Month: September 2016

[Note: March 15, 2020— I have revamped the text of this article and posted a correction.]

Greta Zimmer Friedman, who eventually had been identified as the woman in the iconic World War II photo of a couple kissing during a celebration in New York’s Times Square, has died in Virginia at age 92.  The photograph had become controversial due to her recollection of abruptly being grabbed and kissed by a random drunken sailor against her will, and despite her explaining what happened most media outlets refuse to acknowledge that situation.

As an example, a CNN article at this link talks about her death, but it doesn’t mention the fact that she was assaulted or any of the controversy surrounding it.

A Breitbart article describes a situation of feminists demanding that a statue of the couple be removed from Normandy in Northern France.  [Note: March 15, 2020— Previously I said that the article portrayed the feminists as “overreacting,” however actually the article was more unbiased than that, saying in the last paragraph “if both parties are comfortable with the situation then no offense has taken place, as a result it is unlikely a court would uphold the feminists claims about the original incident.”]

The following excerpts are from the article “The Kissing Sailor, or ‘The Selective Blindness of Rape Culture’,” commenting about how mainstream news reports failed to comment on the fact that Freidman was sexually assaulted despite her clearly explaining what had happened:

For a long time, the identity of the pair remained a mystery. It certainly looks passionate and romantic enough, with many speculating that they were a couple – a sailor and a nurse, celebrating and sharing their joy.  This year, however, historians have finally confirmed that the woman is Greta Zimmer Friedman, a dental nurse at the time, and George Mendonsa, a sailor.

Have a look at some articles about it.  Do you get the feeling that something is not quite right?

Huffington Post

Daily Mail

CBS News

A few facts have come to light.  Far from being a kiss between a loving couple, we learn that George and Greta were perfect strangers.  We learn that George was drunk, and that Greta had no idea of his presence, until she was in his arms, with his lips on hers.

The articles even give us Greta’s own words:

“It wasn’t my choice to be kissed.  The guy just came over and grabbed!”

“I did not see him approaching, and before I knew it, I was in this vice grip. [sic]”

“You don’t forget this guy grabbing you.”

“That man was very strong.  I wasn’t kissing him. He was kissing me.”

It seems pretty clear, then, that what George had committed would be considered sexual assault by modern standards.  Yet, in an amazing feat of willful blindness, none of the articles comment on this, even as they reproduce Greta’s words for us.  Without a single acknowledgement of the problematic nature of the photo that her comments reveal, they continue to talk about the picture in a whimsical, reverent manner, “still mesmerized by his timeless kiss.” George’s actions are romanticized and glorified; it is almost as if Greta had never spoken.

From the YouTube page:

As members of Texas Task Force 1, Bretagne and her mom/handler Denise Corliss had an intense first deployment.  They joined nearly 100 other search and rescue dogs to find and save people trapped in the rubble of the World Trade Center after 9/11.  They’ve had an unshakable bond ever since.

After hearing Bretagne’s story and learning that her 16th birthday was coming up, there was no question in our minds that she deserved a Dog’s Best Day for the ages.

To celebrate her birthday and thank her for her incredible service, we were honored to team up with the dog-lovers at 1 Hotels to bring this New York City hero and her mom back to the city for the ultimate Dog’s Best Day.

From the video:  “Should offensive speech be banned?  Where should we, as a society, draw the line where permitted speech is on one side, and forbidden speech is on the other?  Should we even have that line?  And should free speech be limited by things like trigger warnings and punishments for microaggressions?  Greg Lukianoff, president of the Foundation for Individual Rights in Education, answers these questions and more.”

This video shows how resourceful smugglers can be.

 The following is a summary of a Breitbart article: 

The office of the first Muslim mayor of London Sadiq Khan has set aside millions of pounds to fund police operated “online hate crime hubs”  which will work with social media providers to criminalize “trolls” who “target… individuals and communities.”

The London Mayor’s Office for Policing and Crime (MOPAC) will spend £1,730,726 of taxpayer funds to police online speech, as announced in a recent statement.

The program is described as “involving a dedicated police team [backed by] volunteers,” who will be collaborating with social media providers for filtering and identifying online infractions, identifying the locations of the perpetrators, and then allocating “the appropriate force.”

Earlier this year, the EU announced that Facebook, Twitter, YouTube, and Microsoft have “committed” to working more closely with each countries’ national governments and law enforcement agencies to help them “criminalize” supposed “illegal hate speech online.”

Section 127 of the Communications Act of 2003 in the UK is used to prosecute “internet trolls” who “[use a] public electronic communications network in order to cause annoyance, inconvenience or needless anxiety,” and it can result in a six month prison term or a fine up to £5,000.  Convictions for such crimes have increased tenfold in the past decade, where 1,209 people were found guilty compared with 143 in 2004, according to the Ministry of Justice.

Frank Furedi, emeritus professor of sociology at the University of Kent, explained “Pure rants, very childish [people online] are increasingly criminalized, and as a result of that the police is becoming more and more involved in controlling our morality. … [The police are] almost playing the role of a moral police. And instead of dealing with real crime in the offline world, [the police] find its very convenient to ‘send the message’ in the online world because it’s a relatively easy thing to do. … And what I’m really worried about, is that the whole freedom of speech becomes compromised whenever people have to think twice about what they say.”

