News Is What Somebody Does Not Want You To Print. All the Rest Is Advertising. — Reuven Frank, Former head of NBC News

News Is What Somebody Does Not Want You To Print. All the Rest Is Advertising. — Reuven Frank, Former head of NBC News. The PC mob — who today are in charge of nearly all the opinion-forming organizations in society such as the media, academia, bureaucracy and NGOs — do not argue for their positions as much as suppress any facts that do  not support them. Thus, their main weapon is to lie by omission.

Why Are Accused Sexual Harassers Overwhelmingly on the Left?

Why Are Accused Sexual Harassers Overwhelmingly on the Left? By Avner Zarmi.

While there has been plenty of sleaze to go around, as the cases of Roger Ailes, Bill O’Reilly, and possibly Roy Moore all indicate, such cases among figures of the Left seem to outnumber those on the Right by at least a factor of ten to one, and therein lies the problem.

“Free love” has been a feature of the revolutionary Left as long as there has been a revolutionary Left. The Communist Manifesto recommends the abolition of the family, and advocates that any resultant children be raised as wards of the state. In other words, the current “rule” that there are no rules is a creature of the Left, an artifact of the growing secularization of Western society. …

First, let us please acknowledge that men and women are not interchangeable pieces in some vast social board game. They simply aren’t. …

“Sex” is a biological imperative; “gender” a mere grammatical category that may or may not have any relationship to sex. … So let’s return to calling things by their proper names instead of euphemisms; we are discussing sex, not gender.

Now, one of the manifold differences between men and women — for our purpose, the single most important one — is what constitutes sexual stimuli. Normal, heterosexual men are “hard-wired,” as it were, to respond in certain ways to certain stimuli; if you don’t believe this, there is a multi-billion-dollar male-centered pornographic industry that depends upon it. Every attempt to foster such an industry based on similar stimuli for women has foundered because women are different. This “hard-wired” response does not mean that every man is a pig and rapist; it can be controlled. But it does mean that it has to be acknowledged and taken into account, by reasonable modesty of feminine dress, as well as by traditional rules of social engagement, of which the much-ridiculed “Pence rule” is a common-sense variety.

There are, in reality, virtually no fields in which promotions and pay raises legitimately depend on alcohol-fueled tête-à-têtes. The one possible exception is the entertainment industry.

In no other field does one find such a concentration of young, attractive, ambitious women seeking the patronage and help of powerful producers, directors, and stars, many of whom happen to be male. Actresses have always had a certain reputation, and the casting couch is an old story. Hence, the number of abuses that have surfaced as “open secrets” in movies and television should not be surprising. However, in these cases, the question of who, precisely, is exploiting whom should be kept in mind. …

What is needed, in other words, is a rejection of cultural Marxism and the accompanying pseudo-science that suggests “gender” is a social construct and a matter of choice. We must return to the rational and sane view that traditional social conventions arise from the biological imperative.

Well, framing marriage as about equality rather than reproduction didn’t help.

The US left snatched defeat from the jaws of victory in Vietnam

The US left snatched defeat from the jaws of victory in Vietnam.

The Lies of ‘The Crown’ and ‘The Post’, by Peggy Noonan.

The past week I watched the Netflix series “The Crown” and Steven Spielberg’s movie “The Post.” Each is enjoyable, yet fails in the same significant way.

There’s dramatic license, which is necessary or nothing’s fun, and historical truth, which is necessary or nothing’s understood. Ideally in any work they more or less coexist, however imperfectly. But in “The Crown” and “The Post” the balance is far off. A cheap historical mindlessness marks much of the first, and there’s a lie at the heart of the second. …

Now to “The Post.” …

What is bad is the lie at the movie’s heart. President Nixon is portrayed as the villain of the story. And that is the opposite of the truth.

Nixon did not start the Vietnam War, he ended it. His administration was not even mentioned in the Pentagon Papers, which were finished before he took office.

When that dark, sad man tried to halt publication of the document, he was protecting not his own reputation but in effect those of others. Those others were his political adversaries—Lyndon Johnson and Ben Bradlee’s friend JFK—who the papers revealed had misled the public. If Nixon had been merely self-interested, he would have faked umbrage and done nothing to stop their publication. Even cleverer, he could have decried the leaking of government secrets while declaring and bowing to the public’s right to know.

