YubNub Social YubNub Social
    Advanced Search
  • Login

  • Night mode
  • © 2025 YubNub Social
    About • Directory • Contact Us • Privacy Policy • Terms of Use • Android • Apple iOS • Get Our App

    Select Language

  • English
Install our *FREE* WEB APP! (PWA)
Night mode
Community
News Feed (Home) Popular Posts Events Blog Market Forum
Media
Headline News VidWatch Game Zone Top PodCasts
Explore
Explore Jobs Offers
© 2025 YubNub Social
  • English
About • Directory • Contact Us • Privacy Policy • Terms of Use • Android • Apple iOS • Get Our App

Discover posts

Posts

Users

Pages

Group

Blog

Market

Events

Games

Forum

Jobs

Country Roundup
Country Roundup
49 w

Little Boy Battling Leukemia Visits With Cody Johnson, Jelly Roll, & More In Houston
Favicon 
www.whiskeyriff.com

Little Boy Battling Leukemia Visits With Cody Johnson, Jelly Roll, & More In Houston

Country music stars banding together to make dreams come true. A boy in Central Texas who is currently battling leukemia recently got to meet some of his country music heroes, and it was all thanks to a state trooper that had a connection with Cody Johnson. Hudson Swinnea has been fighting cancer for almost a year, and often uses music as an escape. His mother, Krystal Swinnea, told KWTX10 that they listen to a lot of country music to help pass the time during long car rides to and from his cancer treatments. Some of his favorite artists to listen to are Cody Johnson, Jelly Roll, Ernest and Shaboozey. The state trooper that is friends with the Swinnea family also happens to be friends with CoJo (they're both from Huntsville, TX), and reached out to see if the country music star would be willing to FaceTime the young boy battling with pediatric cancer. That call turned into a FaceTime with both Johnson and Jelly Roll, who both invited Hudson and his family to join them at their respective Houston concerts. Krystal told the Texas news station that Johnson was gracious when the Swinneas got to meet him, and luckily for Hudson, Jelly Roll is currently touring with Ernest and Shaboozey as openers, so they were able to meet them all at once when Jelly Roll played at the Toyota Center in Houston on November 17th: "He shook Cody Johnson’s hand when we got to meet Cody, and he talked to him. Then, there was lots of fist bumps with Jelly Roll, and he did talk to him as well. Ernest and Shaboozey, he did talk to them." While meeting all of the country stars was a phenomenal experience for the Central Texas family, Jelly Roll apparently went above and beyond in the time that he spent with Hudson. The "Need A Favor" singer included the young boy in his pre-concert-prayer, and even shouted out Hudson ahead of the last song of the night. As Hudson's mom explained: "He said this amazing prayer before he went out on stage. We got to stand in their circle and pray with them. He prayed for us, and he prayed for Hudson. The whole experience was very touching. The last song is when he gave Hudson a shout out and said that he was fighting and to keep fighting." As you might imagine, the visits with Jelly Roll, Cody Johnson, Ernest and Shaboozey have lifted the spirits of the young kid that very much deserves all of the experiences that have come his way thanks to the family friend's connection. The Swinnea family feels very grateful that Hudson got to meet so many of his favorite artists, and the meetings went over so well that the young boy fighting cancer has told anyone and everyone he can about it: "He has not quit talking about it. He’s told everybody, and he has definitely said over and over that they’re the best nights ever, so I definitely think he had a great time, and it’s really boosted his spirit." Hudson still has a long road ahead of him. His mother Krystal told KWTX 10 that he has over a year's worth of treatments and hospital stays remaining, which is why these spirit-lifting moments are so important in the young man's fight against cancer. You can hear more on the story - and see some of the videos and pictures of Hudson meeting various country music stars - in the video below: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=1RceRVx42Sw
Like
Comment
Share
Conservative Voices
Conservative Voices
49 w

'Woke' Canada cops aid pro-Hamas mob, arrest journalists: Rebel News founder Ezra Levant
Favicon 
www.brighteon.com

'Woke' Canada cops aid pro-Hamas mob, arrest journalists: Rebel News founder Ezra Levant

