Please disable your Ad Blocker to better interact with this website.

Connect with us

Culture

WH Petition to Label Antifa a Terrorist Organization Surpasses 100K Signatures in 3 Days

Published

on

A White House petition to label the alt-left group Antifa a domestic terrorist organization has surpassed 100,000 signatures in less than three days — despite the glowing endorsements the black-clad mobs have been receiving from mainstream liberal media.

Trending: Judge Who Jailed Manafort Also Cleared Hillary Clinton In Benghazi Case

The petition was launched on Thursday, and by Sunday evening, 105,545 people had added their names.

The petition states:

“Terrorism is defined as ‘the use of violence and intimidation in pursuit of political aims’. This definition is the same definition used to declare ISIS and other groups, as terrorist organizations. AntiFa has earned this title due to its violent actions in multiple cities and their influence in the killings of multiple police officers throughout the United States.”

If a petition on the site can reach the 100,000 threshold within 30 days, the White House is supposed to respond to it within 60 days.

On Tuesday, President Donald Trump earned massive applause from his base, and scorn from liberal media pundits and members of the alt-left.

“What about the alt-left that came charging at, as you say, at the alt-right? Do they have any assemblage of guilt?” Trump asked reporters at Trump Tower on Tuesday. “What about the fact that they came charging with clubs in their hands swinging clubs? Do they have any problem? I think they do. That was a horrible, horrible day.”

Members of Antifa tend to hold the belief that violence is justified when used against political foes, or to send a message. From lighting fires and causing over $500,000 in property damage to the area surrounding University of California at Berkeley to prevent Milo Yiannopoulos from speaking, bashing a trump supporter over the head with a bike lock, to stabbing people they believe to be neo-Nazis — the black-clad criminals have been grabbing many headlines in the past few years.

A core belief uniting the misfit groups is that “hate speech” is not free speech, something which the US Constitution and the Supreme Court both disagree with them on. The fact of the matter is that hate is subjective and loosely defined, which would make it a slippery slope to legislate. There is also the important fact that polite speech would not need an amendment to protect it.

The groups often encourage people to attend protests or commit acts of civil disobedience wearing all black from head to toe, including masks. The tactic is called “black bloc” and is commonly used by the far-left anarchists and communists to create a mob in which people are indistinguishable from one another. The goal of this is to make it difficult for victims or law enforcement to identify violent rioters for prosecution.

While the tactic has been used in various parts of the world for decades, the first recorded use of black bloc tactics in the United States was at the Pentagon in 1988, during a protest calling for the US to stop supporting right-wing death squads in El Salvador. Since then, it has been a common movement at protests across the nation, picking up steam after the Occupy Wall Street protests swept across the country.

Liberal politicians and media may be embracing these communists now, as it suits their anti-Trump agenda, but they it would be wise for them to remember that according to Antifa — liberals get the bullet, too.

Cassandra Fairbanks is a senior reporter at Big League Politics and a DC-based writer and populist political commentator who has been published in a range of outlets including Sputnik News, Teen Vogue, and the International Business Times.

 

Join the conversation!

We have no tolerance for comments containing violence, racism, vulgarity, profanity, all caps, or discourteous behavior. Thank you for partnering with us to maintain a courteous and useful public environment where we can engage in reasonable discourse.

Culture

Ivy League Racism: Harvard Rates Asian Applicants Lower in ‘Likability,’ Other Traits

Published

on

Court documents unsealed Friday show that Harvard College consistently ranks Asian applicants lower on several personality traits than it does students of different ethnicities in its admissions process.

“Harvard’s admissions officials assign Asian Americans the lowest score of any racial group on the personal rating—a subjective assessment of such traits as whether the student has a ‘positive personality’ and ‘others like to be around him or her,’ has ‘character traits’ such as ‘likability … helpfulness, courage, [and] kindness,’ is an ‘attractive person to be with,’ is ‘widely respected,’ is a ‘good person,’ and has good ‘human qualities,’ say the court documents.

The Ivy League giant has been sued by Students for Fair Admissions, an activist group that is fighting the negative externalities of Affirmative Action, which is supposed to protect minorities against discrimination.

“It turns out that the suspicions of Asian-American alumni, students and applicants were right all along,” Student’s for Fair Admissions attorneys said in the court documents. “Harvard today engages in the same kind of discrimination and stereotyping that it used to justify quotas on Jewish applicants in the 1920s and 1930s.”

It has long been known that Affirmative Action policies negatively affect certain racial sub-groups, particular East Asians. A 2005 Princeton University study shows that Asian American students, on average, must score 270 points higher than Latino students, and 450 points higher than black students on the 1600 point SAT in order to be admitted to the same universities.

