Category: propaganda

Lebanon vs Wonder Woman and Normalization with israel

The Lebanese government apparently is working on banning the hit movie “Wonder Woman” because the movie stars an israeli actress called Gal Gadot, who was also Miss israel 2004 and served in the israeli defense forces.

gal g

(She wrote that on FB during the israeli war on innocent civilians in Gaza)

According to the Daily Star:

“Highly anticipated DC Comics American superhero film ‘Wonder Woman’ will be banned in Lebanon, the state-run National News Agency reported Monday.

The movie’s casting, with the superhero played by Israeli actress Gal Gadot, prompted the Ministry of Economy and Commerce “to take necessary measures” to prevent the film’s screening in the country.

The ban is in alignment with Lebanon’s attempts to boycott supporters of Israel and Israeli-affiliated businesses”

This issue was also raised back then when the blockbuster movie “Batman V Superman: Dawn of Justice” – in which Gadot also plays the character of Wonder Woman – was showing in Lebanese theatres. Activists and advocates of the boycott of israel complained, and the Lebanese Ministry of Economy issued a statement (source in Arabic) in May 29, 2017 containing the following :

“the Ministry of Economy and Trade has already taken the necessary measures to ban the screening of Batman V Superman…by sending a letter to the General Directorate of Public Security on 13/3/2016 to take the necessary measures to prevent the screening of this film.”

But the screening did take place, the movie was shown in cinemas and I’ve watched it myself there (I had no idea there’s an israeli actress in it).

batmanvsuperman

As for the Wonder Woman movie, the same statement issued by the Ministry states that

“The Ministry of Economy and Trade confirms that it has taken the necessary action to ban the screening of Wonder Woman… On 29/5/2017, a decree was prepared for the General Directorate of Public Security to take the necessary measures to prevent the screening of this film”.

wonderwoman

Apparently, the Ministry took that decision after demands from the “Campaign To Boycott Supporters of Israel in Lebanon” (who coordinate with BDS, according to their own website). According to a local newspaper (also in Arabic), this campaign sent a letter to the Bureau of Boycott of Israel (which is a part of the Ministry), urging it “to give this serious issue the attention it deserves”.

Let’s get some things straight. I’m not one of those who are screaming “omg censorship!!!!! 111”. Normalization with israel is a real problem that should be properly addressed and dealt with, and if the so-called “censorship” is the only way to prevent it, then I’m all for it. Some liberal youth in this country are going mad over the idea of banning Wonder Woman, for reasons like “i just wanna have fun and they wanna deprive me of it!!111”. They act as if Lebanon has turned into a Goddamn Nazi Germany where a “Big Brother-ish” government forbids artistic freedom. This youth apathy in this country is disgraceful, and if this was really about the fun and the movie, they could watch the movie online, the government can’t ban it from there now, can it? No, this isn’t about “fun” and “living life”, this is about looking liberal and hip and cool. While I do NOT oppose the ban like the liberal youth, my objection is to the contradictory way the problem of normalization in movies is being approached (apart from the issues I have with BDS, who have George Soros and the European Union behind them, infiltrating the support for Palestine).

In Wonder Woman, there’s an israeli actress, but the movie itself isn’t Zionist propaganda and has nothing to do with israel ! israel isn’t mentioned in the plot and there’s no Zionist brainwash or propaganda in the story whatsoever. Perhaps most people wouldn’t have known that the actress is israeli unless they google the actors, had no one made a fuss about her being an israeli.

Of course it is a mild form of normalization with israel when you watch Wonder Woman and look up to the badass empowering feminist character played by an israeli actress, who learned all this “badassery” and training in martial arts during her time in the IDF. However, there are other movies that have actual Zionist propaganda in their plot, they glorify israel directly, straight into the viewer’s face. They are pure brainwash. The movie World War Z is one of them. It would take another article to explain the pro israeli propaganda in it, check out the synopsis if you’re interested and see for yourself how this kind of propaganda is a part of the storyline and plot. Was it banned from the cinemas in Lebanon? No. However, some parts in it that are related to israel, not all, were censored during the screening in all the theaters. This left the viewers confused because, well, they missed a part of the story.

cinemas

Why wasn’t this movie banned altogether? Why didn’t anyone consider banning it like they do with Wonder Woman? How come they want to ban a movie just because of an israeli actress with no mention of israel whatsoever in the story, while they let World War Z pass and consider it enough to cut out some of the israel parts? If they end up banning Wonder Woman from screening in cinemas here, I hope they take the same measure if a movie like World War Z comes out in the future.

World_War_Z_poster

An article was criticizing the government’s decision regarding Wonder Woman, asking

“What’s next, though? Banning every single movie that dares to be associated in any way with Israel? Banning every actor or actress who’s set foot in Israel? Deciding not to show any feature film that has any entity that remotely agrees with anything Israel does? Why don’t we just ban ourselves from everything commercial in the world and be done with it?

