Assange Exposes Clinton War Crimes, Asks Sweden to Set Him Free

World Press Freedom Day, celebrated May 3, stemmed from the necessity to admonish governments the world over a free media acts as a barometer of the health of a nation — insofar as wrongdoing, exposed, can’t continue unnoticed — but today’s celebration has been severely tempered by a decline in the rights of journalists.

In the one nation which should be considered a bastion of press freedom — enshrined expressly in its storied Constitution — the dogged pursuit of governmental transparency in living up to the journalist’s duty to act as watchdog of the State will instead emblazon a permanent target for prosecution. Or worse.

WikiLeaks, itinerant publisher of leaked information of the stripe governments would rather remain hidden, has endured a horrendously negative propaganda campaign from U.S. officials from both sides of the aisle after voluminous caches of documents exposed flagrant, pompous misbehavior at every level.

Founder and editor-in-chief Julian Assange rightly condemns the brazen hypocrisy in the United States maintaining claims it desires press freedom, while simultaneously attempting to change the definition of ‘media’ in order to bring grave charges against WikiLeaks — going so far as to deem published leaks akin to espionage.

While that couldn’t be further from reality, wrongdoings exposed in WikiLeaks’ capacious searchable cache of documents veritably guarantee revelations will occasionally make headlines for years to come — and for American officials, that’s too dangerous to allow.

Hillary Clinton, herself the subject of countless damning emails and documents, has championed the clarion call to crucifixion of Assange under the premise that WikiLeaks, inexplicably in conjunction with Russia, threw the election from her clutches to gift a win to Donald Trump.
Taking “absolute personal responsibility” for the loss in one breath, Clinton claimed with forked tongue she “was on the way to winning until a combination of Jim Comey’s letter, on October 28, and Russian WikiLeaks raised doubts in the minds of people who were inclined to vote for me, but got scared off.”

Shifting blame shirks responsibility for the corruption and mendacity documents proved Clinton so fond, just as she had on previous occasions, so Assange responded accordingly.

Referencing the contents of WikiLeaks’ various Clinton files, Assange pinged the former secretary of state as the “butcher of Libya.”

Clinton’s attempts to shift blame from her actions to the messenger revealing them — and that legions of her supporters sprinted to parrot that logical fallacy — constitutes the exact bumbling of information characteristic of declining press freedom.

In fact, it is the failed presidential candidate’s countless maneuverings on interventionist U.S. foreign policy that left Libya and other nations — having been termed generically, ‘brutal dictatorships,’ prior to American encroachment — decimated beyond repair.

For many of those targets, including Libya, America’s particular brand of Freedom brought with it warlords of every stripe, spates of unhindered violence, and generally deplorable living and humanitarian conditions the original leaders would never have tolerated for civilians, no matter how totalitarian their style of rule.

Invading Libya under the premise Muammar Gaddafi was a tyrant proved to be a whopper of a lie — given the West discovered, to them, a panic-inducing plan by the Libyan leader to move all of Africa away from the almighty petrodollar in favor of the gold-backed dinar.

And that — the lie-shattering evidence in leaked documents from an ethical, free press, which officials could only deliver in their own, newly naked words — is why the media must have as free rein as possible to diligently scrutinize the State, lest its tendency to approve atrocities and justify appalling actions run amok.

It is in that vein Assange through his attorneys has requested the Swedish government drop its detention order against him, which has effectively made the editor a political refugee with limited asylum inside the Ecuadorian Embassy’s walls.

Allegations of sexual assault have been a millstone around Assange’s neck since he first arrived at the embassy in 2012 — Sweden’s detention order and its extradition friendliness with the United States effectively guaranteed his setting foot outside would earn arrest, removal to Sweden, and a short flight straight to an American prison cage under ridiculous espionage allegations.

In December 2016, SMS records proved police had fabricated the rape accusation against Assange — which should have led to Swedish officials to drop its interest in his detention.

Since that did not occur — and due to the Trump administration’s stated goal to relentlessly pursue the WikiLeaks founder for acting with the enemy — Per Samuelson, one of the attorneys representing Assange, asserted Wednesday,

Given that the U.S. is obviously hunting him now, he has to make use of his political asylum and it is Sweden’s duty to make sure that Sweden is no longer a reason for that fact he has to stay in the embassy.