Section 127 was the law used to prosecute the Northern Irish Pastor James McConnel who made “grossly offensive” remarks about Islam during a sermon which was broadcast online in 2014.  He was subjected to an 18 month police investigation and criminal prosecution, and eventually he was found not guilty.

Also in 2011, a Scottish football fan was sentenced to eight months in prison under section 127 for insulting Celtic fans, Catholics and the Pope on a Facebook page.  Also, during his sentencing, the sheriff told him that “the right-thinking people of Glasgow and Scotland” would not tolerate his views being expressed on the internet.

The following information is summarized from this Mirror UK article: 

Senior officers at the West Midlands Police department in the UK have said that they would discuss allowing burqas to become a part of female police officer uniforms in an effort to “boost diversity.”

Chief constable David Thompson said he would look into employing officers who wear burqas in order to increase black and minority ethnic (BME) officers in the region to 30 percent from the current amount of 9 percent.

Speaking after a meeting last Thursday, Thompson said, “As it stands we have not had any approaches from potential recruits asking to wear the burka, but if such an approach was made it is something we would have to consider.”

The West Midlands police already allows hijab-wearing officers and Sikhs to replace their helmet with a turban.  Hijabs are headscarves that cover the head and neck but leave the face uncovered.

The police announced its latest recruitment drive last week and so far it has received 6,000 applications for 1,100 positions.

Following is a summary of an Express UK article:

A gang of ten men in Toulon, France, verbally assaulted two rollerblading women for wearing “revealing” shorts, and then violently attacked their husbands in front of their children, seriously injuring one of them.  Two of the attackers, aged 17 and 19, were identified from CCTV camera footage and apprehended, and a police investigation is trying to locate the remaining men.

In June, in the same town, a young girl was attacked by a mob of five youths for wearing “offensive” denim “hotpants” while traveling by bus.  A few days later, locals then organized a “short protest,” where hundreds converged to denounce the girl’s attack.

The Clarion Project’s National Security Analyst Ryan Mauro explains to Megan Kelly that an American student was attacked by a Muslim gang in London for drinking a beer, saying that it is a part of a bigger trend of Islamist Muslim patrols enforcing Sharia law in parts of London.

Mauro also explains radical Islamist groups existing in the U.S. such as the Jamaat ul-Fuqra that has large communes around the country, with video existing of guerrilla warfare training happening at its “Islamberg” headquarters in New York state.

This 2016 video by Ann G. Corcoran of Refugee Resettlement Watch explains the “refugee resettlement program” which is a UN backed agenda that was introduced by former Senator Joe Biden and Ted Kennedy in 1980 and was signed into law by President Jimmy Carter.  Since that time it has admitted over 2 million refugees into American towns and cities.

In recent years, the Federal government has been bringing in 60 to 70 thousand middle eastern refugees per year and has placed them in hundreds of US towns and cities in 49 states, where they are sustained by all forms of welfare.

Barak Obama has increased the number of refugees to 85 thousand for this year, 10 thousand of which are Syrian Sunni Muslims, and he vows to bring in 100 thousand more during the next year.  This September, Obama will have his last opportunity to specify bringing in more, but Refugee Resettlement Watch believes he will go way beyond the 100 thousand amount as the “refugee resettlement industry” which is composed of nine federal contractors began a huge propaganda campaign in Washington in late August of 2016.

A recent poorly attended Washington D.C. rally which was funded by the globalist George Soros is a lead-up to a “refugee extravaganza” conference to be held at the United Nations on September 19 and 20 with the involvement of the “Organization of Islamic Cooperation.”   The conference will play host to world leaders in order to make Americans feel guilty about not welcoming poorly vetted Syrian refugees into their neighborhoods.

The timing of the UN event is meant to influence the November election as Hillary Clinton has said that she is in favor of bringing in much larger numbers of refugees, Syrians in particular.  She is on record saying that she wants to bring in 65 thousand Syrians next year in addition to the 100 thousand or more coming from other countries.

Many citizens in towns all over the country are concerned about the influx of inadequately vetted refugees, with many citizens seeing Shariah law mentalities being brought by the newcomers.  Also citizens are seeing zoning fights over locations of Mosques, demands for special prayer breaks at places of employment, and demands for special accommodations in school systems.

Often local companies such as food processing or manufacturing plants are responsible for the refugees being brought into an area by coordinating with the government to supply employment for them in exchange for receiving cheap employment kickbacks from the government.

Congress would be able to reign in the problem of the importation of refugees if enough legislators voted against it.  Republican congressmen would often vote against such agendas.  The companies that are bringing the refugees in are doing so at the instruction of the Federal government and are being funded by the government to do so.  In any event, importation of more refugees should be stopped until the new President sets the tone in 2017.

There are alternatives to the costly and impractical agendas of bringing refugees into the United States, including the creation of “safe zones” in the middle east and Africa where refugees could be cared for until the conflict ends.  Saudi Arabia could be a prime location.

From the YouTube video page:  “Obama has been changing America by changing its people. You know that Hillary Clinton will follow in his footsteps, but you are not powerless! This fall the Republicans can turn off the federal spigot for refugee resettlement if they wanted to—you have to make them want to!”

[Note:  Also see the News of Interest.TV article “The United States has secretively been importing millions of Islamic migrants from overseas for decades (including under Donald Trump).”]

View a video explaining some of the most dysfunctional areas of the United States.