Natalie Portman was born in Israel. No one has a problem with her movies. I’m willing to be those same people calling for Wonder Woman’s ban were more than excited to see Portman in the Star Wars reboot, way back when.”

My answer to this is that Natalie Portman has a dual American/israeli citizenship and did not serve in the IDF. Gal Gadot did, on the other hand, as well as blatantly supported the israeli war against innocent Palestinian women and children in Gaza. That’s why they want to ban a movie in which she acts, and do not ban Black Swan or V For Vendetta for example for having Natalie Portman in them. I agree that we should not reduce our fight against normalization with israel to a matter of looking into the CV of every single actor and actress in a movie and then decide based on that, whether to ban the movie or not. It just makes no sense to ban a movie BECAUSE there’s an israeli actress (whether she served in the IDF or not) while the story has nothing to do with Zionism or israel, and not to ban a movie like World War Z which shoves israel right down your throat.

The solution is to set and clarify an actual standard by which to tell what movie fits exactly into the category of “normalization with israel”, and take action based on such a standard. This should be done by local initiatives, not BDS or interventions from “non-governmental organizations” with a foreign suspicious agenda. Of course, all this while keeping in mind that banning or censoring this or that movie limits normalization, but it won’t solve the Palestinian issue and rid the Palestinian people of the israeli occupation – the only way to achieve that is armed resistance.

UPDATE: They ended up officially banning the movie, based on a “Memorandum issued by the General Secretariat of the Arab League on 12/4/2016 on ‘Preventing the display of works of art in which Gadot is involved’ “, according to al-akhbar newspaper (Arabic). This is a BDS victory and I don’t support BDS. However, at least the IDF criminal won’t appear on our screens. So I won’t complain.

If you were so desperate to watch the film, watch it online and stop whining.

Feminists won’t spare this controversial event and will spill their poison at any chance. When they are not complaining about Wonder Woman’s armpits, they will scream that this isn’t about israel, this is about patriarchy, the movie was banned because it has a strong woman protagonist and the evil patriarchal government doesn’t want Lebanese women to get this empowering message, blah blah blah… Really? So basically Lebanese women can’t empower themselves by themselves, they need an idol wearing a cape to descend upon them from the sky and who is played by a Zionist IDF soldier and teach them empowerment? Give me a break.

Liberal youth: raging about this won’t make you à la mode. It makes you pathetic. Just. Stop.

Advertisements

Dear teenage girls, Hollywood celebs and liberals in general: keep crying over Obama.

madonnaalottev

Do you guys even understand politics ? Are you even interested in what’s going on with the world ? Or do you just stay in your small little bubble ? Keep crying over the Obama’s farewell. Keep fangirling over his photos with his wife and kids. Keep picturing him and Lady Obama as the “power couple” who fight for “social justice”. Why? Because he’s black, because he accepted gay marriage, because he’s “anti racist”.

Let’s face it, you are just like Jon Snow: you know nothing. While you kids say “goodbye Obama, goodbye justice, goodbye equality, goodbye sanity”, what would Syrian kids say? What would Libyan kids say? What would Yemeni kids say? What would Iraqi kids say? The answer is “goodbye bombs”.

cher

I’m from Lebanon, and partly Syrian, I consider Syria as my second country. I can’t go there anymore because of the war. Syrian refugees came to Lebanon because of the war, and Lebanon doesn’t even have enough to sustain it’s own population, so how about other populations ?

Do you even watch the news ? Do you actually care about the third world or all this “anti racist” mumbo jumbo is just theatrics ? I’m not saying Trump would be any better. I’m just saying that when you mourn the Obama era, you tell the Syrian kids, the Libyan kids, and all the innocent people who are dying because of his wars that their lives do not matter.

But who cares ? Just go swoon over his photos with his wife.

An Answer to Emma Watson’s #HeForShe UN Speech

The full speech is here , and if you don’t feel like watching another western feminist backed by globalist NGOs, I will quote the most important points.

HeForShe Campaign Launch
Photo by Eduardo Munoz Alvarez/Getty Images

“This is the first campaign of its kind at the UN. We want to try to mobilize as many men and boys as possible to be advocates for change. And, we don’t just want to talk about it. We want to try and make sure that it’s tangible.”

This, if anything, sounds sexist. As if men can’t be involved in any change and they need YOU and your UN to make them involved. Anyway, no human (whether man or woman) in his/her right mind would get themselves involved in modern feminism.

“I was appointed as Goodwill Ambassador for UN Women six months ago. And, the more I spoke about feminism, the more I realized that fighting for women’s rights has too often become synonymous with man-hating. If there is one thing I know for certain, it is that this has to stop.”