If they rescind the detention order, there is a possibility he can go to Ecuador and then he can use political asylum in an entire country.

CIA Director Mike Pompeo crushed centuries of press tradition recently, in terming WikiLeaks a “hostile intelligence service” — simply because a witch hunt befits the current establishment’s penchant for dodging any unfavorable spotlights on its corruption, greed, graft, and pomposity.

As the falling dominoes of liberty are tragically wont to do, should one publisher be characterized as hostile, it should be assumed any press outside the mainstream, corporo-government paradigm is considered equally a threat — and the thriving, imperative independent press would be next in line for execution.

Whatever miscreants have bought the State’s scaremongering about WikiLeaks — that a free press is somehow antithetical to a free, functioning society — would do well to remember the freedom to choose among hundreds and thousands of media platforms, as opposed to a propaganda of just two flavors should the State take over those duties.

Reporters Without Borders — guardian of free journalism — reports the United States this year ranks an abhorrent forty-third on its World Press Freedom Index.

Until U.S. officials halt their war on journalism, it is perhaps a necessity to forget the First Amendment’s protection of the free press — words that hollow in practice should not be a boast permitted to a country acting in direct contradiction to the promise they once offered. (For more from the author of “Assange Exposes Clinton War Crimes, Asks Sweden to Set Him Free” please click HERE)

Follow Joe Miller on Twitter HERE and Facebook HERE.

Police: Concealed Carry Permit Holder Shoots, Kills ‘Active Shooter’

On Wednesday night a concealed carry permit holder shot and killed an alleged “active shooter” at Zona Caliente Sports Bar in Arlington, Texas.

The incident occurred around 6:15 pm. WFAA reported, “A man opened fire at the Zona Caliente Sports Bar… but police say a customer with a gun of his own put a stop to it.”

The man reported to police as an “active shooter” was 48-year-old James Jones. He allegedly walked into Zona Caliente, began arguing with the manager — 37-year-old Cesar Perez — and then pulled out a gun and killed Perez. At that moment a concealed carry permit holder responded by pulling his own gun and killing Jones. (Read more from “Police: Concealed Carry Permit Holder Shoots, Kills ‘Active Shooter'” HERE)

Follow Joe Miller on Twitter HERE and Facebook HERE.

U.S. General Confirms: Special Operations Teams Will Be Sent to Take out North Korean Nuke Sites

With China issuing a final warning to North Korea earlier today, and U.S. President Donald Trump keeping all options on the table as he prepares a response to continued North Korean military posturing and rhetoric, Army General Raymond A. Thomas confirmed in sworn testimony to a Congressional subcommittee that special operations teams will be utilized as part of any conflict with the rogue state and would likely be sent in to secure and/or destroy North Korean nuclear facilities in the event of war:

Army Gen. Raymond A. Thomas stated in testimony to a House subcommittee that Army, Navy, and Air Force commandos are based both permanently and in rotations on the Korean peninsula in case conflict breaks out.

The special operations training and preparation is a warfighting priority, Thomas said in prepared testimony. There are currently around 8,000 special operations troops deployed in more than 80 countries.

“We are actively pursuing a training path to ensure readiness for the entire range of contingency operations in which [special operations forces], to include our exquisite [countering weapons of mass destruction] capabilities, may play a critical role,” he told the subcommittee on emerging threats.

“We are looking comprehensively at our force structure and capabilities on the peninsula and across the region to maximize our support to U.S. [Pacific Command] and [U.S. Forces Korea]. This is my warfighting priority for planning and support.”

Special forces troops would be responsible for locating and destroying North Korean nuclear weapons and missile delivery systems, such as mobile missiles. They also would seek to prevent the movement of the weapons out of the country during a conflict.

Special operations missions are said by military experts to include intelligence gathering on the location of nuclear and chemical weapons sites for targeting by bombers. They also are likely to include direct action assaults on facilities to sabotage the weapons, or to prevent the weapons from being stolen, or set off at the sites by the North Koreans.

