Friday, April 4, 2014

Creeping Totalitarianism And Thought Police





We can see where this is headed. It isn't enough for the emerging 'progressives', fascists, socialists, communists (pick a name) to control our various actions, we have now entered the rhelm of policing your very thoughts. This is another sign of our approaching Tribulation, when the people of the earth will be forced to worship the antichrist. 

This trend, as seen in today's news is hard to deny. Orwell's 1984 is officially here and it is here to stay:









If you do not conform to the new politically correct moral code in America, you cannot be a CEO of a major corporation. If you think that I am joking, just read on. I am actually deadly serious. If you are a young person in America today, what you believe about certain issues is going to determine how high you can climb the ladder in your professional life. In fact, a day is rapidly approaching when anyone that wants to have any measure of professional success in our society is going to have to conform to the moral code. If you choose not to conform, the thought Nazis WILL get you.
Just check out what happened to Mozilla CEO Brendan Eich this week. He was forced out after it was discovered that he had donated $1,000 to support Proposition 8 back in 2008…










Mozilla Chief Executive Brendan Eich has stepped down, the company said on Thursday, after an online dating service urged a boycott of the company’s web browser because of a donation Eich made to opponents of gay marriage.
He broke the politically-correct moral code of the thought Nazis, so he must pay.
It doesn’t matter that 52 percent of the voters in California actually voted in favor of Proposition 8.
It doesn’t matter that this is something that happened six years ago.
It doesn’t even matter that he was really good at his job
While gay activists applauded the move, many in the technology community lamented the departure of Eich, who invented the programming language Javascript and co-founded Mozilla.
“Brendan Eich is a good friend of 20 years, and has made a profound contribution to the Web and to the entire world,” venture capitalist Marc Andreessen tweeted.
He broke the code and so he must pay.
And in case you are wondering, this basically means that anyone who is against gay marriage is now essentially disqualified from being CEO of any major corporation in America.
So if you are a CEO and you are reading this, you better keep your mouth shut if you want to keep your job.
The thought Nazis are monitoring you.
But this isn’t just happening in the private sector. According to a stunning Buzzfeed report, Barack Obama told the top military officers in this country that they could either support the end of Don’t Ask, Don’t Tell or they could resign…
In a meeting with the heads of the five service branches in 2010, President Obama offered the leaders a choice: Support my efforts to end the military’s Don’t Ask, Don’t Tell policy, or resign, the Commandant of the Coast Guard said.
In a video obtained by BuzzFeed via a Freedom of Information Act request, Coast Guard Commandant Adm. Robert Papp revealed that Obama was unwilling to compromise with service leaders over DADT during a meeting in 2010. “We were called into the Oval Office and President Obama looked all five service chiefs in the eye and said, ‘This is what I want to do.’ I cannot divulge everything he said to us, that’s private communications within the Oval Office, but if we didn’t agree with it — if any of us didn’t agree with it — we all had the opportunity to resign our commissions and go do other things,” he said.
Could this have something to do with the widespread purging of the military that has taken place under Obama?
That is a very good question.
But one thing is crystal clear – if you want to rise to the top of the U.S. military in the future, you better conform to the new moral code.

If we continue down this path, what will this nation look like in a few years?
During a recent interview, Dr. Ben Carson compared the current political environment in the United States to Nazi Germany
“[We're] very much like Nazi Germany,” he responded. “And I know you’re not supposed to say ‘Nazi Germany,’ but I don’t care about political correctness. You know, you had a government using its tools to intimidate the population.”
“We now live in a society where people are afraid to say what they actually believe,” he continued. “And it’s because of the PC police, it’s because of politicians, it’s because of news. All of these things are combining to stifle people’s conversation.”
And you know what?
We are becoming more like Nazi Germany with each passing day. In fact, if you want to read much more about this, please see my previous article entitled “25 Signs That America Is Rapidly Becoming More Like Nazi Germany“.
In America, we are supposed to be able to believe what we want to believe.
In recent years, about half of the nation has been in favor of gay marriage and about half the nation has been against it.
Are we now going to tell half the country that they are going to be banned from holding any high position in our society unless they conform to the new moral code?
What kind of country will we have if we do that?





