expect it to “start with something we don’t expect” has now become a self-cancelling prophecy, has not it? If you expect it to start with something you do not expect… you are now expecting it to start with that very thing!

One could go on, “we may not have a choice about a conflict with Russia.” We may not find a golden mushroom growing from the back of our heads in the morning either! We, of course, may not have a choice… but then again we could start to engage with Russia, a predominantly Christian country, after all, we have close ties with Saudi Arabia a country that morally and philosophically is very different to ourselves, (i.e. Sharia law). Saudi Arabia still stones people or hangs them from its lamp posts.

The West, at least a great deal of it has been sabre rattling at and about Russia for many years now. But step back and look at who involved in wars around the world at the moment. Who has been fermenting conflicts and supplying help and weapons to murderous, Christian massacring groups throughout the middle east for the last xxx years? America and the UK. Who is illegally in occupation of large parts of Syria? America.

Russia has not started a conflict in many years, America has not had a year without war for… I don’t know how long. And before you mention Crimea, you need to know about America’s involvement in the election of an anti-Russian government right on the Russian border. And as for the Russian involvement in the resent American elections… What actual evidence have you seen? From all that I hear, and I am trying to get a major interview about this for the Podcast… it is mostly or all fabrication from the CIA, FBI and Democratic party, through Fusion GPS, (the anti-conservative, opposition group) and Perkins Coie, (The law firm that was behind the fake birth certificate for Obama). But that is another story.

Not journalism, but jingoism!

To my mind, what the Daily Mail is doing here is not journalism, but jingoism!

Admittedly, I have not been able to read the article in depth yet, but nor will most people who see this paper. It is the headlines that will be read at the petrol station forecourt stand or at the newsagent. Leaving aside for now whether or not Sir Nick Carter should or should not have made these comments, newspaper editors have a responsibility, not to just regurgitate rhetoric, but to question and report. Even in their headlines, as that is often all that is read.