If Harvard were to admit students strictly based on merit and without consciousness, it would have a much higher percentage of Asian students.

But Students for Fair Admissions argues in its lawsuit that Harvard is actively taking measures to ensure against that. The group argues that Harvard has implemented a “soft-quota” of “racial-balancing” aimed at Asian students, which amounts to institutional discrimination in violation of civil rights law.

“Thorough and comprehensive analysis of the data and evidence makes clear that Harvard College does not discriminate against applicants from any group, including Asian-Americans, whose rate of admission has grown 29 percent over the last decade,” Harvard said in a statement.

Harvard failed to address the fact that the Asian applicant pool has grown more than 40 percent during roughly the same time period while other racial applicant groups has stayed approximately the same.

The school has previously defended itself by claiming that standardized test scores are not the only factor taken into consideration when admitting a student. That defense is meaningless in light of the fact Asians are scoring demonstrably lower on subjective personality assessments conducted by Harvard admissions employees.

The irony is palpable. Ivy League schools are the hotbed for social justice babble against perceived racism. But the racism that is right under their nose – blatant discrimination against a certain group of applicants solely on the basis of the immutable characteristic of race – not only goes unnoticed, but it rather defended.

Continue Reading

Deplorables

LEAK: Ben Shapiro Sponsor Smears Charlie Kirk, Says TPUSA ‘Could Inflict’ ‘Permanent Damage’

Published

on

First reported by Paul Joseph Watson, a club for college conservatives which exclusively sponsors Daily Wire founder and avowed NeverTrumper Ben Shapiro’s college speaking tour, issued an internal memo with a directive to steer young conservatives away from another popular group for conservative students.

“Although it runs counter to our instincts to advise students against becoming involved with other conservative organizations, students deserve to be warned about TPUSA,” said a leaked internal memo from Young America’s Foundation (YAF).

Turning Point USA (TPUSA), founded by Charlie Kirk, is perhaps the most well-known, and certainly the most rapidly growing campus club for young conservatives. The leadership of the group, including firebrand Candace Owens, is known to support President Donald J. Trump.

YAF, on the other hand, exclusively sponsors NeverTrump ringleader Ben Shapiro’s college lecture tour.

Here is part of the the leaked memo:

Courtesy: Paul Joseph Watson

Courtesy: Paul Joseph Watson

“Kirk founded TPUSA with no college experience,” the memo says. “He has taken some classes, but has not graduated. His focus has always been on building his own brand, not strengthening the Conservative Movement.”

YAF is obviously concerned with building its own brand too. If the group was not worried about its brand losing value, it would not have put out a directive to avoid TPUSA. Apparently, YAF supports the free market only when it is winning. As Milton Friedman, one of the greatest free market economists ever to walk the earth once said, “Society runs on individuals pursuing their own self-interests.”

“The silence of conservative leaders enabled Kirk to build TPUSA at a fast pace,” the memo says. “The long-term damage TPUSA could inflict on conservative students and the Conservative Movement can no longer be ignored.”

The “damage” YAF is referring to is the “America First” brand of Republicanism made popular by Trump. YAF is surely looking to protect the neoconservative movement – one that supports “conservatives” like Bill Kristol, the entire Bush family, and of course Shapiro. This brand of conservatism has failed to conserve anything. It has lost on every issue that is supposedly important to “conservatives,” including but not limited to: small government, government spending, gay marriage, abortion, gun rights, and immigration.

Positive results in some of these areas under President Trump seem to have YAF hot and bothered. Never mind what the free market of ideas wants, YAF needs to retain its control so it can churn out the next generation of National Review-reading neocons who will elect President Nikki Haley (Globalist-SC) in 2024. Then the establishment will be able to breathe a sigh of relief and go back to business as usual. Is it any wonder these people sponsor Shapiro as their mouthpiece?

Worth noting, Shapiro was the keynote speaker at TPUSA’s Student Action Summit in December. Perhaps TPUSA flew too close to the sun by hosting YAF’s young star, and YAF panicked.

YAF can dream all it wants. The NeverTrump establishment is breathing its last breaths, never to be revived.

Continue Reading

Snowflakes

Conservative Hall Monitor Ben Shapiro: ‘Nothing Has Been Accomplished’ in North Korea

Published

on

An avowed NeverTrumper and generally annoying “conservative” commentator is not celebrating one of the greatest diplomatic feats of our lifetime.

“Pre-emptive celebration of a Great Victory by the president is sheer partisan hackery,” tweeted Daily Wire founder Ben Shapiro. “Nothing has been accomplished…yet. Perhaps it will be. Celebrate then.”