Ah definitely it has to stop because modern feminism is a failure with all those brainwashed women who didn’t achieve anything in their life and resorted thus to blaming men for their own problems. So now this campaign of yours is to “update” feminism so that it involves brainwashed men as well, self-hating men, men who are made to feel guilty and blame themselves for the failure of those women.

“For the record, feminism by definition is the belief that men and women should have equal rights and opportunities. It is the theory of political, economic and social equality of the sexes.”

*yawn* anyone can use google. We all know the literal definition of feminism. It sounds pretty nice in theory but in practice it turned to a bunch of man bashers and now it will involve a bunch of self-hating men as well thanks to Emma Watson and the UN.

“When I was 8, I was confused for being called bossy because I wanted to direct the plays that we would put on for our parents, but the boys were not.”

Ah you probably made up that story but let’s assume it’s true, it doesn’t make you “oppressed”.  If you were oppressed you wouldn’t be speaking at the UN, they only give voice to attention seeking rich celebrities like yourself to distract the people from the true problems the world is facing right now (see this to know about the agenda of celebrities who involve themselves in politics) . Being a woman doesn’t automatically place you among the oppressed people except in the identity politics nonsense, then Hillary Clinton would be oppressed as well and criticizing her would make one “sexist”(hello political correctness).

Now some white supremacist will come and say “she should see how women are oppressed in the Middle East, then she would shut up about oppression”. I’m a Middle Eastern woman and I’m not oppressed and if I were I’d solve my problems by myself. No, we don’t need your NGOs, your drones, or feminism, or liberalism or whatever poisonous ideology the west is willing to export to our countries. And what country in the Middle East oppresses women, Iran? Here is what you don’t hear in the (western) media about the situation of Iranian women.

“I decided that I was a feminist, and this seemed uncomplicated to me. But my recent research has shown me that feminism has become an unpopular word. Women are choosing not to identify as feminists.”

…and that makes them traitors to the cause, right? Or they have, what is it called…”internalized misogyny”.

“Apparently, I’m among the ranks of women whose expressions are seen as too strong, too aggressive, isolating, and anti-men. Unattractive, even.”

Too strong, no. Too aggressive, no. Attention seeking, yes.

“Why has the word become such an uncomfortable one? I am from Britain, and I think it is right I am paid the same as my male counterparts.”

I was about to give a lecture on how the wage gap is a myth because most of the times women simply choose jobs that do not get as much salary as the ones men usually choose but no, probably because Emma Watson knows the truth but truth doesn’t serve the feminist propaganda, so …

“I think it is right that I should be able to make decisions about my own body.”

When feminists says this, they mean abortion, probably. Even though in that issue it’s not just the woman’s body concerned, it’s also the body inside her, but who cares anyway when there’s the ego of a feminist involved.

Funny how many (right-wingers usually) blame socialism/communism over this feminist mumbo jumbo, because all I see in it is an egoistic liberal mentality of private property, selfishness, individualism and “MY body…MY choice…MY life…MY MY MY…ME ME ME…”

“I think it is right that women be involved on my behalf in the policies and decisions that will affect my life.”

And who says women aren’t involved in decision-making concerning their issues and all issues? I mean they do vote nowadays right?

“My life is a sheer privilege because my parents didn’t love me less because I was born a daughter…”

Finally, she admitted that she’s privileged not oppressed…

“…My school did not limit me because I was a girl. My mentors didn’t assume that I would go less far because I might give birth to a child one day. These influences were the gender equality ambassadors that made me who I am today. They may not know it, but they are the inadvertent feminists that are changing the world today. We need more of those.”

Um, nope. They aren’t feminists, they are just decent human beings with common sense, which you lack. Why do you like to label people and classify them as “feminist” and “non-feminist”. Feminism is an IDEOLOGY, following it doesn’t make one a decent person, and NOT following it doesn’t make one a bad person… And being a decent person doesn’t make one a feminist, and being a bad person doesn’t make one a non-feminist. Those feminists consider their ideology as religious extremism, if one doesn’t follow it (especially if she’s a woman) they scream “TRAITOR!”,”INFIDEL!”, etc… and they exactly act as a religious cult with ex-communication and so on.

“And if you still hate the word, it is not the word that is important. It’s the idea and the ambition behind it, because not all women have received the same rights I have. In fact, statistically, very few have.”

No, we don’t hate the word, because it sounds good in theory, but we do hate the idea and ambition behind it, which is seeking attention, spreading propaganda, intervening in foreign countries, destroying societies, destroying morals, encouraging promiscuity, promoting moral degeneracy, encouraging murder (abortion), hating men and also women who do not agree with you. Go back to Harry Potter.

emmaw

“In 1997, Hillary Clinton made a famous speech in Beijing about women’s rights. Sadly, many of the things that she wanted to change are still true today.”