Follow NewsClips channel at Brighteon.com for more updatesSubscribe to Brighteon newsletter to get the latest news and more featured videos: https://support.brighteon.com/Subscribe.html
Like
Comment
Share
Conservative Voices
Conservative Voices
49 w

Two-tiered justice system will end on Jan. 20th: Corey Lewandowski | American Agenda
Favicon 
www.brighteon.com

Two-tiered justice system will end on Jan. 20th: Corey Lewandowski | American Agenda

Follow NewsClips channel at Brighteon.com for more updatesSubscribe to Brighteon newsletter to get the latest news and more featured videos: https://support.brighteon.com/Subscribe.html
Like
Comment
Share
AllSides - Balanced News
AllSides - Balanced News
49 w

Favicon 
www.allsides.com

Lebanon's first responders say Israeli strikes target them as they work to save lives

Lebanon's first responders say Israeli strikes target them as they work to save lives BEIRUT — It is Jad Deeb's job to run toward the screams. Ever since Israel started carrying out airstrikes in southern Beirut in September as part of its intensified campaign to dismantle Hezbollah, the 31-year-old IT specialist turned paramedic has spent day after day racing toward bombed out buildings to help pull people from the rubble of their homes. The wreckage from Israeli airstrikes is often so vast...
Like
Comment
Share
AllSides - Balanced News
AllSides - Balanced News
49 w

Favicon 
www.allsides.com

Plane clips another plane while being towed at Logan Airport

Plane clips another plane while being towed at Logan Airport A plane was clipped by another plane at Boston's Logan International Airport on Monday evening.Massport said a tug vehicle towing an empty JetBlue plane struck a Cape Air plane at slow speed near Terminal C around 6:30 p.m. Monday.There were no injuries and Massport said the incident was "minor".The incident comes the same day an American Airlines plane clipped the wing tip of a Frontier Airlines plane at Terminal E earlier Monday....
Like
Comment
Share
Conservative Voices
Conservative Voices
49 w