Instead, he did what he thought was the right thing—went to court to prevent the publication of secrets that might harm America’s diplomatic standing while it attempted to extricate itself from a war.

Being Nixon, of course, he had to crow, in a way that became public, that he was sticking it to those liberals in the press. His attempt to stop publication was wrong—the public did have a right to know. But he did what he thought was the responsible thing, and of course pays for it to this day. …

Why does all this matter? Because we are losing history. It is not the fault of Hollywood, as they used to call it, but Hollywood is a contributor to it.

When people care enough about history to study and read it, it’s a small sin to lie and mislead in dramas. But when people get their history through entertainment, when they absorb the story of their times only through screens, then the tendency to fabricate is more damaging.

The Orwellian left, via its Hollywood office, is covering, ducking, and weaving.

The Mueller Test and the Paper Civil War on Trump

The Mueller Test and the Paper Civil War on Trump, by Daniel Greenfield.

From the Mueller investigation to Federal judges declaring that President Trump doesn’t have the right to control immigration policy or command the military, from political sabotage at the DOJ by Obama appointees like Sally Yates to Patagonia’s lawsuit over national monuments, the cold civil war set off by the left’s rejection of the 2016 election results has been a paper war largely waged by lawyers. …

Attorney General Eric Schneiderman of New York … is one of a number of blue state attorney generals who have decided that their primary focus shouldn’t be enforcing the law, but resisting the Federal government. But Scheiderman is also articulating the central tenet of the new #resistance which, despite Antifa’s antics, is more dedicated to legal sabotage than actual violence.

It’s still a paper civil war. For now.

The loss of the two elected branches of government has forced the left to default to the unelected third. Like AG Schneiderman, the left’s legal civil war appears to reject the authority of the Federal government. …

Will the American people govern themselves? Or will Mueller, Schneiderman, Watson, Yates and ten thousand other elites with law degrees be allowed to turn elections into a meaningless farce?

Federal judges have seized previously unimaginable amounts of power by not only blocking orders that had always been considered an essential part of presidential authority on flimsy premises that when dissected amount to a critique of President Trump’s character … but by demanding that agencies under the control of the President of the United States enact their orders, such as accepting transgender military recruits.

The absurd outcomes of these rulings, that the University of Hawaii can set national immigration policy, but not the President of the United States, and that fitness to serve in the military can be determined by a Federal judge, but not by the military or the commander in chief, are only an irrational side effect of a conflict between the elected branches of government and an unelected class of political lawyers.

hat-tip Scott of the Pacific

The Legacy of the Eastern Roman (Byzantine) Empire in Russia

The Legacy of the Eastern Roman (Byzantine) Empire in Russia, by Matfey Shaheen.

When did the Roman Empire fall? Would you be surprised to know the true date was in 1453 A.D. not long before Columbus’s voyage to the New World? …

Sometimes called the Byzantine Empire, an anachronistic term given to it by westerners to demean its Roman and Hellenistic legacy, [the Eastern Roman Empire] lasted from the foundation of Constantinople in the 4th century to its fall in the 15th century which changed Europe forever.

Many nations have desired a one thousand year reign, but this was a transethnic Empire united by Christian faith, and upon Orthodoxy its citizenship was based, a divinely mandated bond, more powerful, and superior than “blood and soil”.

The Byzantine Empire is the missing link in the story of the West, mostly ignored or forgotten.

No other empire in human history lasted as long as Byzantium. It existed for 1123 years. …

During its height, Byzantium was home to one sixth of the entire world population. The Empire stretched from Gibraltar to the Euphrates and Arabia. It encompassed the territories of modern Greece and Turkey, Israel and Egypt, Bulgaria, Serbia and Albania, Tunis, Algiers and Morocco, part of Italy, Spain, and Portugal. …

In 1204 … an army of Europeans calling themselves Crusaders, … instead of freeing the Holy Land treacherously sacked the most beautiful city in the world, [Constantinople]. Byzantine treasures were carried away in an uninterrupted flow over the course of fifty years. Hundreds of tons of precious coin alone were carried away at a time when the annual budget of the wealthiest European countries was no more than two tons of gold. …

An unprecedented flow of free money caused the Western European cities to grow wildly, and became the decisive catalyst in the development of craft, science, and the arts. The barbaric West became the civilized West only after it had taken over, stolen, destroyed, and swallowed up the Byzantine Empire.