Hillary Clinton cares very much about women she even bombs them with drones…

“But what stood out for me the most was that less than thirty percent of the audience were male. How can we effect change in the world when only half of it is invited or feel welcome to participate in the conversation?”

Well, let me tell you dear Emma Watson that maybe, just maybe, these women who attended felt OBLIGED to attend so that feminists like yourself won’t bash them and call them traitors. Men do not feel it as their “duty” to attend which if they do not do, they get “ex communicated”. But now you want to make it the duty of men as well… you want to expand the tyranny of the feminist cult to involve men as well.

“Men, I would like to take this opportunity to extend your formal invitation.”

There you go.

“Because to date, I’ve seen my father’s role as a parent being valued less by society, despite my need of his presence as a child, as much as my mother’s. I’ve seen young men suffering from mental illness, unable to ask for help for fear it would make them less of a man. In fact, in the UK, suicide is the biggest killer of men between 20 to 49, eclipsing road accidents, cancer and coronary heart disease. I’ve seen men made fragile and insecure by a distorted sense of what constitutes male success. Men don’t have the benefits of equality, either.”

Ok you do acknowledge that men are also oppressed but why do you call the campaign #HeForShe if so, if you claim that it is supposed to help both men and women? Why not #HeForSheAndSheForHe or just #EveryoneForEveryone? You try to lure men by addressing their problems but the name of the campaign says it all, you want men to hand women everything on a silver plate, I wouldn’t call this empowering for women at all. I’d call it sexist against both men and women and reassigning of gender roles instead of destroying them.

On the campaign’s official FB page the description is “UN Women’s Solidarity Movement for Gender Equality bringing together one half of humanity in support of the other half of humanity, for the benefit of all.”

heforshe

It does NOT say the two halves should support each other. Instead, ONE (men) should support the other (women).

“We don’t often talk about men being imprisoned by gender stereotypes, but I can see that they are, and that when they are free, things will change for women as a natural consequence.”

So according to you, men will only be free if they submit to servitude for women and join your campaign of “white knights“. So from what I understand, your ultimate goal is to free women, and freeing men from gender stereotypes is a mean not an end?

“If men don’t have to be aggressive in order to be accepted, women won’t feel compelled to be submissive. If men don’t have to control, women won’t have to be controlled.”

Thus men should become controlled by self-absorbed women like yourself…

“I want men to take up this mantle so that their daughters, sisters, and mothers can be free from prejudice, but also so that their sons have permission to be vulnerable and human too, reclaim those parts of themselves they abandoned, and in doing so, be a more true and complete version of themselves.”

If it’s also for their sons, then, again, why did you call it HE for SHE?

“You might be thinking, “Who is this Harry Potter girl, and what is she doing speaking at the UN?” And, it’s a really good question. I’ve been asking myself the same thing.”

I’ll give you the answer – you’re spreading propaganda and promoting the UN.

“Because the reality is that if we do nothing, it will take seventy-five years, or for me to be nearly 100, before women can expect to be paid the same as men for the same work.”

*repeats herself* wage gap is a myth

“15.5 million girls will be married in the next 16 years as children. And at current rates, it won’t be until 2086 before all rural African girls can have a secondary education.”

Don’t pretend now that you care about African girls. The government of your country and all those of big western countries and the UN as well are the ones who oppressed Africans, men and women. You remind me of an Arabic poem verse which says “cure me with the disease itself”…

“If you believe in equality, you might be one of those inadvertent feminists that I spoke of earlier, and for this, I applaud you.”

If you believe men should treat women like helpless children and damsels in distress, you might be some brainwashed simpleton, and for this, I applaud you…

“We are struggling for a uniting word, but the good news is, we have a uniting movement. It is called HeForShe. I invite you to step forward, to be seen and to ask yourself, “If not me, who? If not now, when?””

When people stop buying into this useless feminist crap, hopefully.

emma-malala

We can safely call Emma Watson the white Beyoncé. The latter pretends to empower women of color while investing in sweatshops, and Emma Watson is supposed to be an idol for white women.

Beyonce-UN-21

 

Whether male or female, black or white, we can empower ourselves by ourselves, we don’t need a superwoman or a superman or an idol wearing a cape to descend on us from the sky and empower us, especially if they are a part of the Hollywood elite. Now if a leader comes from within the people and their aspirations I would gladly follow him/her, but not someone shoved down our throats by the UN, the ruling establishment and their media outlets.

heforshe1

Don’t follow leaders/activists whom the media and NGOs love, look for those who are defamed and hated, who knows, you might find the inspiration and empowerment you’re looking for in them.

