RUTHFULLY YOURS

https://amgreatness.com/2020/08/04/why-isnt-cancel-culture-canceling-corporations/

By their actions, multinational corporations such as Apple and Nike show they are fine with slave labor and racism just so long as it doesn’t happen in America.

If you haven’t gotten your fill of “cancel culture” yet, tell you what: I have over 80 companies you can cancel right now. Nike, Apple, Microsoft, Amazon, and Google among others should be facing the wrath of the social justice warriors, but I’ve barely heard a peep from them about these corporations. 

Apparently, these companies forgot that the 13th Amendment removed slavery from our country over 150 years ago and that we felt so strongly about the issue that we passed the Tariff Act of 1930. Section 307 of the law prohibits “the importation of merchandise mined, produced or manufactured, wholly or in part, in any foreign country by forced or indentured labor—including forced child labor.” Furthermore, “such merchandise is subject to exclusion and/or seizure, and may lead to criminal investigation of the importer(s).” But corporations have skirted this legislation via a “consumptive demand” loophole. 

So here we are in the absurd situation where “woke” corporations, which absolutely are making revenue from forced labor (read: slave labor), are using their ill-gotten profits to fund Black Lives Matter social justice global networks. They are giving generous donations totaling in the billions, buying indulgences with politicized racial payoffs so that they don’t have to talk about profiting from slave labor. Of course, their actions directly contradict everything they claim to support. 

These companies don’t love America. They don’t even view themselves as American companies per se. They love the money Americans pay for their products and which finances their salaries, but they would rather use the slave labor of subjugated peoples in foreign countries than undercut the bottom line by paying American workers reasonable wages. Don’t believe me? Ask the 600 or so Uyghur women working in a forced labor camp to produce 7-8 million Nike shoes every year. I’m sure they’d be happy to talk about it all.

https://www.frontpagemag.com/fpm/2020/08/video-blmantifa-riots-adolescent-tragedy-motion-frontpagemagcom/

[To get the whole story on the roots of the Left’s malice and what lies behind its war of destruction on free societies, read Jamie Glazov’s United in Hate: The Left’s Romance with Tyranny and Terror

This new Glazov Gang episode features farmer and television producer James Patrick Riley.

James discusses BLM/Antifa Riots: An Adolescent Tragedy in Motion, unveiling where self-righteousness, obscenity and ignorant zeal merge.

Don’t miss it!

https://www.frontpagemag.com/fpm/2020/08/dubious-peaceful-protestors-bruce-thornton/

Ever since the start of the protests and riots over the police killing of George Floyd in Minneapolis, commentators both progressive and conservative have claimed that “peaceful protestors” who are “justifiably” angry over the callous and deadly treatment of Floyd were being “hijacked” by violent “outsiders” like Antifa. Especially on the progressive media, phrases like “peaceful protestors” or “peaceful protests” have been serially repeated like mantras by television news talking-heads––Google both phrases and you’ll get about 5 million hits.

The trouble with this verbal tic is that it is misleading at best, and often false. “Peaceful protestors” have been seen coordinating with rioters to help them avoid the police, and acting as human shields. Indeed such coordination between shock-troops and “non-violent” political actors has typified revolutionary movements since the French Revolution. And there have been only a few examples of truly peaceful protestors separating themselves from the rioters and looters, or issuing public condemnations. But they have been overwhelmed by the thousands of protestors intermingling with the “hijackers.”

There’s an obvious reason why the progressive media keep chanting this phrase: the fourth protection of citizens in the First Amendment is “the right of the people peaceably to assemble, and to petition the Government for a redress of grievances.” The use of “peaceful” asserts that these protests are protected by the First Amendment.

But consider these protests from the perspective of that phrase. First, there is the large number of violent looters and rioters intermingled with protestors who may not be acting violently, but also may be helping rioters. Again, just by remaining in the streets where violent thugs are rampaging, the “peaceful” protestors have violated the Constitutional proviso “peaceably” since they have made it extremely difficult for the police to do their jobs and restore peace. And especially at night, how can the cops sort them out? How do the police know that screaming and hysterical “peaceful” protestors haven’t also been throwing rocks or frozen bottles of water at them, or a few minutes earlier have been looting the Nike store? Don’t the “peaceful protesters” sticking around all this violence rather suggests an age-old tactic of rioters using acquiescent “innocent bystanders” as cover for their mayhem?

https://pjmedia.com/news-and-politics/stacey-lennox/2020/08/04/dr-scott-barbour-from-americas-frontline-doctors-has-a-plan-for-hydroxychloroquine-n749323

Dr. Scott Barbour participated in the forum with America’s Frontline Doctors in Washington, D.C., last week. Their video promoting the use of hydroxychloroquine, school reopenings, and ending lockdowns went viral in real-time. It was almost immediately censored by several big-tech companies, who said that the information shared violated guidance from the WHO, CDC, and FDA.

This assertion about hydroxychloroquine is kind of a smokescreen. While it is true that major studies were canceled after a study was published in The Lancet, which concluded that administering hydroxychloroquine is dangerous, in a stunning move, The Lancet issued a retraction, saying that the “veracity of the data underlying this observational study could not be assured by the study authors.”