But what about the North Korean government’s willful destruction of the Punggye-ri nuclear test site during peace talks between countries? What about those three hostages North Korea freed during the same time? What about the top North and South Korean leaders holding talks at the DMZ for only the third time in history? What about opening up diplomatic relations between the United States and the world’s most isolated country?

None of those things count as accomplishments in the eyes of Ben Shapiro, conservative moral arbiter and so-called “voice of reason.”

The Trump/Kim summit in itself is an accomplishment, one that even Democrats had to acknowledge. Even Time magazine called it a “genuine victory.” But not Shapiro. And not his neoconservative buddies like Matt Walsh, who compared the summit to the rise of Hitler. Why be optimistic about peace?

Shapiro has been tweeting up a storm since yesterday about how patriotic Americans are wrong for viewing last night’s summit as a step towards peace in the Korean Peninsula.

“Imagine the Nazi flag in place of the North Korean flag,” he said. “Kim is the closest thing to Hitler on the planet today. We put our flag alongside his, and Trump praised him fulsomely. That better reap some dividends.”

“If we receive nothing but empty words and a photo op between the most powerful leader in the world and an evil tinpot dictator who murders his own family members, that’s a true disgrace to the American flag,” he continued.

But we have already “reaped dividends.” What else would one call the freeing of hostages and destruction of a nuclear test facility?

Of course, none of this is meant to lionize the Kim regime or suggest that our work is finished. North Korea has promised denuclearization before.

But negotiations require give-and-take, and America has already taken some rewards. The ultimate prize is peace, which can only be accomplished through diplomacy. Shapiro cannot seem to wrap his head around what a fruitful negotiation looks like.

“Virtually all of the people cheering loudly today for the Trump/Kim meeting would have SAVAGED Obama for the same exact meeting — and vice versa,” he said.

But that is flat wrong. When Obama “negotiated” with Iran, America received nothing at all. Before sending pallets of cash to Iran and receiving a promise of denuclearization, Obama did not receive a single assurance. No freed hostages. No demolition of nuclear sites. Nothing. The average American (or the “people cheering loudly” as Shapiro calls them) understand this dynamic. Obama capitulated to Iran without any assurances, before or after signing the dotted line.

There are other forces at play that give Trump leverage over the Kim regime. UN Sanctions on oil and coal exported from China to North Korea, combined with a moratorium on North Korean imports, are crushing the Hermit Kingdom.

“The trucks [of Chinese goods] are increasingly coming back empty,” said a New York Times piece from September. “And that could present a potential weak point that the Trump administration and others could exploit, if China is willing to go along, as they look for ways to persuade North Korea to give up its nuclear weapons and ballistic missiles.”

Even the New York Times gets it! But not Shapiro.

Trump is sending a loud and clear message to Kim. Play ball, or the sanctions stay in place. Kim understands that those sanctions are a death sentence.

But you (stupid Trump supporter) are supposed to believe Shapiro (“smart conservative”) when he says that this deal mirrors the Iran deal.

And that is the crux of the matter. Shapiro truly believes that Trump is stupid, and that Trump’s supporters are even more stupid. In Shapiro’s eyes, Trump could not possibly have a plan, and if Trump does have a plan it will never work.

Influential Trump supporters are quickly losing patience with Shapiro.

“Is Ben Shapiro actually mad at [Trump] for meeting Kim, something that no other politician could do?” asked YouTube star and commentator Ashton Whitty. “The level of annoying this elf is getting is absolutely ridiculous.”

“Ah, good to see Ben has become a full neoliberal and adopted the ‘Everyone I don’t like is Hitler” argument,’ said Breitbart reporter Charlie Nash.

“Shapiro BLASTS Summit — ‘Treating Kim Jong Un As Leader Is Wrong,’ said radio show host Wayne Dupree. “You would think some of these so-called leaders of the ‘conservative movement’ had money on Trump failing.”

Even Shapiro’s own reporters disagree with him.

“To those saying we received nothing in negotiations with North Korea: we already received our American prisoners and DPRK committed to denuclearization,” said Daily Wire writer Kassy Dillon. “It’s too early to be making blanket statements. It is still progress. We’ll see what happens.”

Expecting Shapiro to come around and support the most conservative president in his lifetime, and probably yours? Don’t bet on it. The NeverTrump is nearly impossible to wash out. It will follow Shapiro for a lifetime.

Continue Reading

Latest Articles

Our Privacy Policy has been updated to support the latest regulations.Click to learn more.×

Send this to a friend