Solidarity with Dilma Rousseff and Lula Da Silva against a “Brazilian Spring”

 

lularousseff.jpg_1718483346

Let’s face it, European left (and even the Lebanese left) sold out to rich businessmen and corporate NGOs – but not the Latin American left. However, those NGOs, rich businessmen and whoever controls them are NOT pleased that the leftist movement in Latin America is a genuine grassroot movement that opposes US government’s domination over the countries’ resources, economy and policies.

That’s why the operations started to undermine the “Pink Tide“. Huge propaganda from the opposition-controlled media in Venezuela against the ruling left-wing party PSUV (United Socialist Party of Venezuela) lead to the victory of the opposition in the latest parliamentary election in December 2015. That was the first time in 16 years in which the Venezuelan opposition wins over the leftist ruling party in the parliamentary elections.

In Bolivia, the majority voted (in a recent referendum) against the current leftist president Evo Morales running for re-election in 2019. In Argentina, after 8 years of the leftist rule of Cristina Fernández de Kirchner, a right-wing president was elected in December 2015. Is all this to show that the end of the “Pink Tide” begun?

 

The answer to this question remains open. However, it seems that the turn of the largest country in the continent finally came. It appears that the Brazilian opposition won’t even let the president Dilma Rousseff (of the Workers’ Party) continue her presidential term, same as the Venezuelan right-wing not wanting to let the president Nicolas Maduro continue his term in the presidential office (having a majority in the parliament is not enough for them).

silva

The opposition, as usual, uses its most strategic weapon: the media. The Brazilian right-wing media has been linking Rousseff, as well as the ex-president Luiz Inácio Lula da Silva (also from the ruling Workers’ Party) to a corruption scandal. Both of them have been demonized without any proof against them. Despite that some other politicians of the opposition are also suspected to be involved in that scandal, the media only focuses on Rousseff, da Silva and the Workers’ Party.

Then, president Rousseff appointed da Silva as chief of staff, and opponents suspected that she did this so that he can get away with impunity, though he could still be subjected to the authority of the Brazilian Supreme Court.

brazil
anti-government protests in Brazil (image source)

Protests erupted against the ruling party, with coverage from mainstream and western media of course. If those protests were really anti-corruption they would have held ALL those who are suspected to be involved in the scandal as accountable, instead of accusing the president without a proof. Those protests are clearly politically-motivated and have nothing to do with fighting corruption. This won’t be the first time in which the fight against corruption is used for dubious political purposes. Corruption is something which exists in many countries and should be combated by the people within the country, and by reforms, not through protests (stirred by a suspicious agenda from the media) which might turn into a military coup, to bring a government of dictatorship to power which contributes to transform the Latin continent into a “backyard” of the USA as it used to be in the past.

Having opposition parties is necessary for any democratic country. But sometimes there is “opposition” that is not aiming for the benefit of the country but for serving US agenda, and if it is allowed to carry out its activities (that are funded by multi-millionaires and backed by foreign NGOs and think tanks), it might lead the country to end up like Syria or Libya. Brazilians definitely don’t want their country to end up like that.

What is going on in Brazil is a part of a planned attack against the spread of leftist governments in that area. The remaining left-wing governments there must be able to withstand the challenge so that Latin America would remain anti-imperialist.

Say NO to an “Arab Spring” in Brazil! Say no to “regime change” because that change won’t be to the better!

 

 

 

Stop “Revolutionizing” celebrities: they ARE a part of the elite!

The world establishment infiltrates causes and directs them to its own benefit. An example mentioned previously here  is the environmental cause, as well as the Palestinian cause through movements like BDS which are highly “politically correct” when it comes to “anti-semitism”; whatever that phrase means…probably means any ideology that is against the illegal state of israel and its genocide against Palestinians. The African American cause is no exception in infiltration, with famous pop singers promoting it and making it “cool”.

Usually NGOs are used to infiltrate causes, as well as celebrities, due to their popularity and “fanbase”. Never, ever put your hopes in celebrities (or NGOs) supporting your cause – because they don’t give a crap about your cause; they only care to please whoever controls them, whether it’s their management, sponsors, or record label. I know it is harsh, but true. Truth will hurt you, shock you, and even offend you. But better than the rosy image you fantasize about.

If those famous actors and singers were genuine supporters of any good cause that contradicts with the interests of the elite (which controls everything from the food you eat till what you see on TV), would they be promoted in the media? Would their music videos be played on MTV? Would their albums sell millions of copies despite them “artists” having little or no talent? Definitely no. The establishment (and the media) won’t promote a true revolutionary or a “dissident voice”. But it makes celebrities APPEAR rebellious anyway. Why? So that they can indoctrinate YOU.

