Jimmy Kimmel Suspended 'Indefinitely' After Pushing Charlie Kirk Propaganda

Comment: Kimmel is a bottom-feeder but now we have the right embracing cancel culture with no irony at all....

----- 

Zero Hedge

The now-former late-night talkshow and Podesta pal will be 'preempted indefinitely" following overt propaganda regarding the killing of Charlie Kirk, an ABC spokesperson told Deadline. The show will be replaced by other programming. 

During his opening monologue on Monday, Kimmel suggested that Tyler Robinson, the 22-year-old suspect in the assassination of Kirk last week at Utah University - was a conservative, when all indications point to the exact opposite.

"The MAGA Gang desperately trying to characterize this kid who murdered Charlie Kirk as anything other than one of them and doing everything they can to score political points from it," Kimmel said, adding "In between the finger-pointing, there was grieving."

ABC's announcement came shortly after Nextar Media Group announced that its company-owned and "partner television stations affiliated with the ABC Television Network will preempt ‘Jimmy Kimmel Live!’ for the foreseeable future beginning with tonight’s show."

Hours earlier, FCC Chair Brendan Carr told Benny Johnson that Kimmel's comments were "truly sick," and that there's a "strong case" for legal action against both ABC and Disney (ABC is a Disney subsidiary).  

Read more

 

The Guardian apologizes for saying Sputnik posted ‘fake’ Notre Dame PHOTO vilifying Muslims

Comment: Hoisted by their own petard. This shows how the Guardian is feverishly looking for racism that isn't there and reveals how ideologially possessed they really are. 

----------------------------

RT

The Guardian has issued a mealy-mouthed apology for accusing Russian news agency Sputnik of doctoring images in the immediate aftermath of the Notre Dame fire to perpetuate an anti-Muslim narrative online – four months later.

“In an episode of Fake or for real? published on 19 April, we suggested that a photo that went viral during the Notre Dame fire had been doctored,” the Guardian wrote in an Instagram story Monday. Instagram stories only have a shelf-life of 24 hours, but thankfully screenshots of the story exist.

“We have been contacted by the copyright owner of the photo, Sputnik France, and accept that it had not been doctored; we apologise for suggesting otherwise.”

The four-months late apology refers to the Guardian’s coverage of a photo from Sputnik France’s Facebook live coverage of the April 15 Notre Dame fire. 

The Guardian’s ‘Fake or for Real’ Instagram series suggested the photo was altered to depict ‘Muslims’ celebrating the fire at the world-famous cathedral. 

This particular angle appeared in various locations online, there was just one problem: Sputnik did not make any reference or speculation as to the men's background or religious beliefs. 

Sputnik France even released the full metadata relating to the image, allowing any and all ‘fact-checkers’ to see for themselves. 

This photo has been shared tens of thousands of times on Facebook in the past 24 hours. It shows "Muslims laughing" walking away from #NotreDame. But the image is doctored. https://t.co/FYzZPhGdsz pic.twitter.com/M5Dr9Nio91

— PolitiFact (@PolitiFact) April 16, 2019

At the time, the ‘fact-checking’ community went into overdrive, including bastion of virtue, Politifact, which was forced to issue a multi-tiered retraction over the course of several weeks.

 Read more

Delegitimizing the white male

Paul Craig Roberts
paulcraigroberts.org

We know that the white male has been delegitimized. Women's studies, black studies, Latino studies, and Identity Politics have been demonizing, and teaching hatered of, white males since the 1980s. But where did these hate-filled special interest groups get their power? The answer is that effete white males handed it to them.

It was white male university administrators who created the anti-white male propaganda degrees called women's studies and black studies. It is the white males in the Democratic Party who endorse Identity Politics, an ideology that puts responsibility for all the evil in the world on white males.

The latest white male collapse is that of the president of Notre Dame University. Catholics, themselves formerly a marginalized people in the United States and Great Britain, are guilty, according to Rev. John Jenkins, Notre Dame's president, of displaying in Notre Dame's main building a wall mural painted by Luis Gregori in 1880. In the Identity Politics that now rules even Catholic universities, the 1880 painting is viewed in the 21st century as depicting native Americans in stereotypical submissive poses before white European explorers.

I would bet that most Americans would not read the painting in this way. But in American everything is determined by the few.

Notre Dame's president has decided that the solution to this "offense" is for the university to cover the mural.

Apparently the only intelligent person present at Notre Dame university is a law student, Grant Strobl, who said that "if we adopt the standard of judging previous generations by current standards, we may reach a point where there are no longer accomplishments to celebrate."

This is a good point, but I would go farther. Luis Gregori's painting was not intended to depict the submission of native Americans to the white man. Here we have another case of real history replaced by fake history with the connivance of the president of Notre Dame University.

Think about this for a moment. Is Luis Gregori's painting the only painting, the only piece of art that can be construed, or misconstrued, as giving offense? 

Read more

The American Psychological Association goes to war against boys and men

Barbara Kay
The Post Millennial

The American Psychological Association (APA) has, for the first time in its history, come out with Guidelines for Psychological Practice with Boys and Men.

One does not have to have read the entire 30,000 word document to appreciate its thrust: "traditional masculinity" is bad for society as well as to boys and men themselves. Stoicism, competitiveness and risk-taking, the qualities we consider desirable when they result in firefighting, search-and-rescue operations, self-sacrifice for women and children (see under Titanic) and combat in the defence of the nation, are, the APA believes, "psychologically harmful."

In a section called "masculine ideology," the APA says: "Masculine ideology is a set of descriptive, prescriptive, and proscriptive ... cognitions about boys and men (academic citations added). Although there are differences in masculinity ideologies, there is a particular constellation of standards that have held sway over large segments of the population, including: anti-femininity, achievement, eschewal of the appearance of weakness, and adventure, risk and violence. These have been collectively referred to as traditional masculinity ideology." This statement seems to have been composed by someone who has to bite her or his tongue in order not to describe manly men as "deplorables."

Let's unpack this a bit. By "anti-femininity," the APA means homophobia, but homophobia as a systematic attitude was not so much a feature of traditional masculinity as of traditional society. Women in a previous era were as likely to mock homosexuals as men. "Violence" was never a yardstick for masculinity in our culture, although physicality is.

The others - achievement, eschewal of the appearance of weakness, adventure, and risk-taking - are indeed masculine qualities, and they are not part of an "ideology," they are inherent. They are the qualities that brought humankind from caves to the Silk Road to global exploration across dangerous seas and to the moon landing. But the monumental accomplishments that can be traced directly to these masculine traits are of no interest to the APA. The Guidelines spew forth all the predictable shibboleths of social-justice warriordom - intersectionality, oppression, privilege, patriarchy, etc. Under the rubrics of Identity Politics, "traditional masculinity" is inherently toxic to women and other fragile people. 

Read more

Jordan Peterson and Ben Shapiro: Frontline of Free Speech (LIVE)