After New Zealand Shooting, Australia To Ban “Violent Content” On Internet

By William Teach April 5, 2019 – 7:04 am

Like New Zealand, Australia also has massive bans and limits on private ownership of firearms, nor do they have a 1st Amendment like the United States. As the old saying goes, the road to Hell is paved with good intentions

Australia To Criminalize Failure To Remove Violent Content From Internet Platforms

Australia’s parliament has passed new legislation to criminalize Internet platforms for failing to remove violent videos and audio, after an Australian gunman livestreamed himself shooting worshippers in two mosques in Christchurch, New Zealand.

Under the new legislation, social media executives — among other online content or hosting providers — could be imprisoned for up to three years and companies could face penalties of up to 10 percent of their annual revenue if they do not remove violent content in an “expeditious” manner.

The bill passed on Thursday local time with cross-party support but faced criticism, including that it could cause increased censorship and that the process was rushed.

Christian Porter, Australia’s attorney general with the Liberal party, said of the bill, which he said was likely a “world first,” was a direct response to footage of the terror attacks in New Zealand that spread across social media. The original video was available on Facebook for about an hour from the beginning of the live broadcast – and viewed by thousands of people – before Facebook removed it. Facebook said it blocked or removed 1.5 million copies over the next 24 hours. (snip)

Porter said the legislation is intended to make companies take responsibility for the spread of video or audio of “abhorrent violent conduct” — defined as terrorism, murder, attempted murder, torture, rape and kidnapping.

I’m sure we can all agree that those are pretty bad, right? There’s also like a gazillion (slightly more than a shitload) of videos on the web right now.

Arthur Moses, president of the Law Council of Australia, told the AP that the legislation could have an impact on online business investment and lead to media censorship.

“Media freedom and whistleblowing of atrocities here and overseas have been put at risk by the ill-informed livestream laws passed by the Federal Parliament,” Moses said.

Scott Farquhar, CEO of Sydney-based software company Atlassian, said the bill would make any person working at a company that allows uploads of videos or images “guilty until proven innocent.”

“They need to violate users’ privacy to police this,” he wrote on Twitter.

The question needs to be asked, what next? The law is cool with allowing violent content in the news and for artistic purposes, meaning TV shows and movies. What about video games? Will they be targeted?

And what happens next? What do they ban? The law itself is very vague, so, do they crack down on things that are mean? There’s always mission creep from Government. And what will citizens do about it? That’s one reason we have a 2nd Amendment, to protect the measures in the 1st. Sure, you might not win against the government, which has tanks and such, but, you can try. And when we band together, we can.

Read: After New Zealand Shooting, Australia To Ban “Violent Content” On Internet »

Posted in Current Affairs, Progressive Goals | 4 Comments | Trackback URL

AOC, Who Won’t Force Vote On Green New Deal, Compares It To Civil Rights Fight

By William Teach April 5, 2019 – 6:49 am

Seriously, if this is so darned important, why is she not out there demanding a vote on it daily? Why is she not slamming Nancy Pelosi for refusing a floor vote? Why did she throw a fit when the Senate voted on it, and not take the 43 Democrats who voted “present” to task?

Ocasio-Cortez To Critics Of Green New Deal: “I Pity You For Your Role In History Right Now”

On Instagram Live Wednesday night, Rep. Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez spoke to critics who laugh and make jokes about her often-repeated statement that “we have twelve years left to cut emissions by at least 50%” to stop the most devastating effects of climate change.

“For everyone who wants to make a joke about that, you may laugh, but your grandkids will not,” she warned. “So, understand that the internet documents everything.”

So, understand that the internet documents everything.

You know, you want to look about, you want to talk about looking at the back of history, looking backward?

You look back and you open history books on the civil rights movement, and you see those folks who are protesting against the ability for African-Americans and black Americans to have the right to vote, and they would hold up these bigoted signs, and they would hold up signs that said things like ‘what about white rights?’ and all of this stuff, in the 1950s, 1960s.

So, if it is that important, why not demand a vote? If it’s so important, then why is she making this proclamation while munching on popcorn, drinking wine, and putting together a piece of furniture from IKEA (and having no screwdriver)?

She continues

So just know that in the present day there a lot of people who hide the fact that their families and that their grandparents fought against principles of equal rights in the United States. Not 100 years ago, not 80 years ago, but in this generation’s lifetime.