Source: Free Beacon

In earlier reports it was noted that SEALs and other commandos could be used in a first strike to decapitate North Korean leadership at the onset of any military engagement.

The President deployed high-altitude surveillance drones over North Korea earlier this week in a bid to gather intelligence about the secretive country’s nuclear and military capabilities ahead of any military action . . .

The world appears to be moving towards war at a feverish pace. (For more from the author of “U.S. General Confirms: Special Operations Teams Will Be Sent to Take out North Korean Nuke Sites” please click HERE)

Follow Joe Miller on Twitter HERE and Facebook HERE.

Obama’s Sex Secrets Laid Bare

The sex secrets of the young Barack Obama have been revealed in an authoritative new biography of the ex-president.

Obama slept with his girlfriend Genevieve Cook on their first date, before she wrote him a poem about their ‘f***ing’ and called their sex ‘passionate’, the book about the former president reveals . . .

Obama also considered a gay relationship while at college, twice proposed to another white girlfriend, and cheated on Michelle with his ex during the first year of their relationship.

His past is revealed in the 1,078-page biography Rising Star: The Making of Barack Obama, to be published on May 9.

Obama, a new Columbia graduate who was working for a firm that prepared financial reports at the time, made dinner for Cook at his apartment in Manhattan two weeks after meeting her at a New Year’s Eve party and handing her his phone number. (Read more from “Obama’s Sex Secrets Laid Bare” HERE)

Follow Joe Miller on Twitter HERE and Facebook HERE.

Let’s Penalize People for Having ‘Extra Kids’ — Bill Nye’s Outrageous Idea

By Todd Starnes. These days Mr. Nye hosts a series on Netflix – Bill Nye Saves the World. The other day – he pondered this question – should people be penalized for having extra kids.

Travis Rieder, a bioethicist at Johns Hopkins University, told Mr. Nye it was a good idea.

“I do think that we should at least consider it,” he said.

“Well, ‘at least consider it’ is like ‘do it,’” Nye replied.

Their theory is that big American families are hurting the environment. (Read more from “Let’s Penalize People for Having ‘Extra Kids’ — Bill Nye’s Outrageous Idea” HERE)

________________________________________

Bill Nye: Should Parents Be Penalized for Having ‘Extra Kids?’

By Chris White. Comedian Bill Nye suggested that saving the world from climate change might entail punishing people in developed countries for having too many children.

Nye asked one of the panelists on the Tuesday episode of his Netflix show “Bill Nye Saves The Earth” if it would be a good idea to have the government penalize having “extra kids.”

“Should we have policies that penalize people for having extra kids in the developed world?” Nye asked Travis Rieder, an academic for Berman Institute of Bioethics at Johns Hopkins University.

“I do think we should at least consider it,” said Rieder, who believes that limiting the size of families is paramount to fighting global warming.

“Well, ‘at least consider it’ is like, ‘do it,’” Nye replied. Conservatives have had a field day lampooning the former children’s TV host over the content of his new show, which is directed toward adults with a layman’s understanding of scientific issues. (Read more from “Bill Nye: Should Parents Be Penalized for Having ‘Extra Kids?'” HERE)

Follow Joe Miller on Twitter HERE and Facebook HERE.

Top 6 Media Meltdowns of Trump’s First 100 Days

The first 100 days of Donald Trump’s presidency have been filled with outrageous moments in the mainstream media. Some of those moments will make you laugh, some will make you cry, and some will infuriate you. Here are six of the hottest of hot-take fails, outrageous comparisons, outright fabrications, and more from Trump’s first 100 days.

1. LET’S START AT THE BEGINNING, ON INAUGURAL DAY AND NIGHT

LIfeZette had a great compilation of media meltdowns on inauguration day: Matt Lauer being afraid that Trump fans would physically harm Hillary Clinton, Salon saying that Trump was going to “victimize his own voters,” and more. But perhaps my favorite is Paul Krugman, the smarmy New York Times economic columnist, who just needed a safe space.

Inaugural day kicked off the insanity. It really hasn’t ended.

