Being a fashion designer this just inspired me… So now I´m doing a project on hats right now… I´ll show you soon…
Being a fashion designer this just inspired me… So now I´m doing a project on hats right now… I´ll show you soon…
Just helping the word get around… Hope someone listens…
After more than 20 years, I’ve finally decided to tell the world what I witnessed in 1991, which I believe was one of the biggest turning point in popular music, and ultimately American society. I have struggled for a long time weighing the pros and cons of making this story public as I was reluctant to implicate the individuals who were present that day. So I’ve simply decided to leave out names and all the details that may risk my personal well being and that of those who were, like me, dragged into something they weren’t ready for.
Between the late 80’s and early 90’s, I was what you may call a “decision maker” with one of the more established company in the music industry. I came from Europe in the early 80’s and quickly established myself in the business. The industry was different back then. Since technology and media weren’t accessible to people like they are today, the industry had more control over the public and had the means to influence them anyway it wanted. This may explain why in early 1991, I was invited to attend a closed door meeting with a small group of music business insiders to discuss rap music’s new direction. Little did I know that we would be asked to participate in one of the most unethical and destructive business practice I’ve ever seen.
The meeting was held at a private residence on the outskirts of Los Angeles. I remember about 25 to 30 people being there, most of them familiar faces. Speaking to those I knew, we joked about the theme of the meeting as many of us did not care for rap music and failed to see the purpose of being invited to a private gathering to discuss its future. Among the attendees was a small group of unfamiliar faces who stayed to themselves and made no attempt to socialize beyond their circle. Based on their behavior and formal appearances, they didn’t seem to be in our industry. Our casual chatter was interrupted when we were asked to sign a confidentiality agreement preventing us from publicly discussing the information presented during the meeting. Needless to say, this intrigued and in some cases disturbed many of us. The agreement was only a page long but very clear on the matter and consequences which stated that violating the terms would result in job termination. We asked several people what this meeting was about and the reason for such secrecy but couldn’t find anyone who had answers for us. A few people refused to sign and walked out. No one stopped them. I was tempted to follow but curiosity got the best of me. A man who was part of the “unfamiliar” group collected the agreements from us.
Quickly after the meeting began, one of my industry colleagues (who shall remain nameless like everyone else) thanked us for attending. He then gave the floor to a man who only introduced himself by first name and gave no further details about his personal background. I think he was the owner of the residence but it was never confirmed. He briefly praised all of us for the success we had achieved in our industry and congratulated us for being selected as part of this small group of “decision makers”. At this point I begin to feel slightly uncomfortable at the strangeness of this gathering. The subject quickly changed as the speaker went on to tell us that the respective companies we represented had invested in a very profitable industry which could become even more rewarding with our active involvement. He explained that the companies we work for had invested millions into the building of privately owned prisons and that our positions of influence in the music industry would actually impact the profitability of these investments. I remember many of us in the group immediately looking at each other in confusion. At the time, I didn’t know what a private prison was but I wasn’t the only one. Sure enough, someone asked what these prisons were and what any of this had to do with us. We were told that these prisons were built by privately owned companies who received funding from the government based on the number of inmates. The more inmates, the more money the government would pay these prisons. It was also made clear to us that since these prisons are privately owned, as they become publicly traded, we’d be able to buy shares. Most of us were taken back by this. Again, a couple of people asked what this had to do with us. At this point, my industry colleague who had first opened the meeting took the floor again and answered our questions. He told us that since our employers had become silent investors in this prison business, it was now in their interest to make sure that these prisons remained filled. Our job would be to help make this happen by marketing music which promotes criminal behavior, rap being the music of choice. He assured us that this would be a great situation for us because rap music was becoming an increasingly profitable market for our companies, and as employee, we’d also be able to buy personal stocks in these prisons. Immediately, silence came over the room. You could have heard a pin drop. I remember looking around to make sure I wasn’t dreaming and saw half of the people with dropped jaws. My daze was interrupted when someone shouted, “Is this a f****** joke?” At this point things became chaotic. Two of the men who were part of the “unfamiliar” group grabbed the man who shouted out and attempted to remove him from the house. A few of us, myself included, tried to intervene. One of them pulled out a gun and we all backed off. They separated us from the crowd and all four of us were escorted outside. My industry colleague who had opened the meeting earlier hurried out to meet us and reminded us that we had signed agreement and would suffer the consequences of speaking about this publicly or even with those who attended the meeting. I asked him why he was involved with something this corrupt and he replied that it was bigger than the music business and nothing we’d want to challenge without risking consequences. We all protested and as he walked back into the house I remember word for word the last thing he said, “It’s out of my hands now. Remember you signed an agreement.” He then closed the door behind him. The men rushed us to our cars and actually watched until we drove off.