HCQ Helps Contain COVID-19 Cases: New Evidence and a Major Retraction

Dr. Barbour has trouble articulating just how unprecedented this is. To have a peer-reviewed study retracted by respected journals is stunning and disturbing. He is afraid it indicates some level of corruption in the publication process. It is also strange that once these studies were retracted, the guidance from the health agencies did not change.

https://www.americanthinker.com/blog/2020/08/leftists_go_after_two_plus_two_equals_four.html

Those on the left continues to believe that, if they can erase the line between real and imaginary, they can convince people that socialism will work.

In George Orwell’s dystopian Nineteen Eighty-Four, the concept that two plus two equals four had extraordinary symbolic weight. The State, as embodied in Big Brother, controlled everything that people could think or say.

Part of how the rebellious Winston Smith fought back against this totalitarianism was to remind himself that, no matter what the State said, two plus two did, in fact, equal four. To the all-powerful State, though, Smith’s belief in objective math was a threatening form of insanity. The State therefore used a mixture of torture and cajoling to force Smith to embrace a State-sanctioned “sanity” that denied reality:

“You are a slow learner, Winston.”

“How can I help it? How can I help but see what is in front of my eyes? Two and two are four.”

“Sometimes, Winston. Sometimes they are five. Sometimes they are three. Sometimes they are all of them at once. You must try harder. It is not easy to become sane.”

By the novel’s end, with the State’s torture having completely broken him, Smith readily conceded that, yes, if the State said that two plus two equals five, that would be the correct answer.

https://ruleofreason.blogspot.com/2020/08/surrender.html

It was bound to happen sooner or later, given all the Defund the Police propaganda  in various states and cities. Minneapolis police, in its last hurray, have advised residents to just give criminals what they want tn and to offer no resistance. If there’s violence, the police – what’s left of them – will not respond or offer help. The announcement reads, in part with homilies about their being concerned with “your safety.”

.+ Be prepared to give up your cell phone and purse/wallet.

= Do as they say, Your safety to most important.. (but not your rights or the sanctity of your life and property).

Suppose the criminals wanted to assault your wife, or kidnap your daughter, and not merely take your purse or wallet? Would you be justified in fighting back?

Barely, If at all. I can see the headline now: Resident arrested and charged with harming and jeopardizing the lives of his “guests.” : Samuel Brown has been charged by the “Publidc Safety Committee” with resisting the desires of “peaceful”  citizens and making an unlawful citizen’s arrest, of brandishing a gun and a knife, and faces a  $199 fine and five years of community service.

https://thefederalist.com/2020/08/03/8-democrat-myths-william-barr-debunked-between-deliberate-interruptions/

Notwithstanding Democrats’ attempts to prevent William Barr from setting the record straight, the attorney general dismantled major fake news headlines over the last two months.

When Attorney General William Barr testified before the House Judiciary Committee last Tuesday, Democrats’ rhetorical questions reinforced eight falsehoods previously peddled by left-wing media. Notwithstanding these attempts to prevent Barr from setting the record straight, the attorney general dismantled much of the fake news that has made headlines over the last two months.

Here are the highlights of the media myths congressional Democrats paraded for the public during the hearing.

Myth 1: Barr overruled prosecutors’ sentencing recommendation for Roger Stone because of a Donald Trump tweet.

Several of Democrats’ attacks focused on President Trump associate Roger Stone. Democrat committee Chair Jerry Nadler accused Barr of personally interfering “with ongoing criminal investigations to protect the president and his allies from the consequences of their actions,” and then “when career investigators and prosecutors resisted these brazen unprecedented actions, you replaced them with less qualified staff who appear to be singularly beholden to you.” Rep. Hank Johnson, a Georgia Democrat, drilled more specifically into the Stone case, misrepresenting the facts in the process.

https://www.dailysignal.com/2020/08/01/hydroxychloroquine-covid-19/?utm_source=rss&

The buzz surrounding the drug hydroxychloroquine to treat COVID-19 began to die down until early July and the results of 2,500-person study. Pictured: A pharmacy employee displays a box of Plaqueni, a brand name for hydroxychloroquine, May 28 in Paris. (Photo: Marc Piasecki/Getty Images)

Early in health officials’ response to the pandemic, one drug offered hope of a safe, widely available, and cheap therapeutic that would break the death grip that COVID-19 held on the world.

However, after its promised efficacy didn’t materialize in large, statistically significant numbers, enthusiasm for the drug, hydroxychloroquine, quickly waned. Why, then, has it made its way back into the headlines?

When it was first suggested that hydroxychloroquine may be an effective antiviral against the new coronavirus, which scientists call SARS-CoV-2, the U.S. government purchased and delivered the drug by the millions of doses even before research could prove its efficacy.

At the time, what scarce data was available suggested it would work, and waiting much longer would’ve been unethical. After all, the drug has a decadeslong history of use to treat malaria.

But with those millions of doses being administered, clinicians found only mixed results. Some, as in the early French trial, found tremendous success, while many others found no clinical benefit.