2. TRUMP SIGNS HIS NAME LIKE A NAZI WAR CRIMINAL

Surely this can’t be true, you must be saying to yourself. There is no way that any respected journalism outfit would waste either paper or internet bandwidth with a story like that. Well, you’d be wrong. The Boston Globe published an “ideas” piece that basically asked if you “should care” that Trump signs his name like a Nazi.

Some experts — graphologists, people who have been trained to examine handwriting for markers of personality — were no less harsh. “His signature is this barbed-wire thing that’s into power and control and rigidity,” said Sheila Lowe, a Ventura, Calif., handwriting analyst with more than 40 years of experience in this small field. “It’s closed, it’s not open, it’s not soft at all and it looks like Himmler’s.” As in Heinrich Himmler, head of Adolf Hitler’s SS and the man who established the first official concentration camp at Dachau.

But they totally made it OK by asking if you “should care.”

3. TRUMP’S KIDS ARE JUST THE SAME AS THE HUSSEIN WAR CRIMINAL DUO

If you guessed that this one would involve MSNBC, you’d be right. Almost lost in an orgy of Leftist spin were these two jewels by MSNBC hosts Rachel Maddow and Chris Matthews.

Here’s Rachel – jump to 3:40 in this video.

We have never thought of us as a country where Uday and Qusay [Hussein] get to be ministers of whatever they want, right?

You might think that was obnoxious but was all of it, until you hear Matthews from the week before.

That’s right, because the Trump kids and family follow a long tradition of family members working in a presidential administration, they should be compared to murderous thugs like Uday and Qusay Hussein, the sons of Saddam Hussein.

4. DONALD TRUMP IS CAUSING THE NATION TO LOSE PRECIOUS SLEEP

Here’s another golden one. Lisa Belkin, the “chief national correspondent” for Yahoo News, decided back in March that a think piece on Trump as national bogeyman would be a fun time. She described a dystopian present where Americans were tossing and turning, all because of Trump.

She even went full Nazi Germany, casting the heroes of the piece:

Last night I dreamed we were hiding people in our basement,” says Allentown, Pa., physician Jenni Levy. “Not sure what they were hiding from.”

It continued …

I’m worried about the ‘Anne Franks‘ of Syria, Somalia, Yemen,” says tech industry employee Amanda Silver, who is literally sleepless in Seattle, her hometown.

“I am afraid the democratic process is under attack by a nationalist, far-right, authoritarian leader,” says Lori Rivere Rodrig, who teaches math at a New Jersey high school.

Boo!

5. NOT JUST TRUMP BUT HIS APPOINTMENTS TOO

It was pretty hard to find dirt on the Boy Scout and Trump SCOTUS nominee Neil Gorsuch. But that didn’t stop NPR and a whole host of other organizations from trying. Here’s an original headline for a gotcha piece on Gorsuch.

The story went on to describe a class discussion about employment law that, quite simply, did not happen. Here’s the NPR story. After a rush to publish, without disclosing the conflicts of the source, NPR and other organizations were forced to clarify the story. It ended up not that bad for Gorsuch. Here’s the editors’ note from NPR.

Editors’ note Monday, 12:55 p.m. ET: Since this story was first published, we have added material from another former student and former law clerks of Gorsuch, as well as more information about Jennifer Sisk’s political affiliations. On Tuesday, Gorsuch disputed the allegation himself during his confirmation hearing and explained the lesson he intended to teach.

What were Sisk, the accuser’s, political affiliations?

Sisk, once a staffer for former Democratic Sen. Mark Udall of Colorado and the Interior Department during the Obama administration, told NPR that she wrote the letter “so that the proper questions could be asked during his confirmation hearings,” which begin Monday before the Senate Judiciary Committee.

Yeah, the allegations came from a professional Democratic operative, and until called out on it, NPR didn’t disclose it.

6. RACHEL MADDOW CHANNELS AL CAPONE’S VAULT

If you were alive during the 1980s, chances are you remember the hype from a not-yet-famous Geraldo Rivera surrounding the unveiling of Al Capone’s secret vault. It was a live prime-time event. Except it was an empty room behind a wall.

Maddow wanted a similar moment all to herself. So she hyped that she had Donald Trump’s tax returns. Except, well, she didn’t. Here, let Greg Gutfeld explain.