A million things were going through my mind as I drove away and I eventually decided to pull over and park on a side street in order to collect my thoughts. I replayed everything in my mind repeatedly and it all seemed very surreal to me. I was angry with myself for not having taken a more active role in questioning what had been presented to us. I’d like to believe the shock of it all is what suspended my better nature. After what seemed like an eternity, I was able to calm myself enough to make it home. I didn’t talk or call anyone that night. The next day back at the office, I was visibly out of it but blamed it on being under the weather. No one else in my department had been invited to the meeting and I felt a sense of guilt for not being able to share what I had witnessed. I thought about contacting the 3 others who wear kicked out of the house but I didn’t remember their names and thought that tracking them down would probably bring unwanted attention. I considered speaking out publicly at the risk of losing my job but I realized I’d probably be jeopardizing more than my job and I wasn’t willing to risk anything happening to my family. I thought about those men with guns and wondered who they were? I had been told that this was bigger than the music business and all I could do was let my imagination run free. There were no answers and no one to talk to. I tried to do a little bit of research on private prisons but didn’t uncover anything about the music business’ involvement. However, the information I did find confirmed how dangerous this prison business really was. Days turned into weeks and weeks into months. Eventually, it was as if the meeting had never taken place. It all seemed surreal. I became more reclusive and stopped going to any industry events unless professionally obligated to do so. On two occasions, I found myself attending the same function as my former colleague. Both times, our eyes met but nothing more was exchanged.
As the months passed, rap music had definitely changed direction. I was never a fan of it but even I could tell the difference. Rap acts that talked about politics or harmless fun were quickly fading away as gangster rap started dominating the airwaves. Only a few months had passed since the meeting but I suspect that the ideas presented that day had been successfully implemented. It was as if the order has been given to all major label executives. The music was climbing the charts and most companies when more than happy to capitalize on it. Each one was churning out their very own gangster rap acts on an assembly line. Everyone bought into it, consumers included. Violence and drug use became a central theme in most rap music. I spoke to a few of my peers in the industry to get their opinions on the new trend but was told repeatedly that it was all about supply and demand. Sadly many of them even expressed that the music reinforced their prejudice of minorities.
I officially quit the music business in 1993 but my heart had already left months before. I broke ties with the majority of my peers and removed myself from this thing I had once loved. I took some time off, returned to Europe for a few years, settled out of state, and lived a “quiet” life away from the world of entertainment. As the years passed, I managed to keep my secret, fearful of sharing it with the wrong person but also a little ashamed of not having had the balls to blow the whistle. But as rap got worse, my guilt grew. Fortunately, in the late 90’s, having the internet as a resource which wasn’t at my disposal in the early days made it easier for me to investigate what is now labeled the prison industrial complex. Now that I have a greater understanding of how private prisons operate, things make much more sense than they ever have. I see how the criminalization of rap music played a big part in promoting racial stereotypes and misguided so many impressionable young minds into adopting these glorified criminal behaviors which often lead to incarceration. Twenty years of guilt is a heavy load to carry but the least I can do now is to share my story, hoping that fans of rap music realize how they’ve been used for the past 2 decades. Although I plan on remaining anonymous for obvious reasons, my goal now is to get this information out to as many people as possible. Please help me spread the word. Hopefully, others who attended the meeting back in 1991 will be inspired by this and tell their own stories. Most importantly, if only one life has been touched by my story, I pray it makes the weight of my guilt a little more tolerable.
In 1885 Ulysses S Grant died from an oral cancer widely believed to have resulted from his long term heavy consumption of cigars. However, despite continually mounting scientific evidence for the link between tobacco and many diseases, the public notion that smoking was safe, or even healthy, persisted for another 100 years.
Benjamin Franklin discovered that hot lead in printer’s type was dangerous to his health, yet 200 years later we were still putting lead into gasoline and house paint.
In 1881 President James Garfield was hit by an assassin’s bullet. The wound was serious, but should not have been fatal. Garfield died 11 weeks later from infections caused by doctors repeatedly searching for the bullet with unwashed fingers inserted into the wound. Scientific studies by the Hungarian physician Ignaz Semmelweis had shown more than 30 years earlier that hand washing reduced the death rate from puerperal fever of mothers giving birth in clinics, but Semmelweis’s evidence was not widely accepted. The United States had much evidence of wound treatment and survival rates from the Civil War, but the evidence was largely unexamined and unanalyzed. In France Louis Pasteur had developed the germ theory of disease, but the theory was still rudimentary, viruses had not been discovered, and the link between infectious substances and specific bacteria was not established. In the US doctors retained a practical certainty that the inconvenience of hand washing was unnecessary.