Rumors are floating around Twitter that proof of Brendan Eich’s donation was illegally leaked by people in government sympathetic to the cause of gay marriage. Not so. I’d forgotten about it, but friends reminded me that the LA Times obtained a list of people who gave, for and against, to the fight over the Prop 8 referendum in 2008. They put the whole database online and made it searchable. Search it today and, sure enough, there’s Eich with a $1,000 donation in favor. Under California law, that disclosure is perfectly legal: The state is authorized to provide certain personal information about anyone who donates more than $100 to a ballot measure. Why the state is allowed to do that, I’m not sure.


At the very least, if you’re worried about shadowy interests pouring cash into ads to sway a public referendum, the financial threshold to trigger disclosure should be way, way higher than $100. The Prop 8 donor list now functions essentially as a blacklist, and Eich isn’t its first or only victim. Remember, people who gave to Prop 8 have been harassed and had their property vandalized; the Heritage Foundation issued a report chronicling cases of intimidation back in 2009. Either Eich didn’t know the law when he chipped in 10 times the disclosure amount or he assumed that giving to a political cause as a private citizen wouldn’t cause people he worked with for years to force him out of the company upon conviction of a thoughtcrime. Which, by the way, is what this was. Jonathan Last seizes on the significance of Mozilla chair Mitchell Baker admitting that “I never saw any kind of behavior or attitude from him that was not in line with Mozilla’s values of inclusiveness.” If that’s the case, says Last, why exactly was Eich ousted?

If voting to ban gay marriage is grounds for dismissal, wonders Last, wouldn’t/shouldn’t voting against cap-and-trade be grounds? What about voting against tax hikes on the rich? Eich didn’t oppose gays working for Mozilla. He didn’t oppose them donating to pro-gay causes. He didn’t oppose gay employees from getting married. Or so I assume; if he did, his business partner Baker presumably would have mentioned it. He engaged in a private, perfectly legal act of expression, and now he’s out on his ear for it. Even Andrew Sullivan, who’s spent decades championing the cause of gay marriage, is horrified at his ouster.








[Just watch the video to see the absurdity in this story]




A Connecticut community college suspended a student after he approached Gov. Dannel Malloy and asked him several questions about gun control laws, according to the Daily Caller.


Nicholas Saucier, a student at Asnuntuck Community College in Enfield, recorded video of a conversation in October 2013 with Malloy, a Democrat, who was speaking at ACC that day. Saucier tried to get Malloy to answer questions about his support for gun control legislation, which has put Saucier’s ammunition manufacturing business in jeopardy. The conversation was halted abruptly when Malloy got into his car and left.
The Daily Caller reported:
Shortly thereafter, Saucier received notice from the administration that he was suspended on grounds that his “continued presence on campus would present a danger to the persons, property and/or academic process of the College.”
The student was officially charged with engaging in harassment and showing disrespect for Malloy, in violation of ACC’s student code. Administrators claimed that Saucier became increasingly hostile, called Malloy a “[f***ing] snake,” and reached into his pocket for something that could have been a weapon (it was actually a video recording device.)
“Being pushy isn’t against the law … he was perfectly within his constitutional rights,” Peter Bonilla, director of the Individual Rights Program at the Foundation for Individual Rights in Education, told TheBlaze.
Bonilla’s organization has come to the student’s defense; FIRE called on Asnuntuck Community College to drop its disciplinary action against Saucier, saying the college deprived the student of crucial due process protections, and refused to review “exculpatory video evidence,” according to their website.

“College students, like every citizen have an expectation to speak with their elected officials,”
Bonilla said. “These kinds of conversations are common and directly engaging with elected officials is constitutional.”
Saucier followed Malloy to his vehicle while filming the entire encounter, and was eventually restrained by the college president and later escorted off the campus by a security officer, according to Bonilla.