The most recent example is Beyoncé, paying a “tribute” to African American revolutionaries through her performance in the Super Bowl Halftime show, with her stage dancers dressed as Black Panthers (African American radicals).

beyonce1

The activist Ajamu Baraka perfectly explained here what I think about the implication of Beyoncé’s Super Bowl performance; I have nothing else to add. In his own words:

“No folks, real opposition to this white supremacist, colonialist/imperialist order is not cool, or sexy. Being a black revolutionary means the possibility of death, it can mean facing decades of incarceration as a political prisoner, it can mean exile or the inability to make a living because your liberal friends consider you dangerous. It is facing the naked power of the national security state with its power to engage in extra-judicial murder with impunity, surveillance and infiltration.”

Yet, people still look up to B as “progressive” and view her as the mother goddess of modern African American feminism. Have they forgotten that she participated in a campaign to ban the word “bossy” (because it was considered as oppressive for women) along with Condolezza Rice who is the most un-progressive black women ever! And this censorship of of words and speech is not “progressive” or “empowering”, it is an Orwellian elite strategy to ban the freedom of expression. Its goal isn’t really to stop people from calling ambitious, charismatic women “bossy”… But it is to stop YOU from calling the elite “bossy”!

banbossybeyonce-455x246

In short, stop looking up to B as “progressive”, whatever that word means, because faux-leftists ruined its meaning anyway.

Another elite puppet previously mentioned here is Azealia Banks. She compared African Americans to Jews, which follows the agenda to victimize Jews so that whatever atrocities they commit against Palestinians become forgivable. You might consider this view as “anti-semitic” or whatever but you know what, this is a space free of your “political correctness”. African Americans and Jews can not be compared, you know why? Here’s the difference: African Americans are oppressed but are not committing genocide against anyone, while Zionists are committing genocide in the name of Judaism and they feel they have the right to because of past oppression they have been through themselves.

And then, Azealia promotes the “New-Age” pseudo-spirituality saying that it will empower African Americans if they embrace it; assuming that it was their “Old Religion” before they became Christian (fun fact: New Age movements started in the end of 19th & the beginning of 20th century). The role of New-Age movements in the rise of faux-leftists needs a separate post on its own, so let’s just stick to our topic now.

Azealia, like Beyoncé, pretends to be “progressive” and rebellious and all the hip-cool anarcho-leftist labels you can come up with, while pushing the same old elite agenda concerning the israel issue, and promoting the New-Age thing that is a pseudo-religion which the elite wants the people to embrace instead of of Christianity, Islam… This is the same kind of false rebellion/controlled opposition which the elite wants us to follow instead of genuine grassroot opposition.

And then Azealia complains…

azealiabanks

Really? Listen, dearie, if the establishment had any problem with you, would your videos be played on MTV? Would your songs be among the top hits? Would we even know you exist? You ARE a part of the establishment, being a black woman does not automatically place you among an oppressed social class. Don’t fool people to think you’re a female Malcolm X just because you didn’t get an award, while you ARE a part of the profit-oriented capitalist 1%.

And “opinionated black women”? Who is she kidding now? By the mainstream standard which Azealia herself abides by as well, Beyoncé also is an “opinionated black woman” while she drowns in awards, and performs in a huge event in which she promotes black revolution! What more could an “opinionated black woman” wish for?

Let’s move to Angelina Jolie, the philanthropic queen. She says she supports the Palestinian cause while her father, John Voight, is the biggest Zionist in Hollywood, and she herself is pretty much a hypocrite.

angelinajolie1

She says beautiful words such as:

“I respect all religions. What I don’t respect is when people use religion to attack others. I’ve met people across the world, in the middle of nowhere, who are just trying to survive and all they have is religion. In some way it helps them, and I wouldn’t take it away from them. There are also people who use it to hate and kill. I don’t consider them religious people.”

…and then she openly supports Syrian rebels. Don’t these use religion to kill?

When I see Arabs especially idolizing her all I think of is “sheeple” to be honest.

syrianrev

 Oh, and dear Angelina, taking kids from Asia won’t make you the Mother Teresa of Hollywood.

Beyoncé (and Azealia) infiltrate the African American cause, and Angelina Jolie is for our Arab causes. The latter also supported a campaign  called “KONY 2012”. Many celebrities such as George Clooney, Oprah Winfrey and others were a part of this campaign, which demands that the US interferes in Uganda because of some warlord there, whether he’s dead or alive, nobody knows. This is the exact modus operandi: make people THEMSELVES demand that the US spreads its “democracy” and “liberal values” everywhere, because of some warlord or a “dictator”.

angelinajolie

Some would say that such celebrities caring for causes is not bad, they are using their popularity to gain support for good causes. But, again, what kind of “good causes” they are?

Is Jared Leto‘s support for the “rebels” in Ukraine and Venezuela (who are backed by the multi-millionaire George Soros and the US government through National Endowment For Democracy) a good cause? Is censoring speech a good cause? The African American cause is a good cause, but would performing a sexy dance in the Super Bowl halftime help African Americans in any way? You know whom that helps? Not African Americans – not anyone who is oppressed, but it helps the enemies of humanity, and of all free people and nations!