These are examples of discord between scientific evidence and practical opinion. In the first examples the evidence is one sided, but the popular view was conflicted. There were anti-smoking campaigns, as well as pro-smoking advertising and product placement by the tobacco industry that maintained public uncertainty about the health effects of smoking. The effects of tobacco and lead don’t show up immediately, so the public was uncertain.
In the hand washing example, the evidence was as yet uncertain, lacking an accepted theoretical basis, but doctors were certain (the wrong way) and took risks that they could (and should) have avoided.
The first kind of discord is the more easily identified and studied. Climate science and evolution are examples of firm scientific evidence being disputed by an uncertain public. Evidence that conflicts with economic, political, or religious interests or ideological beliefs tends to be ignored by the interested parties.
The second kind of discord is a little harder to identify and analyze, but it is perhaps even more common and its effects can be even more costly. There is a natural tendency to seek certainty and resolution and to seize upon answers to questions even when those answers are tentative and the science, the evidence, and the analysis behind them are still open to scientific dispute.
This second discord occurs when scientific issues are uncertain or unresolved, but the public holds and acts upon beliefs that are not backed by science, especially when those false certainties are supported by institutional interests.
Not so long ago blood-letting was widely accepted as the preferred medical treatment for numerous conditions. George Washington died from it. Benjamin Franklin accepted it. We recently avoided eggs, then butter, then salt. Now, instead, sugar is the concern. We used to remove children’s tonsils, now we leave them in except in extreme cases. We banned marijuana as dangerous, now we prescribe it. There is a wide gap between what is believed at a particular time and what is actually known. Faith is said to be pretending to know things you don’t know. When people say they have faith in science, they are pretending to know things they don’t know about science. Science is not something to be taken on faith.
Science is a method of inquiry, not a set of certainties.
Science is a method of inquiry, not a set of certainties. Science applies to things we are uncertain about. Science aids decision-making by providing evidence. Most decisions can’t wait for certainty.
Science also enriches life apart from immediate practicality. We are consumers of information. There is a problem, though. Much of our information, many of the things we think we know, especially things we unthinkingly accept without question, are going to turn out to be false.
Desire for certainty makes us gullible. We want the truth, but what we have is information, evidence, and theories. We live in a reality that includes powerful institutions that have a strong interest in what we accept as true. Private corporations and other business entities make their profits by selling products, and by avoiding government constraints, and they spend large sums on advertising and lobbying and the creation or manipulation of public opinion. Political parties and government itself are powerful institutions that have interests in public information and the formation of public opinion. Nonprofit institutions can be just as strong as business institutions, and have similar interests. Religious institutions have obvious interests in the formation of beliefs. Public opinion relating to economics, politics or religion are hot topics where strongly held opinions often lead to conflict.
Our lives are constrained by institutions that saturate world society, and the institutions in turn are constrained and interact with public opinion. Public opinion based on facts and evidence, rather than institutional interests, is necessary for wise and beneficial relationships among the public and the institutions we rely on. Science should contribute facts and evidence. Science might be presumed to be an neutral arbitrator, until it is realized that science, too, is a matter of institutions. The method of science is available to all of us individually, but the practice of science is complex, interpersonal (or inter-institutional), and expensive.
Discussing all this in the abstract has limited appeal. A case study on how science, institutions, and public opinion interact can shed more light on the situation than a purely theoretical discussion.
The case study presented here takes on a topic that is less personal and possibly less inflammatory than one directly involving politics, economics or religion, but which has the same kind of powerful institutional influence in the background. The case study is about the origins of the HIV/AIDS epidemic, a subject of interest in itself, and which could have important consequences for the fight against the epidemic in Africa and other places where inadequate funding has been a constraint.