That’s right, she had one year’s returns, that Trump probably sent her anonymously himself, that showed he paid a higher tax percentage than almost every president who has released his returns.

Maddow was rightly excoriated for the remarks. Even Geraldo got in on the fun, in a hilarious bit of self-deprecating humor.

Those are just six of hundreds of media moments. Do you remember any others? Tweet me @robeno to let me know of your favorite meltdown. I may cover it in a future article or Facebook live. (For more from the author of “Top 6 Media Meltdowns of Trump’s First 100 Days” please click HERE)

Follow Joe Miller on Twitter HERE and Facebook HERE.

STEM Academy Assistant Principal on Leave for Screaming at Pro-Life Teen

An assistant principal at Downingtown STEM Academy in Chester County has been placed on administrative leave after a video surfaced of him yelling at pro-life teenagers last Friday.

The video, posted on YouTube by one of the teens, showed a heated verbal exchange between Dr. Zach Ruffs and a 16-year-old protesting the “holocaust of abortion.”

The argument transpired as students were leaving school for the day. Ruff appeared to be directing traffic away from the school when the incident was recorded.

“Innocent children are being murdered in our society,” declared one of the protesting teens in video footage.

“They’re not children. They’re cells. Go home!” yelled Ruff. (Read more from “STEM Academy Assistant Principal on Leave for Screaming at Pro-Life Teen” HERE)

Follow Joe Miller on Twitter HERE and Facebook HERE.

Do Women Wearing Bikinis Deserve to Be Sexually Assaulted?

A teenager in Australia pleaded guilty to sexually assaulting 9 women and girls but was not sentenced to prison. Instead, he was put on two-years’ probation. Why? The judge reasoned that, as a Muslim who had immigrated from Afghanistan, “seeing girls in bikinis is different to the environment in which he grew up.”

Seriously? This young man assaults 9 different women and girls on a beach in Australia, and the court finds him not guilty because he came from a different culture?

A Closer Look at the Case

I understand that in Afghanistan, women are required to be completely covered. And so, it would be quite a shock for a Muslim teen raised in that country to come to Australia and see so much flesh.

It’s for that very reason that some believers who come from conservative religious backgrounds avoid going to crowded beaches. They’re not into the bikini culture.

I can relate to that personally, which is why I avoid crowded beaches myself. I’m no more comfortable surrounded by women in bikinis than I’d be surrounded by women in their underwear.

But I fully understand that these women are not asking to be sexually assaulted, no matter how they’re dressed. And it would never dawn on me in a million years that I had the right to assault them because of their scanty attire. God forbid.

You might say, “But you were raised in America, so this is not foreign to you. You understand the culture, which is similar to Australia.”

That’s true.

But do you mean to tell me that this 17-year-old teenager from Afghanistan thought that what he was doing was fine? That, as he swam in the water and “spent two hours grabbing women, aged between 15 and 24 years,” he had no idea he was upsetting them?

The court was told that the “defendant grabbed his victims on their bottoms, breasts and, in three cases, their vaginas.” And the Crown attorney, Nick McGhee “said the defendant was seen swimming up to his victims ‘in quite a predatory manner’.”

And he had no idea this was a bad thing? He had no idea he was at a beach where these girls went to swim, not get assaulted? And, after the first girl reacted to him, he still thought they were inviting his predations?

The judge also noted that the young man had a difficult background, having lost his father in 2011.

But how, exactly, does this lessen his guilt before the court? How, precisely, does this mitigate his responsibility?

It is all too common for convicted criminals to have troubled pasts, and our prisons would be nearly empty if judges looked the other way because the guilty party was raised without a dad. (I don’t mean to sound uncaring here. I’m simply talking about a judge doing his or her duty.)

Let’s Take the Judge’s Decision to Its Logical Conclusion

As for the idea that the teen came from a different culture and therefore was not fully responsible, how far will the courts take such logic?

“Your honor, I killed my daughter because she disgraced the family by dating a non-Muslim boy.”

“Your honor, I poisoned by son because he apostasized from the Islamic faith and became a Christian.”

