Monthly Archives: May 2016

Political Correctness & Terrorism You Will Not Believe What Just Happened

Eagles-of-Death-Metal-
Eagles-of-Death-Metal

When I think I’ve seen it all I am wrong. Please read what happen to terrorist victims Eagles of Death Metal.

His offense? Trying to make sense of the senseless violence of Nov. 13, 2015, when Islamic terrorists stormed the venue in the middle of the band’s set and killed 89 concertgoers.

In a recent interview, Hughes committed such blasphemies as noting that “political correctness is killing our natural instinct and making us vulnerable,” attacking “affluent white kids who have grown up in a liberal curriculum from the time they were in kindergarten . . . inundated with . . . lofty notions that are just hot air,” and musing that the Paris attacks were aided by employees of the venue.

All things considered, pretty mild stuff.

Not to the left, of course. To them, it’s more important to hysterically rush to the defense of the “marginalized” group, regardless of how preposterous it looks. Sure, Hughes also heroically tried to save other concertgoers and was later hospitalized after pieces of “teeth and human bone” were lodged in his face, but what really matters is that he briefly drifted away from some nebulous conception of “tolerance.”

How the music industry has changed.

When David Bowie died this year, he was rightfully remembered as a deeply gifted artist who made a meaningful and lasting impact on music. There wasn’t much talk about his brief, and bizarre, flirtations with fascism.

In the middle of a 1976 interview with Rolling Stone, Bowie went on a tangent about how he believed “very strongly in fascism” and that “Hitler was the first rock star.” It’s not regarded as a high point in Bowie’s career, but it’s also not considered particularly relevant.

Bowie disavowed his comments years later, saying he was “out of [his] mind” and “totally crazed.” The incident has been mostly forgotten — it’s not as though you hear someone object to a Bowie song on the radio because he once praised fascist media manipulation.

When Bowie seemingly endorsed a genocidal tyrant, most people probably chalked it up to drug use or a lame attempt to create an edgy persona. Forty years later, a man can’t be permitted to criticize radical Islamism, despite being a victim of a terrorist act carried out in its name, without his livelihood being threatened.

The common sense applied to Bowie is as much a relic as his bell-bottom jeans.

Worse, it’s unclear what exactly these music festivals even hoped to accomplish by forbidding the Eagles of Death Metal from performing. Something tells me the band wasn’t initially targeted because the terrorists thought Hughes might hold critical opinions of Islam. Nor has total capitulation to the assassin’s veto worked very well for Europe.

It’s not a stretch to imagine that the band was initially targeted because its music represents everything radical Islam loathes: the West’s tradition of free expression and, well, having a good time.

And losing these things is precisely what’s at stake if artists don’t stand up to the kind of behavior displayed by these festival organizers.

Canceling the Eagles of Death Metal’s performances wasn’t a virtuous act. All it did was punish a band because of its frontman’s grieving process, disappoint a whole bunch of fans and further embolden extremists.

I suppose ISIS might appreciate the cancellations, but you know what it would appreciate more? Outlawing Western music entirely. Maybe it thinks it’s one step closer to that — and who could blame the terrorists for that assumption after the cowardice on display?

Sadly, the latest series of attacks in Europe has brought out the absolute worst examples of this kind of thinking. Shortly after the Charlie Hebdo shootings, some leftists didn’t hesitate to wonder whether the publication’s staff members were ultimately responsible for the attacks because they dared satirize Mohammad.

Already, some, like Donovan Farley of Paste Magazine, support the festival’s decision because “France is attempting to heal” (unlike Hughes?) and argue that allowing the band to play could potentially “alienate young Muslims.” No concern is found for the actual victims of the attacks, only the hypothetically offended.

Cowards. And besides, who wants to listen only to music that has been OK’d by a bunch of spineless liberals and their culture of censorship? Doesn’t that seem kind of antithetical to what rock ’n’ roll is all about?

Just as the Paris attacks were seen as an attack on all of Western society, the cancellation of the Eagles of Death Metal should be considered an assault on free expression.

Obama, Communism, Vietnam and Why You Should Care

obama-vietnam-communism
Obama-Vietnam-Communism

Recently the President visited Vietnam. He relaxed trade on weapons with the country.

I believe that this is some experimental tactic to put Vietnam at odds against China. However the data is frightening …”Vietnam between 2011 and 2015 was the eighth-largest weapons importer in the world, according to the Stockholm International Peace Research Institute. ” [U.S. News & World Report Andrew Soergel]

Dale why should I care? Read Seth Lipsky ‘s piece and you’ll get it …

President Obama, standing in front of the American and Communist flags, announced in Hanoi this week that he’s ending the embargo that has for 50 years blocked US arms sales to Vietnam. The move, he said, would end a “lingering vestige of the Cold War.”

Between North Korea, Red China, Cuba and Vietnam, it’s a bit of a trick telling one lingering vestige from another. How about the lingering vestige of the Communist Party? When are we going to end that?

It’s not my intention here to re-litigate the Vietnam War. (In my opinion, history will vindicate the hawks and go hard on the Congress, where America’s hard-earned battlefield victory was given away in pursuit of an illusory peace.)

Yet it’s just bizarre that Obama and Secretary of State John Kerry seem to think that our embargo was more of a problem than the Communism itself. Even if Red China is itching for a war in the South China Sea.