To read the full case study go to: http://www.greenmedinfo.com/blog/what-really-caused-aids-epidemic
Estoy cansada de escuchar mentiras y mas mentiras de parte de los gobiernos y los noticieros… Hasta cuando? Que tanto tienen que comprometer la libertad, la salud y la sanidad mental del pueblo antes de que la gente del común se de cuenta? Día a día leo cada vez mas noticias mundiales que me causan preocupación: guerras, violaciones a nuestros derechos, gobiernos corruptos, medios moldeando la opinion publica, entre otras. La maquinaria de la propaganda es tal, que ni siquiera los mas educados de la ¨clase alta¨ lo han notado. Y me refiero a la clase alta entre comillas, por que ellos pueden creer que pertenecen a tal estrato, pero si no eres parte de la elite mundial, no eres realmente mas que otro trabajador con un mayor poder adquisitivo. Me preocupa ver como nuestra sociedad va avanzando hacia un futuro muy similar a 1984 de George Orwell en donde la represión social es tal que hasta se persiguen los ¨crímenes de pensamiento¨ (ThoughtCrime en ingles) termino utilizado recientemente en estados unidos por grupos radicales que pretenden defender a las minorías a través de subyugar a las mayorías. Doy gracias por que cada vez somos mas los que nos damos cuenta de estas cosas, pero un pensamiento recurrente me asecha: Y ahora quien podrá defendernos? Es una pregunta que me atormentaba hasta en mis sueños, hasta que poco a poco he logrado comprender que nadie vendrá a salvarnos, no vendrán extraterrestres a llevarnos en una nave, no aparecera ningún Cristo a redimir a esta sociedad, tampoco los grandes cataclismos que se supone nos sacarían de esta miseria, no, nada de esto que muchos líderes espirituales prometen acabaran con esta putrefacta sociedad, así que finalmente lo comprendí, NOSOTROS SOMOS LA SOLUCION, y me no refiero a que nosotros somos el problema, como algunos creen, si no que SOMOS la SOLUCION! Solo uniéndonos todos podremos hacer que las cosas cambien, no aceptando las mentiras que nos dan de comer los gobiernos y medios de comunicación, educándonos nosotros mismos y a los mas ignorantes que nosotros somos los que realmente establecemos las leyes y a los estados, no lo contrario. Debemos entender que nuestros derechos llegan hasta donde inician los derechos de los demás, respetándolos y haciéndolos respetar. Creo firmemente en que la nobleza obliga: Noblesse Oblige: es nuestra responsabilidad como los mas educados y privilegiados en esta sociedad velar y proteger los derechos e intereses de los menos afortunados.
Despierta #Colombia, el que no sabe su historia esta condenado a repetirla. Ya nos liberamos una vez de la corona Española, no nos dejemos esclavizar una vez mas. Entendamos que la división del poder entre las diferentes ramas del gobierno es algo totalmente necesario para asegurar que el estado no se vuelva tiránico. Aquí les recuerdo como se supone debe funcionar nuestro gobierno para que un grupo de individuos no tengan demasiado poder. Ya tenemos un estado altamente corrupto, no dejemos que tengan mas poder para hacer lo que les de la gana con nuestro país…
Colombia es una república presidencialista, y un Estado unitario con separación de poderes ejecutivo, legislativo y judicial. La Constitución política vigente fue proclamada, el 4 de julio de 1991. El Presidente de la República y los gobernadores departamentales son los que se encargan de hacer cumplir los reglamentos de la nación.
Se encarga de hacer cumplir las leyes (Ejecutar), mantener el orden público, organizar los servicios PARA LA POBLACION y recaudar impuestos para hacer uso de ellos.
El gabinete se compone, además del presidente y el vicepresidente, de los ministros de despacho y los directores de departamentos administrativos.
El presidente es elegido por voto popular directo para un período de cuatro años o menos, en caso de sustitución. La Constitución de 1991 prohibía la reelección presidencial de por vida y con anterioridad era posible la reelección mediata (un ex presidente podía ser reelegido pero el presidente en ejercicio no podía ser reelegido para el período siguiente). Con referendo constitucional en 2005 esta prohibición fue abolida y dos presidentes hicieron uso de ella pudiendo participar en las elecciones desde el cargo. En el año 2015 se retorno a la ley de 1991.
El vicepresidente se elige por voto popular directo en llave con el presidente. Los ministros y los directores administrativos son cargos de libre nombramiento y remoción por parte del presidente.
También se encuentran los Gobernadores y Alcaldes que son elegidos por voto popular.
Se encarga de elaborar las leyes y normas (Legislar). Un Congresobicameral formado por el Senado (100 miembros elegidos por circunscripción nacional por un periodo de cuatro años y un número adicional de 2 senadores elegidos en circunscripción especial por comunidades indígenas) y la Cámara de Representantes, conformada por ciento sesenta y seis miembros elegidos por 4 años, de los cuales ciento sesenta y uno representan a las circunscripciones territoriales (departamentos y el Distrito Capital). A razón de 2 por cada circunscripción y uno más por cada 250.000 habitantes o fracción mayor de 125.000; los cinco restantes representan a las comunidades afrocolombianas (dos), los indígenas (uno), los colombianos residentes en el exterior (uno) y las minorías políticas (uno).