“Your honor, I burned down the TV station because one of the hosts made disparaging comments about the Quran.”

“Your honor, I butchered the cartoonist because he mocked the prophet Muhammad.”

“Your honor, that’s just what we do in our culture. Please understand I wasn’t used to your way of doing things, and I’ll do better next time.”

Would the judge accept arguments like these? Hardly. (Or perhaps this same judge would accept such arguments. That’s what is really scary.)

What if you came from a cannibalistic culture where tribal disputes were settled with knife fights, and the winners ate the losers? How would this play out in court?

“Your honor, yes, it’s true that I roasted and ate my neighbor, but it’s a cultural thing. If I had lost the fight, I assumed he would have done the same to me. So, can I go home now?”

The Message It Sends

It’s bad enough that these girls and women have to deal with the trauma of being assaulted and groped. It’s even worse when the court sympathizes with their attacker rather than with them, finding a reason to look the other way. And what kind of message does this send to other Muslim immigrants, who will surely hear of this court case in the days to come?

Ironically, if an Australian woman living in Afghanistan decided to dress as she did in her home country, she’d be lucky to escape a mob assault on the streets, let alone experience leniency from the court. Yet in Australia, a young man guilty of multiple sexual assaults is let off the hook because of his Muslim background.

This is being open-minded to the point of utter foolishness. It sets a very dangerous precedent too. (For more from the author of “Do Women Wearing Bikinis Deserve to Be Sexually Assaulted?” please click HERE)

Follow Joe Miller on Twitter HERE and Facebook HERE.

Let Slip the Hogs of War — Wild Pigs Thwart ISIS Ambush, Kill 3 Militants

Three Islamic State fighters were mauled to death by a pack of wild boar, reports U.K.’s The Times. Another 5 militants were also injured in the attack.

The men were said to be taking cover in a field as they set up an ambush for local tribesmen, local leaders said.

“It is likely their movement disturbed a herd of wild pigs, which inhabit the area as well as the nearby cornfields,” Sheikh Anwar al-Assi, a chief of the local Ubaid tribe and supervisor of anti-ISIS forces, told the Times. “The area is dense with reeds, which are good for hiding in.” (Read more from “Let Slip the Hogs of War — Wild Pigs Thwart ISIS Ambush, Kill 3 Militants” HERE)

Follow Joe Miller on Twitter HERE and Facebook HERE.

Repeat After Me (or Lose Your Job): ‘White Men Are Not Being Persecuted. And They Deserve It.’

I wrote a few days ago that the Alt-Right movement is a neopagan error. It’s an “angry, inchoate reaction to a powerful, slippery heresy that preens as a winsome angel of light.” That heresy is multiculturalism, which boasts of its double standards and targets white males as villains. But how powerful is that movement, really? Was I exaggerating for effect?

No. If anything, I understated things. White men are demonized and scapegoated for nearly every evil. Highly educated people feel perfectly comfortable, even proud of themselves for doing so. It’s part of the ritual exorcism practiced by the church of multiculturalism:

“Do you renounce white males?”

“I do.”

“And all their works?”

“I do.”

“And all their books and institutions?”

“I do.”

Scapegoating a Race

Multiculturalists point to long-dead slaveowners, or to freakishly rich members of the “one percent,” to pretend that every white man partakes of “privilege.” So he ought to be suspect as a bigot till proven otherwise. Likewise, anti-Semites have always pointed to Jewish accomplishments and influence as proof of their power and wickedness.

If you scoff at the idea that white men could ever be victims, remember this: Scholars of the Holocaust report that German Jews were the best-assimilated, wealthiest, and most successful Jewish community in the history of the world. Right up until 1933. That didn’t help them. Alas, their achievements made them a highly attractive scapegoat.

“Kill As Many White Males as Possible.”

I wonder what part the escalating atmosphere of racial/sexual hatred played in the recent mass killing in Fresno, California. The killer, Kori Ali Muhammad, interrupted his spree to go online and announce “that he was going to kill as many white males as possible,” according to Fresno Police Chief Jerry Dyer.