Arms to Vietnam have a certain logic. It’s like Winston Churchill saying, when the Nazis entered Stalin’s Russia, that if Hitler invaded Hell, he’d at least make a favorable reference to the Devil in the House of Commons.

In Southeast Asia, the theory is that the Communists in China are more of a threat to American interests than the Communists in Vietnam, China’s traditional foe. Yet Obama is denying that the end of the arms embargo is linked to China.

It was, he insisted, based on “our desire to complete what has been a lengthy process of moving towards normalization with Vietnam.” But he has brushed aside all sorts of red flags about the nature of the regime.

Human Rights Watch sent him a letter nearly a month ago, warning of what he was dealing with in Vietnam’s Communist camarilla. It called Vietnam’s government “one of the most repressive in the world.”

It noted that expression, association and assembly are “extremely limited,” that the press is controlled and censored and that the Communist Party “controls all public institutions and uses them to maintain its hold on power.”

Human Rights Watch characterized the elections in Vietnam as “a form of political theater.” The president with whom Obama has been treating, Tran Dai Quang, it noted, is the thug who headed Vietnam’s “notorious Ministry of Public Security.”

In Hanoi this week, Obama insisted that any arms deals would have to meet the usual requirements, including human rights. But who believes him after the hash he made of the Iranian appeasement?

Obama doesn’t seem to grasp that the Communism is the human-rights violation. Speaking to students in Argentina two months ago, he brushed off the distinction between capitalism and Communism as “interesting intellectual arguments.”

“Just choose from what works,” Obama said. It was one of the most ridiculous comments of his presidency, given that if the century since the Bolshevik revolution has taught us anything, it’s that we know which one works.

Even the Communists know. They just don’t know — or care — what makes capitalism work. That’s the comprehension that liberty and prosperity are linked. There’s no difference between economic and political freedom.

Oh, there were fine words when Quang and Obama made their toasts in Hanoi. The Vietnamese president quoted the appeal to President Harry Truman from the father of Vietnam’s Communist revolution, Ho Chi Minh.

Ho appealed for American support for independence. America refused in part because he was without standing. He had long since become a Communist agent. He had never stood before his people in an election.

The leaders who have done that are to be found in, say, South Korea and the free Chinese republic of Taiwan.

They have built prosperous countries, where political parties contend, newspapers cover them and people can worship God. And come and go.

No doubt China is the bigger strategic threat, but it would be ironic if we arm Vietnam and it goes into a fight with the Chinese. American rockets could be falling on Chinese Communists instead of Chicom rockets falling on Americans.

Then again, our selling arms to Vietnam could well result in the Communist regime there using them against the Vietnamese people, including those in the South to whom we once supplied arms — and gave 58,209 American lives — to secure their lingering vestige of liberty.

 

Elijah Wood: Hollywood Full of ‘Organized’ Child Sex Abuse

For years I have talked about the epidemic of child sex crimes in Hollywood.  When does the U.S. Department of Justice and the AG listen to the victims and indite male and female perpetrators of child rape?

by DANIEL NUSSBAUM

Actor Elijah Wood claims that Hollywood’s entertainment industry is rife with sexual abuse of young boys and girls — and that senior figures within it have been protecting pedophiles for decades.

In an interview with the Sunday Times, the Lord of the Rings star — who began acting in Hollywood at age nine — claimed that “organized” sexual abuse of children has taken place in the entertainment industry and compared the situation to that of notorious British pedophile Jimmy Savile.

“You all grew up with Savile — Jesus, it must have been devastating,” Wood, 35, told theTimes, referring to the late BBC DJ who allegedly sexually abused more than 50 young boys and girls in the 1970s and 80s.

“There are a lot of vipers in this industry, people who only have their own interests in mind,” Wood added. “There is a darkness in the underbelly — if you can imagine it, it’s probably happened.”

Wood got his start at a young age in Hollywood with a breakout role as little Michael Kaye in the Barry Levinson-directed 1990 film Avalon. He went on to act throughout his childhood with roles in 90s movies Paradise, Radio Flyer and Flipper.

But Wood said he was spared the abuse that many other young actors his age were subjected to because his mother did not allow him to go to industry parties, where Hollywood power players regularly “preyed upon” children.

“If you’re innocent you have very little knowledge of the world and you want to succeed,” the actor told the Times. “People with parasitic interests will see you as their prey.”

The subject of rampant child sex abuse in Hollywood gained new attention last year following the release of the documentary An Open Secret. The film — directed by Oscar-nominated documentary filmmaker Amy Berg — features interview with former child star sex abuse victims including Corey Feldman and Todd Bridges.

The film was, perhaps unsurprisingly, not without controversy — it reportedly had to be re-cut after a man’s sexual assault accusations against X-Men director Bryan Singer were subsequently dropped in court. However, the film also examines allegations made against other high-level Hollywood executives including Marty Weiss, Michael Harrah and child talent manager Bob Villard, who represented a young Leonardo DiCaprio before pleading no contest to felony charges of committing a lewd act on a child in 2005.

In his interview with the Times, Wood said that young actors and actresses who are victims of sex abuse are often stifled, because they “can’t speak as loudly as people in power.”

“That’s the tragedy of attempting to reveal what is happening to innocent people,” he said. “They can be squashed but their lives have been irreparably damaged.”