Se encarga de aplicar la ley de manera justa y resuelve conflictos entre las personas de acuerdo a la ley (Judicializar).
El poder judicial de Colombia empieza a partir de la Constitución Política de 1991. Es conformado por la Corte Suprema de Justicia, la Corte Constitucional, el Consejo de Estado, el Consejo Superior de la Judicatura, así como los tribunales y juzgados. La Fiscalía General de la Nación que es un organismo independiente adscrito a la rama judicial del Poder Público en Colombia.
Son entidades del Estado, ajenas a las tres ramas del poder colombiano:
No me parece sabio alterar nuestra constitución por una promesa de paz por parte de uno de los tantos grupos criminales que se ha ganado la vida a costa de los Colombianos. Y aun que a muchos les duela acaptarlo, Santos no se ha ganado la confianza para ello tampoco. ¿Que es lo que tiene que esconder para tener que hacer todo el proceso a puertas cerradas? Al final somos todos los Colombianos los que debemos decidir si es justo o no. ¿Por que se nos ha escondido el proceso mediante el cual han llegado a este acuerdo? A mi me causa mucha desconfianza que uno de los pasos sea entregarle mas poder al presidente. Y ademas TODOS los senadores deberían estar en su contra para ser rechazado, ¿por que no hacer todo lo contrario? Que sean todos los senadores los que deban estar de acuerdo para que se legalice el acuerdo, no son ellos los elegidos por todos nosotros? Ahora, no quiero que me mal interpreten, yo no le digo que no a la PAZ, todo lo contrario, pero como víctima, familiar de víctimas, y ciudadana Colombiana, le digo NO a esta solución. Me parece muy apresurada y una falta de respeto hacia todo lo que hemos sufrido. Tal vez haga falta negociar mas, tal vez necesitemos otros puntos de vista, tal vez tantas cosas, pero ciertamente alguna solución que sea mas justa y equilibrada para TODOS nosotros.
A massive rally against pro-migrant government policies and what has been dubbed the “Islamic flooding” of the country took place in the southwestern Polish city of Katowice.
Over 25,000 people were expected to take to streets in a protest against an influx of refugees and migrants from the Middle East and North Africa, according to reports in local media ahead of the rally.
The demonstration, organized by a nationalist organization called All Polish Youth, comes after a decision by Poland’s authorities to accept some 2,000 refugees from Syria and North Africa by 2017.
“All Polish Youth expresses its strong opposition to the actions taken by the Polish government since it blindly does everything Brussels and Berlin say,” Michał Nowak, representative of All Polish Youth, said.
“Polish media do not cover the situation accurately, saying that the majority of refugees, who are actually economic migrants, are women and children. In fact, 75% of those people are young men, according to the UN statistics,” he declared.
The protesters who walked down the streets carrying Polish flags and placards reading “Poland is for us” or “No to extremism,” condemned the situation and blamed the government for turning their backs on the needs of Polish people.
Przemyslaw Wipler and Janusz Korwin-Mikke, members of the liberal Polish political party Coalition of Polish Republic’s Renewal Freedom and Hope (KORWiN), were also among the protesters.
Korwin-Mikke, who is the chairman of KORWiN, compared Europe to a rotting tree and refugees to parasites at a party convention on Saturday.
“The parasites are not to blame, however, the trees are actually at fault,” said the politician.
A number of other cities in Poland saw similar demonstrations.
Despite the decision that angered the All Polish Youth organization, Warsaw seems somewhat reluctant to take on the additional refugees that could be imposed on it by the obligatory quotas on which the EU has been insisting. Poland’s foreign minister Grzegorz Schetyna said on Monday that, while the country could accept up to 9,000 new refugees or even more under the European Union quota plan, he would prefer to see the bloc’s borders sealed. He also said such decisions should be voluntary.
This is not the first time Poles have gathered to protest pro-migrant policies. A wave of protests swept across Warsaw not long ago, when several hundred people took to the streets back in July of this year.
Europe is currently struggling with an unprecedented influx of refugees fleeing from war-torn regions in the Middle East and North Africa, and natives are showing their dissatisfaction even in football matches…
I just hope things don’t get too heated up and start turning violent, for the sake of everyone involved. As I said before, I believe migrants are just peons in a globalist agenda. I wish for everyone to live in peace, safe and happy in their own homes.