So just know that while a lot of people can hide that their grandparents did that in the civil rights movement, you should also know that the internet documents everything. And your grandchildren will not be able to hide the fact that you fought against acknowledging and taking bold action against climate change.

And for those of you who are trying to mock and delay this moment, I mean, I just feel bad for you. I pity you for your role in history right now.

First, it was mostly Democrats who fought against the Civil Rights legislation, who lionized a former high ranking KKK member in the Senate, and then turned around and found a way to get the black vote while keeping blacks down in poverty in inner cities.

Second, if she won’t demand that the GND be given a vote and implemented, then she is what she calls a climate delayer, and she should pity herself. Or, perhaps she was just drunk and exhausted from doing minor manual labor.

Read: AOC, Who Won’t Force Vote On Green New Deal, Compares It To Civil Rights Fight »

Posted in AGW Idiocy, Democrats, Global Warming | 9 Comments | Trackback URL

Good News: Feminists Say It’s Now OK To Stare At Breasts

By William Teach April 4, 2019 – 4:08 pm

In fact, it seems as if they want us to stare at female breasts (via Twitchy)

From the article

Giant inflatable breasts were installed across the city of London on Monday in an effort to destigmatize breastfeeding.

According to HuffPost UK, four giant inflatable breasts of varying sizes and colors were installed in different locations across the town on Sunday morning as part of the #FreetheFeed campaign, which aims to remove negative associations from breastfeeding or milk pumping in public.

Tania Boler, CEO of the tech firm Elvie, which created the campaign, told the news publication earlier this week that the effort is an “invitation to everyone to stand with all those women that have felt shamed or confined when breastfeeding or pumping.”

“We know the giant boobs will raise a few eyebrows, but we want to make sure no one overlooks the way that this stigma has been used to repress women,” she continued.

It’s cool to stare now, guys. Because we don’t want to shame women by looking away.

And anyone who calls us out for staring will be told that they are shaming us.

Read: Good News: Feminists Say It’s Now OK To Stare At Breasts »

Posted in Like, Gnarly, Dude | 28 Comments | Trackback URL

If All You See…

By William Teach April 4, 2019 – 1:00 pm

…is wall meant to keep the rising seas out, you might just be a Warmist

The blog of the day is MOTUS A.D., with a post on feminists being anything they want.

Read: If All You See… »

Posted in If All You See | 3 Comments | Trackback URL

Report: Excitable Eric Swalwell To Run For President On Gun Grabbing

By William Teach April 4, 2019 – 10:30 am

Hey, why not? Jay Inslee is running on ‘climate change’, Julian Castro is running on Open Borders, Elizabeth Warren is running on taking everyone else’s money, Bernie is running on government controlling your health care

Swalwell running for White House on gun control: report

Rep. Eric Swalwell (D-Calif.) will reportedly announce next week that he is running for president in 2020 and will center his campaign around gun control.

The Atlantic reported Thursday that Swalwell will announce his plans during an appearance on CBS’s “The Late Show With Stephen Colbert,” where he will be joined by Cameron Kasky, a survivor of the 2018 shooting at Marjory Stoneman Douglas High School in Parkland, Fla.

Swalwell, who is hosting a town hall on gun control next week in Florida, did not confirm his plans to The Atlantic, but said he thinks gun control should be a top issue in 2020.

“We are doing a town hall in Parkland,” he told The Atlantic. “And I do believe that gun safety has to be a top 2020 issue.”

Good luck with this, Sparky. Perhaps Eric can explain why all his gun grabbing laws would work nationwide when they do not work in California? And why many are being shot down in federal lawsuits?

Anyhow, if he won the primaries (he won’t), he’d win the Democrat base, but lose quite a bit of Blue Dogs and Independents who are tired of Government eroding our Constitutional Rights, all while those trying to take those rights run around with armed protection using firearms that are already banned from most private ownership already.

Really, though, you know with Swalwell his schtick will really be Trump Derangement Syndrome.

Read: Report: Excitable Eric Swalwell To Run For President On Gun Grabbing »

Posted in 2nd Amendment, Democrats, Unhinged Tools | 13 Comments | Trackback URL

Say, What If Toxic Masculinity Is The Reason For ‘Climate Change’ Or Something?