Imagine going to work one day only to be, in effect, fired -- not because of anything you did or didn’t do at your job, but because of something you did in your personal life.  Something religious.  Or maybe, something political.
Imagine if you were denied a promotion at work because a co-worker found out you had made a personal donation to a conservative candidate.  Imagine if your environmentally-correct boss discovered that, in your free time at home, you supported an organization that exposed the fallacies of man-made global warming and asked you for your resignation.  Imagine if you were the successful CEO of Widget Corp, lauded and respected for your accomplishments, but clients or customers found out you were a tea partier and demanded you be forced out.

That’s exactly what happened to Brendan Eich, a highly-respected tech guru in Silicon Valley and co-founder of Mozilla Corporation, after he was appointed CEO in late March.  In less than a week, he was forced out of this position for no reason other than that he had a made a $1000 contribution to the Prop 8 initiative in 2008.  His own money.  On his own time.  In his private capacity.  Mozilla had nothing to do with it.  Nor did he discuss gay marriage at work.

Eich clearly has more sense in his little pinky than the “aggrieved” have collectively.  But still, this is one of the saddest days in America -- a nation founded on religious liberty, a nation that has fought to protect the civil liberties of its citizens from encroachment by the state or abuse by employers, landlords and other institutions.  It now seems that anyone can be punished for his or her religious, moral or political beliefs by well-funded mobs that can exert economic pressure on one’s employer.   These are the tactics of closed societies behind the Iron Curtain; not the shining city on the hill. 
This isn’t new:  we have seen it take place on a national level with Chick-fil-A.  Many of us have seen people outed at work for their support of Prop 8.  Busloads of angry mobsters have descended on the private property of CEOs.  We have seen Tea Parties shaken down by the IRS. We know there is a Hollywood blacklist for conservatives.  It has been a slow trickle that is fast turning into a full stream. 
This is NOT about Prop 8, gay marriage and religion.  That is just the context in which this latest abuse has come to be.  It is about the freedom -- in your personal life -- to believe as you do, support the candidates and issues you want, and to be left in peace to do so without fear of recrimination at the place where you make your livelihood. 


If competent individuals can be fired at work for their personal stances on issues that they do not bring into the workplace, then we are no longer in a free and open society, but a very tightly closed one where fear reigns and keeps us all under control--where our beliefs must yield to pre-set political and religious dogma we are force fed.   
Not only is it hard to swallow that something like this could happen in our country, it is hard to fathom how anyone can be so self-righteous, so emboldened, to think it a perfectly good idea to socially engineer society with the same iron fists as history's liberty-crushing despots.   All of that talk about equality, justice, liberty, tolerance and diversity, is just talk.  It’s a one way street leading to oppression.  And so frenzied are they with their viewpoints -- so intent on crushing any opposing ideas-- that they are blinded to their own bigotry. 
So now, no longer is it just the government that can single you out, punish and persecute you for being a patriot or a tea partier.  Now, your employer can as well.  And then, maybe your landlord.  And, why not the local hospital?  And what about your kids in school?  For those of you from the old USSR, you know, this was how it was done.  Stick to the party line, keep quiet, support the state…and you keep your job and get assigned a small apartment.  If you don’t, your kids suffer in school, your boss makes life difficult at work and don’t be surprised if your electricity doesn’t work.  Take on the entire system, become a dissident or refusnik, and it’s off to Siberia.  You’ll be lucky if you live.







A British-Iranian woman, Roya Saberi Negad Nobakht, has spent the last five months in Tehran’s notorious Evin Prison for writing on Facebook that Iran’s government was “too Islamic.” Arrested during a visit to Iran to visit family members, she has been charged with “insulting Islamic sanctities.” British authorities are indignant about this affront to the freedom of speech – but given the prevailing eagerness to avoid insulting Islamic sanctities in the U.S. as well as Britain, it is hard to see why.


Nobakht’s husband, Daryoush Taghipoor is worried: “It’s a very bad situation. We don’t know what’s going on. Roya is not well at all. She has lost three stone and is frightened. She is scared that the government will kill her.”