And little something from an actual #Syrian,
Note: First of all, I want to let something clear, I do not believe that muslims are at fault with everything thats been happening. I think they are just being victims of a globalist agenda. Obviously there are good and bad people in every country and religion.
People from third world countries don’t think the same way developed country citizens think. Proof of it is seen in the way they live their lives (their culture). And you don’t need to be an anthropologist to figure these things out. In third world countries, religion plays an important aspect in determining their beliefs, arts, morals, laws, and customs. Culture in Middle Eastern counties, part of South Asia and North Africa is based on the powerful influence Islam exerts in people’s lives. Islamic law touches on virtually every aspect of life and society, providing guidance on multifarious topics from banking and welfare, to family life and the environment. Islam (Muslim) schools are dividen in two denominations: Sunni (75–90%) or Shia (10–20%). About 13% of Muslims live in Indonesia, 25% in South Asia, 20% in the Middle East, and 15% in Sub-Saharan Africa. It is the second-largest religion by number of adherents and, according to many sources, the fastest-growing major religion in the world.
In some Muslim countries, the law requires women to cover either just legs, shoulders and head or the whole body apart from the face. In strictest countries, the face as well must be covered leaving just a mesh to see through. These rules for dressing cause tensions, concerning particularly Muslims living in Western countries, where restrictions are considered both sexist and oppressive. In Syria women are now entitled to receive the same education as men and to seek employment, but the traditional attitude that views females as inferior beings prevails. A woman is considered the possession of a man rather than her own person. She is identified as her father’s daughter until marriage; after the birth of a male child, her identity is transferred from the wife of her husband to the mother of her son. Since Children are highly valued as a blessing from God, the more children they have they believe the more fortunate they will be considered.
In the other hand there are the different European countries, each with a culture of its own, but similar in the way women are respected as equal to men. We have the Scandinavian countries, some of the richest, most successful societies on Earth, with exceptionally high levels of education, health care, and safety, but all of this is being shaken down by floods of immigrants.
Here is a video of a Sweden woman speaking up because of this:
There are also tons of news about a school located in Pocking, Bavaria, who sent a letter to parents advising them of new “security measures” after a migrant shelter was opened at the school’s nearby gym. Parents were warned that their children should not wear revealing clothes for fear of “misunderstandings” that could lead to “attacks” by the migrants. Children were also told that “derogatory or racial remarks” would not be tolerated. Meanwhile a 7-year-old girl was raped by a north African migrant in a German park last week, a story that has received little media attention. And now, since Sweden opened its doors to mass immigration, the country has become the rape capital of the west, with cases skyrocketing by 1400%. Around 77.6% of the rapists are identified as “foreigners”.
Muslim rape culture has become a major problem in Scandinavia but its critics have been labeled racist and Islamophobic. And now The United Kingdom, which is also set to accept a further 20,000 refugees, has also seen numerous cases of Muslim rape gangs, including a sex trafficking ring in Rotherham that was covered up by local councilors and the police over fears that identifying the culprits – almost all of whom were Pakistani men – would be seen as politically incorrect.
And if the issues about the women and children being raped weren’t scandalous enough, vandalising their way through Europe, robbing charitable donors, and creating tension and uneasiness for the locals are just the appetisers before the main course.
Now I´ve been wondering, with each day even more and more people questioning themselves: what will be the outcome of such a large scale immigration? Have things been handled the best possible way? Weren’t there other solutions besides “absorbing” the refugees? What will become of the countries with such large influx of migrants? Wasn’t the invitation to the refugees a little bit premature? And so on, Is the #RefugeeCrisis being taken too lightly by the #EU? Because you can only judge by the consequences and these are only pointing out the negligence in preventing a humanitarian crisis from occurring
As the story goes, Ahmed, a 14-year-old Muslim high school student in Irving, Texas, took his “homemade” clock to school to impress his engineering teacher and was arrested after another teacher thought the clock was a bomb.
“This video challenges that the clock was homemade by showing a nearly identical package being prepared in about 20 seconds,” the video’s description reads.
The clock in the video is a near-perfect clone of the clock Ahmed took to class, including the 9V battery hook-up, the wall cord and the snooze button.
In other words, Ahmed didn’t build a clock but rather ripped the guts out of a store-bought clock and shoved them into a suitcase he took to school.
Ahmed’s clock was likely a Micronta 63-765A sold by Radio Shack in the 1970s, according to Anthony DiPasquale, an electronics expert art Artvoice.com.