By William Teach April 4, 2019 – 8:14 am

Yet another screed that shows that this whole thing has nothing to do with science and everything to do with hardcore leftist politics

https://twitter.com/RickyDelFuego/status/1113554795216789505

Carolyn Centento Milton is really reaching for the crazy with this article

When a person walks out of the grocery store holding an eco-friendly canvas bag instead of a plastic bag, what gender do you think they are? Most likely, your unconscious bias answers that they are female. This is the type of answer Dr. Aaron Brough of Utah State University is trying to get to the bottom of through his research.

Brough co-authored a paper with professors from four other universities to understand how gender norms affect sustainable decision making. They report data from seven experiments that included over 2,000 participants from the US and China. What they found was remarkable.

They found that both men and women associated doing something good for the environment with being “more feminine.” And when men’s gender identity was threatened, they tried to reassert their masculinity through environmentally damaging choices. The report states that “men may be motivated to avoid or even oppose green behaviors in order to safeguard their gender identity.” This unearths a deeply held unconscious bias that Brough and team call the “Green-Feminine Stereotype.” Once this unconscious bias is revealed, it has the potential to help society shift our increasingly precarious relationship with the environment for the better. If it remains hidden, it has the potential to greatly damage our environment permanently. (snip)

Another experiment took the idea further and applied the concept of the “Green-Feminine Stereotype” to product and brand selection. Male participants were exposed to one of two Walmart gift cards—one that used more comically feminine design elements like pink and floral, selected to threaten masculine stereotypes, or another gift card that was designed to not threaten masculinity. The men were then asked to make a series of choices between green and non-green products to purchase. Men who were shown the “gender threat” gift card chose more non-green products than men shown the other gift card. That means that when men felt emasculated, they asserted their masculinity and safeguarded their gender by making choices that would ultimately harm the environment.

In other words, men are men, women are women. Get over, unhinged Warmists.

The more interesting opportunity seems to be in exposing the toxicity present within the unconscious bias that acting green is a feminine and therefore weaker or negative thing. Exposing the fact that our society creates a toxic hierarchy around femininity as a lesser thing. Brough himself cited gender research around “gender incongruence” and the great penalties that men (and women) face when they don’t fit stereotypical gender norms. Research suggests that men experience greater psychological damage or face harsher consequences when associated with feminine qualities. As a society, we are beginning to address these problems with corporate unconscious bias training, exposure and conversation. But when it comes to our environment, our toxic masculinity is greatly affecting our shared environment for the worse.

Brough sums it up nicely, “We need to overcome our unhealthy judgements of gender incongruence. And men need to be confident in their self-identity and decide to live a sustainable lifestyle without caring what other people think.” Let’s begin the conversation to start overriding our natural judgements. Our future depends on it.

Read: Say, What If Toxic Masculinity Is The Reason For ‘Climate Change’ Or Something? »

Posted in AGW Idiocy, Global Warming | 8 Comments | Trackback URL

Democrats Who Can’t Get Over Losing 2016 Formally Demand Trump’s Tax Returns

By William Teach April 4, 2019 – 8:02 am

I’m wondering if all the Democratic members of the House committee have released their own? It’s hard to determine, since most searches bring up something related to this story

House Dem asks IRS for 6 years of Trump’s tax returns, setting up showdown with White House

President Trump responded with a dismissive taunt on Wednesday after a House committee chairman formally requested the IRS provide several years of his personal and business tax returns, in a move that prompted congressional Republicans to warn that Democrats had “weaponized” tax law.

Told by a reporter at the White House that Democrats wanted six years of his tax returns, Trump replied: “Is that all? Usually it’s 10. So I guess they’re giving up. We’re under audit, despite what people said, and we’re working that out — I’m always under audit, it seems, but I’ve been under audit for many years, because the numbers are big, and I guess when you have a name, you’re audited. But until such time as I’m not under audit, I would not be inclined to do that.”

The request Wednesday by Massachusetts Rep. Richard Neal, who heads the tax-writing House Ways and Means Committee, is the first such demand for a sitting president’s tax information in 45 years. The move sets up a virtually certain legal showdown with the White House.