Jim VandeHei’s Captain Phillips Moment
Favicon 
spectator.org

Jim VandeHei’s Captain Phillips Moment

For many movie fans, and also for the Meme Smart-ass community, the famous scene in the Tom Hanks movie Captain Phillips in which the lead character is faced with the dismal reality that Somali pirates have taken over the Maersk Alabama is one of the most iconic of all time. Maybe Jim VandeHei, the head honcho at Axios, would like Tom Hanks to play him in a movie with a similar plot, at least from his perspective. VandeHei is very, very displeased at the disruptive influence Elon Musk is having in American society, particularly with respect to the current challenging environment for the news media. So much so that he publicly melted down over Musk’s statement that “you are the media now” to users of X, the formerly-constipated social media platform known as Twitter where Propaganda Press institutions used to compete for status as the most Orwellian practitioners of woke newspeak. X is no longer that platform: It is now a place where free speech is supported, and its user base is split almost exactly down the middle between left-leaners and right-leaners. This is a shift that the former cool kids of Twitter do not like. And the Propaganda Press crowd who used to use Twitter as a tidy little echo chamber largely free from participation by shadow-banned, fact-checked, and de-platformed dissident voices are very unhappy with their frequent ratios at the hands of the deplorables. The pirates are taking the bridge, and the Jim VandeHeis are no longer the captains. Tom Hanks’s character bore the news a bit better than did VandeHei at a confab put on by the National Press Club… Go and whine a little. The funny thing about VandeHei’s anti-X rant is that a whole bunch of it is true — but that’s even more damaging to his cause than were he coming completely out of left field. Is being a reporter hard? Well, being a good reporter is hard. That much is true. But Propaganda Press institutions have generally run off all their good reporters. Most of those today are independent journalists who’ve been sacked from the legacy media organizations they used to work for. Why? Because, to do that work means exposing corruption, waste, idiocy, incompetence, and criminality on both sides of the political aisle, and there are scant few reporters encouraged or even allowed to do such work anymore. Those who do? They very often find a far friendlier and more inviting — and even sometimes more lucrative — existence basing their operations on X or other platforms for independent journalism (Substack, Rumble, Patreon, etc.) than they ever did in legacy corporate media newsrooms. That’s what Musk meant when he told X users that they were the media now. That and the fact that crowdsourcing stories on a platform like X will, over time, yield a larger body of information — much of it potentially false, to be sure — than will entrusting those stories to gatekeepers like Jim VandeHei with no backstop behind him. VandeHei can rail against Musk and the other chatterers on X all he wants, but X and Musk aren’t the problem of the legacy corporate media for which he’s shilling. X is simply gasoline being poured on a fire that already existed. That fire is the immolation of their own credibility. When the idiot Kamala Harris was instantly transformed from a shamefully incompetent and charisma-free vice president to a “brat” and “joyful” presidential nominee by institutions like Axios, the Washington Post, and MSNBC, it wasn’t even the worst example of propaganda taking the place of journalism we’ve seen. That award goes, even today, to the attempt to dismiss the Hunter Biden laptop story as Russian disinformation. It even places behind the legacy corporate press’ participation in the politicized public health bureaucracy’s efforts to weaponize COVID against both Donald Trump and the American public. But Harris’s media elevation, which was repaid with a contemptuous denial of legitimate interviews and a total failure to provide candid campaign communication of any real stripe, was simply the straw that broke the camel’s back. Mr. VandeHei, if you were truly reporters, your plaintive wails might serve your doomed cause. But nobody believes that about you anymore. When your industry slandered Trump as Hitler while giving the tyrannical Biden–Harris regime a free pass for the countless abuses they’ve perpetrated over the past four years, you deserve all of the opprobrium and diminution you’re receiving. Nobody cares about your problems, and in fact, most relish in them. I go back a while in this debate, as I’ve been doing The Hayride in Louisiana for a decade and a half. In fact, on Friday it’ll be exactly 15 years since the site first made its debut on the internet. And in all of that time, I’ve had a running battle with the local Propaganda Press, and particularly the Baton Rouge Advocate — a formerly somewhat respectable newspaper that has devolved into, essentially, a small tabloid supported by a web publication that survives on funding from left-wing NGO’s like the Ford and Kellogg Foundations. I remember being part of a panel discussion that included one of the Advocate’s reporters, and I made a point about the legacy media’s totally inaccurate coverage of a particular issue, only to have the ink-stained wretch screech at me that “you’re in the media, too!” I asked him if that was the case, why the Advocate had a policy of never including a link to anything posted at The Hayride when the site was referenced in the paper’s articles. He had nothing to say to that, and so I was able to proudly distance myself from the Propaganda Press. We don’t have any NGO’s funding us at The Hayride. We have advertisers and readers who buy tickets and sponsorships to our events. Meaning that our audience keeps us afloat, which is something the Advocate can’t say. And legacy corporate media newsrooms know that the same is true for them. They know it. They might deny it. You can test that by asking them what they think of the idea of banning pharmaceutical ads on television, like every country on earth other than the U.S. and New Zealand do. That’s one of the things Robert F. Kennedy Jr. is talking about doing should he be confirmed as secretary of Health and Human Services, and you can bet your bottom dollar these sanctimonious scribes will fight him tooth and nail at his confirmation hearings. They aren’t fooling a soul. The game is over. The pirates have stormed the bridge, and Jim VandeHei and the rest of the “Fourth Estate” are no longer the captains. The difference is that this isn’t Somalia. It’s actually a good thing that we are the media now. Maybe some truth will come out as a result. READ MORE from Scott McKay: Isn’t It Time for Jasmine Crockett to Shut Up? Saving The Country With Russ Vought Five Quick Things: Trump’s Cabinet Picks Are a Political Sea Change The post Jim VandeHei’s Captain Phillips Moment appeared first on The American Spectator | USA News and Politics.
Like
Comment
Share
Conservative Voices
Conservative Voices
49 w