“The shape and design is a dead give away… The large screen… The buttons on the front laid out horizontally would have been on a separate board – a large snooze button, four control buttons, and two switches to turn the alarm on and off, and choose two brightness levels,” he wrote. “The clock features a 9v battery back-up, and a switch on the rear allows the owner to choose between 12 and 24 hour time (features like a battery back-up, and a 24 hour time selection seems awful superfluous for a hobby project, don’t you think?)”
“Oh, and that ‘M’ logo on the circuit board mentioned above? Micronta.”
It’s unlikely a hobbyist would silkscreen company logos and part numbers on the circuit boards in a homemade clock, DiPasquale added.
“It’s pretty safe to say already we’re looking at ’70s tech, mass produced in a factory,” he concluded.
What’s really telling is how the mainstream media is running to Ahmed’s defense despite the overwhelming evidence debunking his story.
“Whether Ahmed ‘invented’ a clock or merely reassembled the various components of what was already a clock is really beside the point,” Robby Soave at Reason.com claimed. “Frankly, it just doesn’t matter; of course a 14-year-old is going to use the word ‘invention’ a little more loosely than the U.S. Patent Office.”
Of course it matters because Amhed’s father, Mohamed El-Hassan Mohamed, is a well-known Muslim apologist who has previously been involved in other stunts to call people out for being “Islamiphobic” and the evidence suggests the Mohameds reassembled the clock to look like a suitcase bomb so they could claim Ahmed was “racially profiled.”
“If the parents were involved in the hoax, now you now have a fraud going on because money has been collected on false pretenses,” former New Jersey Superior Court Judge Andrew Napolitano said, referring to the gifts and scholarships Ahmed has since received.
Another victim of social networks shutting down their account (in this case was Facebook) for speaking out their minds was 13-year-old CJ Pearson from Georgia. Now, I do not necessarily agree with him in everything he says, but I encourage people to speak up their minds a bit more.
I believe this type of videos should be the ones breaking down the internet, and not Kim Kardashians ass…
Pearson focuses on the story of Obama inviting a muslim student to the White House after the kid was arrested in Texas for making a clock, which officials initially thought was a bomb.
Calling Obama “ignorant,” “incompetent” unable to grasp reality, Pearson notes that while the kid got an open invite from Obama, the families of gunned down cops and those killed by illegal immigrants are simply ignored.
“Mr. President, when Kate Steinle was gunned down by an illegal immigrant you didn’t do anything — you didn’t call the family or invite them to the White House. Is that okay? I don’t think so, Mr. President,” Pearson urges.
“And to go even further, Mr. President, when cops are being gunned down, you’re not inviting their families to the White House. You never did.” Pearson adds.
“But when a Muslim kid builds a clock? ‘Oh, come on by.’ What is this world you’re living in?” he asks the president.
Pearson continued the rant by referring to the Dylan Roof shooting.
“You know, when the shooting in Chattanooga happened, it took you longer to lower the flag than it took you to light the White House in rainbow colors after the Supreme Court decision legalizing gay marriage,” he vents.
Pearson charges that the public perception of Obama’s inviting the muslim kid to the White House “fits into your agenda,” noting “That’s great for you.”
“But Mr. President, these people were gunned down. Kate Steinle was innocent. This man was deported but it was a sanctuary city so he was able to roam free.” Pearson further explains.
“Cops are being gunned down every single day because of your actions, Mr. President. Because you’re seeking to appease terrorists — domestic terrorists — and those domestic terrorists are the Black Lives Matter movement.” the middle schooler declares.
“And you think, Mr. President, that I’m going to respect you if you don’t respect the brave men and women and innocent people who lost their lives because of your incompetence. I’m sick and tired of it and I know the American people are, too,” Pearson concludes.
Pearson is executive director of a group called “Young Georgians in Government.”
His Facebook page says he is “committed to fighting for conservative principles and engaging young people in the political process.”
“Most young people really don’t have an interest in government or politics, but we need to pique that interest, we need to make sure that they know, the decisions politicians make are going to affect them,” the student told ABC 6 in a profile story last December.
Pearson’s rants have become popular online.
First, I want to copy/paste some definitions:
Bullying is the use of force, threat, or coercion to abuse, intimidate, or aggressively dominate others. The behavior is often repeated and habitual. One essential prerequisite is the perception, by the bully or by others, of an imbalance of social or physical power, which distinguishes bullying from conflict. Behaviours used to assert such domination can include verbal harassment or threat, physical assault or coercion, and such acts may be directed repeatedly towards particular targets. Rationalisations for such behavior sometimes include differences of social class, race, religion, gender, sexual orientation, appearance, behavior, body language, personality, reputation, lineage, strength, size or ability. If bullying is done by a group, it is called mobbing.