Nancy Pelosi and other Dems have refused to release their own returns, which would show how someone on a Congressperson’s salary can make so much money

The president’s congressional allies registered immediate and fierce disapproval. The top Republican on the House Ways and Means Committee, Kevin Brady, R-Texas, wrote to Treasury Secretary Steven Mnuchin to decry what he called Democrats’ “abuse” of their authority.

“Weaponizing our nation’s tax code by targeting political foes sets a dangerous precedent and weakens Americans’ privacy rights, As you know, by law all Americans have a fundamental right to the privacy of the personal information found in their tax returns,” Brady said in the letter. “This particular request is an abuse of the tax-writing committees’ statutory authority, and violates the intent and safeguards of Section 6103 of the Internal Revenue Code as Congress intended.”

That provision of tax law generally prohibits the disclosure of personal tax information.

Brady added that while “transparency in our government is enormously important,” the “privacy and freedom” of all taxpayers is paramount — and that Congress should pass new disclosure laws if it sees a problem. Violating the privacy rights of one taxpayer, Brady asserted, “begins the process of eroding and threatening the privacy rights of all taxpayers.”

If Democrats want to play this game, I’ve noted before that Team Trump can use the same laws to obtain the Dems’ tax returns. This is a dangerous road for Dems to travel. Just like with the nuclear option under Harry Reid, Republicans can play this game, too.

Senate Finance Committee Ranking Member Ron Wyden, D-Ore., followed up with a statement backing up his counterpart in the House.

“The law is crystal clear—the Treasury Department must provide tax returns to the Ways & Means and Finance Committees when the chairman requests them. I expect the Treasury Department to comply in a timely manner,” Wyden said. “Chairman Grassley should make the same request so Senate Finance Committee members are also able to access them.”

Congress must have an actual, important, relevant, substantive reason for demanding tax returns of any citizen, not simply because they’re pissed off that Hillary lost fair and square and Trump is president.

Read: Democrats Who Can’t Get Over Losing 2016 Formally Demand Trump’s Tax Returns »

Posted in Democrats, Unhinged Tools | 15 Comments | Trackback URL

Democrat Presidential Contenders Cool With Forum That Embraces Cop Killer Assata Shakur

By William Teach April 3, 2019 – 3:00 pm

Now, just imagine that a bunch of Republican politicians of any stripe were at a forum that embraced some right leaning murderer. How would that go?

N.J. cop-killing fugitive Assata Shakur’s words take center stage at Dem presidential forum. State Police, others express anger.

New Jersey’s top law enforcement officials denounced a speaker who led a crowd in a call-and-response using the words of fugitive cop killer Assata Shakur during a conference featuring 2020 Democratic presidential contenders.

Speaking at the We the People summit, NAACP Vice President of Civic Engagement Jamal Watkins called Shakur a “leader.”

Assata Shakur, who was born with the name Joanne Chesimard, was convicted in the 1973 slaying of NJSP Trooper Werner Foerster. The FBI Most Wanted killer escaped from a women’s prison and has been harbored from justice in Cuba.

None of the candidates were on stage during the Watkins speech that evoked Shakur.

Watkins led the crowd in a chant quoting the trooper’s killer, Fox News reported.

“I’m gonna actually have you participate with me in repeating some words from a leader by the name of Assata Shakur. So if you could stand up…but I want you to repeat after me,” Watkins said.

“It is our duty to fight for our freedom. It is our duty to win. We must love each other and support each other. We have nothing to lose but our chains,” he continued, citing words Shakur wrote while in prison.

NJ’s AG Gurbir Grewal wisely slammed this.

The conference features 2020 hopefuls U.S. Sen. Cory Booker, U.S. Sen. Amy Klobuchar, U.S. Sen. Bernie Sanders, U.S. Sen, Elizabeth Warren, Washington Governor Jay Inslee, U.S. Sen. Kirsten Gillibrand, Julián Castro and Beto O’Rourke, Fox News reported.

What’s worse for Booker is that he is a Senator for New Jersey. He took a nice selfie while there and spoke on stage. None of these people have complained, nor did they walk out in protest.

Nice to know they support the cop murderer.