Yes, Muhammad was deranged. But so was Charleston killer Dylann Roof. That didn’t stop observers from concluding that Roof represented a dangerous trend in racist violence. They won’t say that about Muhammad. In fact, since the facts have come out, you will not hear his name mentioned in the media ever again. Especially that name.

As proof that multiculturalism is virulent, dangerous, and ungrounded in reality, I could cite the epidemic of “deaths of despair” among less educated white men in America: Why isn’t it being taken seriously as a public health catastrophe like breast cancer or AIDS? I could point to the persecution of all-male organizations at colleges. Black and Muslim groups, of course, are exempted. Or the fact that white males, alone, are not protected by anti-discrimination laws.

Should White Men Be Stripped of the Vote?

Instead, let’s talk about an event that on the face of it seems less serious. On April 13, The Huffington Post ran a column by “Shelley Garland” that argued for depriving white males of the vote:

Some of the biggest blows to the progressive cause in the past year have often been due to the votes of white men. If white men were not allowed to vote, it is unlikely that the United Kingdom would be leaving the European Union, it is unlikely that Donald Trump would now be the President of the United States, and it is unlikely that the Democratic Alliance would now be governing four of South Africa’s biggest cities.

If white men no longer had the vote, the progressive cause would be strengthened. It would not be necessary to deny white men indefinitely – the denial of the vote to white men for 20 years (just less than a generation) would go some way to seeing a decline in the influence of reactionary and neo-liberal ideology in the world. The influence of reckless white males were one of the primary reasons that led to the Great Recession which began in 2008. This would also strike a blow against toxic white masculinity, one that is long needed.

At the same time, a denial of the franchise to white men, could see a redistribution of global assets to their rightful owners. After all, white men have used the imposition of Western legal systems around the world to reinforce modern capitalism. A period of twenty years without white men in the world’s parliaments and voting booths will allow legislation to be passed which could see the world’s wealth far more equitably shared. The violence of white male wealth and income inequality will be a thing of the past.

Now, you’ll notice that I didn’t include a link to that column. That’s because The Huffington Post took it down. Why did that happen? Did some sane editor read the article and conclude, accurately, that it was hate speech against human beings who happened to be both male and white?

Silencing Satire, Like Good Little Stalinists

No, not at all. You see, it turned out that the piece was a satire. It was written by a white guy. As Heat Street reports:

Earlier this week, the gullible Huffington Post fell victim to a hoax article calling for white men to be stripped of their voting rights. The site became the subject of widespread derision and condemnation after HuffPost editors stood up to defend the article’s content.

But as was later revealed, the author submitted the piece to Huffington Post South Africa as a hoax, intending to prove a point about the outlet’s radical leftist stance. He did so under a fake persona masquerading as a feminist activist named “Shelly Garland.” …

Following its publication and subsequent retraction, the HuffPost identified the author behind the “Shelly Garland” persona as Marius Roodt, a researcher at South Africa’s Centre for Development and Enterprise. According to the site, the email address Roodt used to submit the piece was traced back to him. The site claims that his identity was further “confirmed with facial recognition technology,” as he digitally altered a picture of himself to look like a woman.

Pretty funny, right? Except that after Roodt was outed, he lost his job. No, not the editors who published the outrageous article, thinking it was dead serious and a pretty good idea. They’re still working, still shaping American minds.

You Think That’s Funny? You’re Fired.

But Roodt was stripped of his livelihood for daring to mock the pieties of the church of multiculturalism. His employer publicly denounced him. And The Huffington Post took down the post, under the rationale that it had turned out to be hate speech.

Have you got that? At first, the article seemed to call in all seriousness for hundreds of millions of people (rich and poor, including coal miners and war veterans) to be denied the right to vote because of their sex and their race.

So The Huffington Post had no problem with it. They defended it, in fact. But when it came out that the piece was in fact a satire of that position, now it amounted to hate speech.

Wrap your mind around that. Try “mansplaining” that to yourself.

No wonder some white guys are paranoid. People really are out to get them. (For more from the author of “Repeat After Me (or Lose Your Job): ‘White Men Are Not Being Persecuted. And They Deserve It.'” please click HERE)

Follow Joe Miller on Twitter HERE and Facebook HERE.