Nationality:

Nationality problems in Byzantium really had not existed for many centuries. As the historical, lawful descendants of ancient Rome, which was destroyed by barbarians in the fifth century, the inhabitants of Byzantium called themselves Romans. In a vast empire divided into many nationalities there was one faith—Orthodox Christianity. The Byzantines literally fulfilled the Christian teaching of a new humanity living in a Divine spirit, where “there is neither Greek, nor Jew, nor Scythe,” as the Apostle Paul wrote. This hope preserved the country from the destructive storm of ethnic conflict. It was enough for any pagan or foreigner to accept the Orthodox Faith, and confirm it in deed, in order to become a full member of society. On the Byzantine throne, for example, were almost as many Armenians as there were Greeks; there were also citizens of Syrian, Arabian, Slavic, and Germanic origin. Amongst the higher ranks of government were representatives of all peoples in the Empire — the main requirements were their competence and dedication to the Orthodox Faith. This provided Byzantine civilization with incomparable cultural wealth. …

The very idea of a “nation” was actually a European concept which later in Byzantium evolved into an idea of their own national superiority (or more precisely, of that of the Greeks, around whom Byzantium had grown). Europeans lived in smaller states built upon ethnic principles; for example, France, Germanic countries, and Italian republics. National custom was good and correct for them; but the fact of the matter was that Byzantium was not an ethnic state, but rather a multi-national empire, and this was an essential difference. For one hundred years the Byzantines warred with this temptation and did not allow themselves to be broken. “We are all Romans — Orthodox citizens of the New Rome,” they proclaimed.

Sound familiar?

The demographic problem was one of the most serious problems in Byzantium. The Empire was gradually inhabited by peoples of a foreign spirit, who firmly supplanted the native Orthodox population. The country’s ethnic composition changed visibly. This was in some ways an irreversible process, for the birth rate in Byzantium was decreasing. …

The catastrophe was that the peoples who were pouring into the Empire were no longer becoming Romans, as they once had done, but remained permanently foreign, aggressive, and enemy. Now the newcomers treated Byzantium not as their new homeland, but only as potential property which should sooner or later come into their own hands.

This happened also because the Empire refused to educate the people — a concession it had made to the new, renaissance-era demagogy declaring state ideology to be a violation of the individual. However, nature abhors a vacuum. Having voluntarily renounced their thousand-year ideological function of educating and cultivating the people, the Byzantines made way for influences upon the minds and souls of their citizens; influences which were not so much a promotion of independent and free thinking as they were a form of intentional ideological aggression, aimed at destroying the foundations of state and society. …

In Byzantium, after the end of the 13th century, two parties emerged — one called for reliance upon the country’s internal strengths — to believe in them unconditionally, and to develop the country’s colossal potential. … The pro-Western party began to re-evaluate its fatherland’s history, culture, and Faith. However, instead of healthy criticism, they offered only destructive self-abnegation. Everything Western was exulted, and everything of their own was held in contempt. Byzantine history was distorted, faith and tradition were mocked, and the army was degraded. The whole of Byzantium began to be painted as a sort of universal monster.