“The Oscar Apartheid”: Why “diversity” is bad for oppressed people

You might have heard all the outrage which the Oscar caused by nominating 20 actors who were all white for the second year in row. Dissatisfaction was expressed all over social media. George Clooney expressed his dissatisfaction as well. Other actors like Will Smith wanted to boycott the Awards. All because of the lack of representation of racial minorities and other groups such as people who are disabled, LGBT community, etc…

Academy_Award_trophy

However, one did manage to say the truth: Sir Michael Caine. And I respect him for that:

“In the end you can’t vote for an actor because he’s black. You can’t say ‘I’m going to vote for him, he’s not very good, but he’s black, I’ll vote for him’.”

He wants nominees to be picked based on talent. Not based on race or gender or something which they didn’t choose themselves. Any person with common sense would want that.

I bet he got a lot of hate from those “radical leftists” because nowadays, saying the truth is not allowed.

This issue of diversity and representation of minorities is not only pushed in the Oscar. It is being pushed everywhere in our daily life, no need to dig too much or do excessive research to find out.

For example:

“Future US president should be a woman”

So that’s the only criteria for a person to be eligible to become a president? To be a woman?

Hillary_Clinton_official_Secretary_of_State_portrait_crop

This lady will make the worst president if you ask me…

I’m not American anyway so let me talk about my country. Here in Lebanon, NGOs, “civil society” and so on  call for the “representation of women and youth in the parliament”. Well, here’s an unpopular opinion: our MPs should be chosen based on their merit, not sex or age. Or you’ll just put women there even if they aren’t qualified; just because they’re women?!

I’m not saying we don’t already have unqualified people in the parliament – of course we do! But shall we make it worse by adding more unqualified people? We definitely have qualified women I’m sure – but the main criteria for those who call for representation of women is that the candidates are…women.

Let’s leave politics for a second and go back to the movie industry. “Radical leftists”, “social justice warriors” and online “activists” keep on calling for representation of minorities in the movies, TV shows, etc…They judge movies/shows based on how much of their main characters are representative of different groups.

Writers of the ABC show “Once Upon A Time” get slandered a lot on social media and called names, because the majority of the characters in that show are – guess what – white. Except Regina whom those keyboard warriors call a “woman of color” because the actress who plays her role is Latina…even though technically she’s white (are they colorblind or what?), see for yourself:

Regina-2x1-the-evil-queen-regina-mills-33147669-1280-720

Admire her talent! NOT her ethnicity or gender!

Why does it matter so much what the color of the skin is? The only thing that is supposed to matter is that the actors are professionals and the characters are rich in personality and have an interesting storyline. Who gives a damn whether they’re black or white or whatever? “Radical leftists” and fanatic keyboard warriors do.

And then they start saying “haven’t the OUAT writers heard of diversity? For heaven’s sake we’re in the 21st century!” Well honey if you have a problem then don’t watch the show and stop whining. Do you expect the show to add for you characters just for the sake of diversity even if the actors are bad (“who cares, they’re colored!!”) or the characters don’t have a proper storyline?

Or go ahead, show us your talent, make your own story and put in it queers and “women of color” as much as you want!

Let’s talk about the famous animation blockbuster, Disney’s Frozen. It caused many objections because “oh damn, another white Disney princess”.

frozen_elsa-2048x1536

For Odin’s sake the story of the movie takes place in ANCIENT NORWAY. What did you expect the Norwegian princess to be, black? Because to hell with history for the sake of diversity and representation of minorities!!! Some even wanted the princess in Frozen part 2 to come out as a lesbian…yeah right, as if there were openly lesbians in ancient Norway.

200_s

Some even started drawing Elsa as they imagine her if she were a “woman of color”:

tumblr_nip2hsLTl11rqsahko1_500
Image source

Nice drawing, but… If you want an African princess I’d be more convinced if she wore an actual traditional Africa dress…this Frozen dress is too European…

africa1africa2africa3

Here are ideas for you guys.

(Images found here, here & here)

And I’m not a fan of Disney but it’s not like they never had a “woman of color” as the heroine in animations… Pocahontas, anyone? (it got criticism for historical inaccuracy but that’s not the point here).

So back to our topic – what is all this about? Why is all this pushing for “diversity” which:

  1. contradicts history
  2. appoints nominees, actors, politicians etc based on things they don’t themselves choose instead of merit or talent?

Who benefits from all this? Is the Oscar some kind of an “Apartheid” regime so that they call for integration of “people of color” in it?

And most importantly – what do actual, ordinary “people of color” gain from this “diversity”? Or let me use the expression “people of third world countries” because “people of color” sounds racist especially when used for Arabs, because we’re white, and in fact some of us are even “whiter” than Europeans. Many Latinos as well are white (like the actress mentioned above) and it’s also racist to call them “PoC” just because they’re not as white as Europeans.