Yet the odd thing about this story is that while Amnesty International and the British government are offended that Roya Saberi Negad Nobakht could be executed in Iran for “insulting Islamic sanctities,” in Britain (and America as well) it is a de facto crime to insult Islamic sanctities. It won’t get you prison (yet), but it will get you public abuse, insults, the savaging of your reputation, and ostracism from circles of the politically correct and self-styled right-thinking folk. Prison is just the next step. 



After all, the British government banned me from entering the country for saying that Islam is “a religion and is a belief system that mandates warfare against unbelievers for the purpose for establishing a societal model that is absolutely incompatible with Western society” – a manifestly true statement that is not controversial to anyone who has studied Islam. 


Just days before Pamela Geller and I were banned, the British government admitted Saudi Sheikh Mohammed al-Arefe. Al-Arefe has said:

“Devotion to jihad for the sake of Allah, and the desire to shed blood, to smash skulls, and to sever limbs for the sake of Allah and in defense of His religion, is, undoubtedly, an honor for the believer. Allah said that if a man fights the infidels, the infidels will be unable to prepare to fight.”

Al-Arefe said essentially what I said – that Islam mandates warfare against unbelievers. The principal difference, aside from the fact that al-Arefe put it much more graphically than I did, was that al-Arefe is for jihad violence against non-Muslims, and I am against it. The British government banned me, in other words, for insulting Islamic sanctities – for daring to oppose the Islamic supremacist project of subjugating the world under Islamic world.







A U.S. Air Force base’s decision to remove a symbolic display honoring missing troops because of its inclusion of a Bible has angered some veterans.

Missing Man Tables are traditionally setup in the armed forces to honor soldiers who are missing or who have not returned from combat.
In addition to a Bible, they typically include a white table cloth, an inverted glass, a yellow ribbon, a red rose and a plate, among other elements.
Michael Tater, a 64-year-old Vietnam War vet, recently noticed that the POW/MIA Missing Man Table he typically saw at the Riverside Dining Facility at Patrick Air Force Base in Cocoa Beach, Fla., was missing, Florida Today reported.
According to the National League of POW/MIA Families’ list of items traditionally present at these tables, the Bible is mentioned as having both a spiritual and patriotic purpose.
“The Bible represents the strength gained through faith in our country, founded as one nation under God, to sustain those lost from our midst,” reads a description.
A representative for Patrick Air Force Base told TheBlaze that officials do not yet have a press release with information on how the table will be reintroduced and TheBlaze’s inquiries surrounding the situation have not been answered.





A city board on Thursday gave a Muslim group the go-ahead to remove six crosses from the roof and spires of a century-old former Catholic church so the now-vacant Gothic structure can be used as a mosque.



In a meeting with the heads of the five service branches in 2010, President Obama offered the leaders a choice: Support my efforts to end the military’s Don’t Ask, Don’t Tell policy, or resign, the Commandant of the Coast Guard said.
In a video obtained by BuzzFeed via a Freedom of Information Act request, Coast Guard Commandant Adm. Robert Papp revealed that Obama was unwilling to compromise with service leaders over DADT during a meeting in 2010. “We were called into the Oval Office and President Obama looked all five service chiefs in the eye and said, ‘This is what I want to do.’ I cannot divulge everything he said to us, that’s private communications within the Oval Office, but if we didn’t agree with it — if any of us didn’t agree with it — we all had the opportunity to resign our commissions and go do other things,” he said.











 

2 comments:

Mrs.C said...

Just an update on the bison in Yellowstone supposedly running out of the park. SMH No surprise, just another fake internet rumor where the truth got twisted once again...they were running INTO the park, NOT away from it. Its happens every Spring!

"The Very Important Detail About That Video of Bison ‘Running for Their Lives’ Out of Yellowstone"

http://www.theblaze.com/stories/2014/04/04/the-very-important-detail-about-that-video-of-bison-running-for-their-lives-out-of-yellowstone/



This nonsense was so rampant on the internet, that the Parks Service even made their own Youtube video called - 3/31/14
Minute Out In It - Rumor Control
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=l1vwuBA6Gfk


David Pearson said...

If they are smart, they will be running into the park.................where hunting isn't allowed!

David P