The wealthy Byzantine younger generation no longer studied in its own country, but rather left to study abroad. The best minds of Byzantine science emigrated to the West — the state ceased to give them the proper attention. …

During the final, fatal attack on Constantinople, a brilliant metal-casting scholar, a Hungarian named Urban, offered to create for the Emperor large artillery armaments which could sweep away the Turkish troops. But the treasury was empty, and the rich of Constantinople did not give any money. Not having received payment, the insulted Urban offered his services to Sultan Mehmed. The Sultan seized the opportunity which would give him the capability to destroy the city’s invincible walls. He provided unlimited funds and began the project. Finally, the canons of Urban, the best student of the Byzantine ballistics school, decided the Empire’s fate. …

The fatal year of 1453 was approaching. In April, Sultan Mehmed [of the Turks, who were Muslims], still a very young man of twenty-one … attacked Constantinople. The Sultan was absolutely delirious with the idea of taking the Romans’ capital. … After a siege lasting many months and resisted heroically by the city’s defense forces, the Turks were able to break through the upper wall. The defense forces, frightened, turned to flight. …

Now a completely different people are living here, with different laws and morals [– they are Islamic]. The Byzantine inheritance, foreign to the invaders, was either destroyed or altered at the root. The descendents of those Greeks who were not destroyed by the conquerors were made into second class citizens in their own land, with no rights, for many long centuries.

hat-tip Stephen Neil

Poll: Russians Favor Family Over Career

Poll: Russians Favor Family Over Career, by Vera Reid.

For 32 percent, polled by the Public Opinion Foundation, success is the happiness of the family, for 27 percent – material well-being, for 20 –a good job, for 6 – career, for 5 – self-realization.’

The ‘career’ has lost its golden pedestal”- comments the managing director of the FOM Larysa Pautova. – And with it, the era of the manifestation of extreme individualism is shifting. …

Sociologists hypothesize that one of the reasons that that Russians put less weight on the high status of career options and material growth, simply because amid Russia’s ongoing economic crisis, achieving material prosperity is pretty difficult. …

But that begets the question: Have Russia’s economic difficulties contributed to the country’s moral awakening?

What if an economically harder life creates a more morally beneficial environment, more so than a life that consists of gorging on comfort and pleasure?

Perhaps, in less comfortable circumstances, people are less blinded by the fluff of material prosperity and are more likely regain their senses and realize what, ultimately, is truly important in life.

hat-tip Stephen Neil

Study: 27 Percent of California Youth Are Gender ‘Nonconforming’

Study: 27 Percent of California Youth Are Gender ‘Nonconforming’, by Susan Berry.

A new study released at UCLA finds 27 percent of California’s young people between the ages of 12 and 17 self-report that others view them as gender ‘nonconforming” at school.

The study – which has a margin of error of about six percent – was based on the inclusion of two questions in the California Health Interview Survey that were asked of 1,594 California young people between the ages of 12 and 17. …

Those young people categorized as “highly gender nonconforming” numbered 59, while 331 were placed in the “androgynous” category. Of the youth participants in the study, 1,204 were in the “gender conforming” category, i.e., those who are comfortable with their biological sex.

Oh how trendy. Compare that 27% to the natural rate of homosexuality, which is 3% for men and less than 1% for women. What could possibly go wrong with what today’s sexual revolutionaries are pushing?

hat-tip Stephen Neil

Sentencing at heart of Victorian youth crisis, say cops

Sentencing at heart of Victorian youth crisis, say cops, by Sam Buckingham-Jones.

The head of Victoria’s police union and the state’s Victims of Crime Commissioner have lashed lenient sentences handed out by the state’s courts, as it emerges most African youths sentenced for violent crimes in the past year were given average or below average punishments ­despite Premier Daniel Andrews repeatedly insisting they would feel the “full force of the law”.

Analysis by The Weekend Australian reveals that of the 17 offenders of Sudanese, South Sudanese or Kenyan descent who were sentenced in Victorian county courts in the past year, only two were given sentences above the average for the crime. In one case, despite the offender having 15 prior convictions, he was fined $100 and given a 188-day sentence after being charged with a theft and an affray that involved him stealing a 30cm knife and using it to stab another man in the leg in a brawl. …

Other offences committed by young African men that were given below-average sentences ­included armed robbery, theft, causing serious injury, indecent assault, theft, reckless conduct ­endangering life, affray and ­robbery. …

PC word-smithing to the rescue:

Victims of Crime Commissioner Greg Davies said the “therapeutic jurisprudence” approach of the past 30 years did not appear to be working. …

The lay person’s definition of ‘the full force of the law’ is not necessarily the same definition as the courts.

We call that “lying,” because we were deceived by their words.

hat-tip Stephen Neil