If the next Disney princess is black, how would this benefit black people? The US has a black president for God’s sake, did this improve the situation of black people there? Definitely no, it even became worse.

It’s like those “activists” and NGOs who pretend to be “pro-Palestinian” but all they’re busy with is begging Alicia Keys and Madonna to cancel their concerts in israel. Because once those concerts are cancelled, the whole problems of Palestinians would be magically solved, wouldn’t they? 

The reason why this united-colors-of-benetton-type diversity is pushed by NGOs is that they want to make oppressed people all over the world (in western countries and in their own countries) be busy with useless pseudo-causes which won’t benefit them, such as representation in the media and so on… to divert their attention from the main issues which directly affect them: globalization, capitalism, dictator rulers imposed by western governments on third world countries, israeli occupation of Palestine, etc… and to make them feel like the west compensated for them for all those years of slavery and colonialism, by – guess what – diversity.

In short, this “diversity” is bad for the oppressed people. And for all people. And no, keyboard warriors, it’s not some “white male afraid of losing his privilege”. Middle-Eastern female here. We DON’T want this diversity!

Peace.

 

 

 

Religion, Rebellion and Zionist Infiltrators

To begin, the person who caused me to write this post is the African American rap singer Azealia Banks. She’s known for being an activist promoting causes of black people and causing online controversy for her opinions. Also, she’s into the neo-pagan Wicca thing.

banks

Once I mentioned Wicca on this blog in a post about The Mists of Avalon. It’s one of those neo-pagan New Age religions that were created in the 20th century and that mix magic with rituals and practices from many religions out there and create new faiths which appeal to hippies, fantasy/sci-fi fans, radical environmentalists and teeny girls who want to rebel against Christianity. Some followers of those new faiths claim that they were the “Old Religion” where the society was peaceful and matriarchal before Christianity came and imposed patriarchy. The truth is that the church did impose patriarchy, but before it was EQUALITY, not “matriarchy” or whatever…

banks3
Azealia with a Wiccan symbol behind her in one of her music videos. Source

Now let’s get back to the singer Azealia Banks. To quote her:

“I wonder if most of the black American Christians in the US know WHY they are Christian. I wonder if they even consider for a SECOND that before their ancestors came to the Americas that they may have believed in something ELSE.”

“But really, it’s all about magic. The most magical people are the ones who have to deal with oppression, because the non-magical are jealous. That’s why Jews and Blacks have been persecuted over and over again throughout history. because they have the most magic … all I’m trying to say is that black people are naturally born SEERS, DIVINERS, WITCHES AND WIZARDS. we have REAL supernatural powers, and the sooner we ALL learn to cultivate them and access them, the sooner we can REALLY fix sh*t.”

Source

Okay, okay…First of all, yeah, most likely they weren’t Christian before they were brought to the American continent on ships. But “naturally born SEERS, DIVINERS, WITCHES etc…”?  This is a plain cultural stereotype. What’s the difference between saying that and saying “all Muslims are terrorists, all Asians are nerds, etc…”? You might consider that which Azealia said not as a negative stereotype while others are, but stereotypes are stereotypes, whether positive or negative, and they’re all racist.

Second, this is NOT empowering to black people! Azealia is basically saying that black people can’t be empowered unless they embrace the New Age mumbo jumbo and they need it to be able to overcome oppression and without it they can’t. No dear, to overcome oppression they need to be aware of their situation, embrace their cause, struggle for it and follow the example of their respectful leaders such as Malcolm X, NOT follow the New Age thing which was NOT their religion before Christianity. If they wish to find out about their pre-Christian religion then they have to trace their ancestry back to Africa, which is difficult.

Third, why make parallel between black people and Jews? This is an agenda to promote Jews as an oppressed group so that the world may forgive them and excuse them for the atrocities they’re committing against the Palestinians. And before I get showered with the “omg ur so anti semetic” comments, I have nothing against Judaism as a religion. Inciting religious hatred would make me no different than ISIS.

And what Jews was she talking about? Does she mean Kabbalists? Those were rejected by the rest of the Jewish sects BECAUSE its followers practiced magic! So next time dear Azealia, educate yourself.

Azealia just exposed herself to be a Zionist infiltrating the African American cause (and the sad thing is that she’s not the only one). She wants African Americans to rebel against Christianity. Just to make one thing clear, rebelling against Christianity incites religious hatred which would make one no different than ISIS. What should be done is to rebel against colonialism that was committed in the name of Christianity. Otherwise, let’s also hate Islam as well due to what ISIS is doing. No religion commits atrocities. Only people do. Converting to a newly created religion wouldn’t solve anything. Reforming the currently existing religions would.

And Merry Christmas! 🙂