Bullying can be defined in many different ways and it´s divided into four basic types of abuse – emotional (sometimes called relational), verbal, physical, and cyber. It typically involves subtle methods of coercion, such as intimidation. It ranges from simple one-on-one bullying to more complex bullying in which the bully may have one or more “lieutenants” who may seem to be willing to assist the primary bully in his or her bullying activities. Bullying in school and the workplace is also referred to as peer abuse. A bullying culture can develop in any context in which humans interact with each other. This includes school, family, the workplace, home, and neighbourhoods. – Wikipedia
Social Darwinism is a modern name given to various theories of society that emerged in the United Kingdom, North America, and Western Europe in the 1870s, which claim to apply biological concepts of natural selection and survival of the fittest to sociology and politics. Economically, social Darwinists argue that the strong should see their wealth and power increase while the weak should see their wealth and power decrease. Different social Darwinists have differing views about which groups of people are considered to be the strong and which groups of people are considered to be the weak, and they also hold different opinions about the precise mechanism that should be used to reward strength and punish weakness. Many such views stress competition between individuals in laissez-faire capitalism, while others are claimed to have motivated ideas of eugenics, racism, imperialism, fascism, Nazism, and struggle between national or racial groups. – Wikipedia
Now, can you see where I am going? Can anyone notice a resemblance? Do you agree that bullies believe themselves to be better tan others (their victims)? Could it be that bullies act that way just because they think they deserve more than others based on perceived so called differences? Isn’t this what social darwinism is about? Do you want to knowingly continue to live in a society where competition and survival of the fittest make the rules of cohabitation? Do you think its fair for cultural groups to attack others based on their differences? Isn’t this what all radical groups do?
As I see it, if we continue highlighting our differences, be them social, economical, racial, religious, gender, appearance, sexual orientation, behaviour, body language, personality, reputation, lineage, strength, size or ability, If we continue living on a society that emphasises that the difference between one-another is what makes you valuable and not the fact that you are just a living human being, if we continue believing we are not all brothers and sisters from the same planet, someone will always exploit you based on those stereotypes that make you an easy target of propaganda and thought manipulation. So I would like to invite every being who reads this to not think of yourself and others as stereotypes, but as living entities, brothers and sisters from our same planet. Lets all get along.
Lately all I read about on the different #SocialMedia platforms denotes a battle concerning #FreedomOfSpeech. Since the #DolceandGabbana incident, many many more less famous people have been gang hate attacked because of their perspectives on all types of subjects. The diversity ranges from Lauren Southern on #Rape Culture or Radical #Feminism, to Nicole Arbour on #Obesity. You may read the different backlashes and join the hate gang or you may actually see the videos and form your own opinions about them.
Is her way of expressing her opinion violent in any way? Do you believe she is being disrespectful or harmful? Here she talks about the repercussions caused by people who aren’t tolerant enough.
A bit more…
Now about Nicole Arbour. Here you have her ¨controvercial¨ video.
So, about ¨Fat-shaming¨…
And here is what mainstream Media does…
Wow, 5 agains 1, is that even fair? Now the point isn’t if she is funny or not, Arbour’s opinion is just that: an opinion. It’s backed by the first amendment, just like your own thoughts and opinions. She, like everyone else, has the right to express her thoughts and she welcomes you to express them as well, even when they are against her. So no one who issues a judgment against her or any other person expressing their thoughts is any better than them. The fact is that there will always be people who are going to get offended, we are about 7.125 Billion (2013) people on this planet, and it´s statistically imposible to please everybody. Now, should we call that borderline bulling? Thats ridiculous, its just an open statement about how obesity is bad for you, or how radical feminism is just, too radical. If it saves or kills people as some put it, it´s just a matter of low self-esteem. Yes, it is obvious that we should all love our bodies as we are, but careless obesity is the total oposite, you are being negligent about your body and it is bad for you health.
My point is, you may actually be or not on the same page as some, but that doesn’t justify that trolls gang up and attack someone just because they don’t think the same way some people do. And to prove that not everybody hate it, Arbour won thousands of followers. The healthiest way around this discussions will always be to just ignore the issues you do not agree with, because you always have a choice: to be a childish hater or a grown up and just walk away.