Read: Democrat Presidential Contenders Cool With Forum That Embraces Cop Killer Assata Shakur »

Posted in Democrats | 9 Comments | Trackback URL

If All You See…

By William Teach April 3, 2019 – 1:00 pm

…is a reminder of rising waters from fossil fuels, you might just be a Warmist

The blog of the day is A View From The Beach, with a post on the coming avocado doom.

Read: If All You See… »

Posted in If All You See | 22 Comments | Trackback URL

Dem. Presidential Candidate Julian Castro Thrills Open Borders Advocates With Immigration Plan

By William Teach April 3, 2019 – 10:30 am

Julian Castro is, at this time, one of the very low hanging candidates among a large gaggle of Democrats, with Beto, Biden, and Bernie leading at this time. But, you never know what will happen as time goes on, debates are held, and people vote in primaries. And here comes the Open Borders push

Castro unveils immigration platform, laying an early marker in the 2020 presidential contest

Democratic presidential Julián Castro sought Tuesday to lay down an early marker on immigration, releasing an extensive plan to address an issue that is sure to remain front and center through November 2020.

Castro’s People First Immigration Policy, which comes 10 months before the first votes are cast in the 2020 primary, offers a few ideas that are commonplace among Democratic candidates, like reversing President Donald Trump’s travel ban and providing a pathway to citizenship for people in the country illegally. But in many other areas, the proposal goes much farther than other contenders have gone, thrilling advocates who have been waiting to see which White House hopeful would be first out of the gate with such a detailed proposal.

“They’ve all done riffs at rallies, but this is the first serious, thoughtful and thorough proposal,” said Frank Sharry, director of the liberal immigration group America’s Voice. “He got his wonk on, and wonks appreciate it.”

The plan comes as Castro, the only Latino presidential candidate, works to find a voice in the 2020 primary, where he hardly registers in polls two and a half months into his candidacy. And specifically on immigration, he is vying for attention with fellow Texas Democrat Beto O’Rourke, the El Pasoan who has made the border central to his three-week-old 2020 campaign.

So, what is it about?

Castro’s proposal is highlighted by a call to decriminalize illegal border crossings — which he would do by repealing a provision of U.S. law that makes it a criminal, instead of civil, offense to unlawfully enter the country. The provision, Section 1325 of the Immigration and Nationality Act, has been a key factor in the Trump administration’s “zero tolerance” approach that led to family separation at the border last year.

“The truth is, immigrants seeking refuge in our country aren’t a threat to national security,” Castro wrote in a Medium post outlining the plan. “Migration shouldn’t be a criminal justice issue. It’s time to end this draconian policy and return to treating immigration as a civil — not a criminal — issue.”

In fact, it is a criminal act with a civil penalty for a first offense: a small fine and deportation. What making it strictly a civil penalty would do would be to allow illegal aliens to pay that fine and stay around, at which point Democrats would demand they be given free citizenship, and, more importantly for Dems, voting rights.

In addition to making illegal border crossings a civil offense, Castro’s plan lays out a number of ideas that have not yet entered the 2020 primary mainstream. He wants to end so-called “287(g)” agreements that allow local law enforcement to perform immigration duties after undergoing training. He also wants to eliminate three- and 10-year bans, which prohibit undocumented immigrants from re-entering the United States for certain periods of time after they are deported.

Crossing illegally after being deported is a purely criminal offense, and Open Borders advocate Castro wants to do away with this. It would mean more of this

(Breitbart) A convicted sex offender and illegal alien, who was previously deported from the United States, has been charged with multiple counts of child sex crimes, including producing child pornography, in the state of Louisiana.

In an announcement on Tuesday, Louisiana Attorney General Jeff Landry confirmed that 44-year-old illegal alien Miguel Martinez was arrested in Harvey, Louisiana, and charged with 100 counts of possession of child pornography, one count of production of child pornography, and one count of sexual battery of a child under the age of 13-years-old.

A multi-agency investigation into the illegal alien revealed that Martinez had been previously deported from the U.S. in 2005 and is a registered sex offender in the sanctuary state of California, which shields criminal illegal aliens from deportation.

Castro would be protecting people like Martinez. Remember, though, that they aren’t for Open Borders and totally believe in the rule of law.

Read: Dem. Presidential Candidate Julian Castro Thrills Open Borders Advocates With Immigration Plan »

Posted in Democrats, Illegal Immigration | 1 Comment | Trackback URL
Pirate's Cove