Ukraine Policy: the Big Win
Favicon 
spectator.org

Ukraine Policy: the Big Win

President Trump rightly points out that America did not engage in new wars during his first term in office. The world was indeed a more stable place before the Biden administration engineered a disastrous exit from Afghanistan. That catastrophe signaled weakness and incentivized the Russian invasion of Ukraine as well as the Hamas attack on Israel. When America is weak, our adversaries grow bold. The incoming Trump administration will certainly not be interventionist; gone are the days of neoconservative visions of world transformation. Yet neither is it likely to succumb to the capitulationist voices of isolationism that have cropped up on the right and the left. No one knows better than President Trump that making America great again means making America strong again. We need strength to dissuade our adversaries from destabilizing aggressions. Ukraine will be the first theater in which the Trump administration will be tested. In the wake of the poor performance of the Russian military and the depletion of its manpower Moscow has resorted to bringing in North Korean mercenaries. This internationalization of the conflict represents a significant escalation. The Biden administration has countered this escalation by giving Ukraine authorization to use American missiles that can target sites far inside Russia. For years the Biden team was fearful of provoking Russia and therefore capped supplies to Ukraine, providing enough for Zelensky to keep fighting but never enough to win. That has changed. The prospect for ever greater conflict is therefore growing. This is the stage that President Trump, committed to pursuing peace, will enter on January 20. (READ MORE: North Korea Is in the Fight) But what kind of peace will it be? A narrative is circulating among Democrats, never Trumpers, and Europeans that Trump will pull the plug on Kyiv and hand Putin an easy victory. While this vision conforms with the “Russiagate” narrative that the Democratic National Committee has been hawking for eight years, it is deeply counterintuitive. Trump saw the disastrous consequences of Biden’s version of the Afghanistan wind-down. He surely does not want Ukraine to become his Afghanistan or for a gloating press to report from Kyiv as if it were the fall of Kabul. Surrender is not going to be the Trump path to peace. What then are his options? There are two variables at stake in Ukraine: geography and legality, or the question of territory and the question of guarantees. Concerning geography, the maxim of the inviolability of international borders points to Ukraine regaining control over its full territory. This is the principled position (and one endorsed by President Recep Tayyip Erdoğan in Turkey, Ukraine’s Black Sea neighbor). On the other hand, the Russian position, variously expressed by President Vladimir Putin, other political leaders, or the ideologue Aleksandr Dugin, involves the complete occupation of Ukraine, and the eradication of any Ukrainian independent sovereignty (and probably executing Zelensky). Surely Russia wants at the very least to control the Black Sea coast to maximize its own maritime access but also to render any left-over rump Ukraine a landlocked and subordinate vassal state, even less independent than Belarus. In any case, before analysts in the West start to negotiate with ourselves over how much Ukraine to surrender, it should not be forgotten that Russia still pretty much wants it all. Whether in some settlement Ukraine regains all its territory or is forced to make some concessions, international guarantees will be needed to safeguard against future Russian aggression, a second attempt to gobble up the rest. The strongest version of such a guarantee could be seen as NATO membership for Ukraine. Putin will resist this — this may be his redline. Alternatively, Ukraine might remain out of NATO, but international forces could be stationed at its border with Russia as tripwires to ward off another invasion. Such a solution would be analogous to the NATO troop contingents in the Baltics. A weaker version might just be an international memorandum endorsing Ukrainian independence, but this is what Ukraine already had, the so-called Budapest Accord, which ultimately did it no good at all. President Barack Obama did not feel obligated to offer genuine assistance to Ukraine when Russia invaded Crimea. The worst solution would be a complete Russian occupation of Ukraine or, short of that, major territorial concessions with only weak international security agreements. It would be out of character for Trump to embrace a defeat. While he is not an interventionist, neither is he an appeasement politician or a fool at deal-making. One can surely try to reach a compromise in terms of territory and guarantees, but it is also useful to look beyond the narrow Ukraine issue and keep an eye on the bigger game. Russia is the most direct threat to Europe and hence the Atlantic Alliance, but Russia is not America’s main global adversary; its economy is weak and its population is small. Its geostrategic significance is largely a function of its collaboration with China, while China is now recognized as the primary challenge to American power in the world. It is therefore in long-term U.S. interest to peel Russia off from China, a kind of reversal of President Richard Nixon’s driving a wedge between China and the Soviet Union half a century ago. The challenge of the moment then is for America to be firm with Russia over Ukraine, while at the same time winning Russia over to the American side in the current great power rivalry. This will require tact and agility, but also some outside-the-box thinking. Some analysts believe security for a post-war Ukraine is greatest if it enters NATO, but Moscow would regard that NATO expansion as a threat. What is needed then is a solution that protects Ukraine’s legitimate interests without alienating Russia — in the competition with China, it is important that the U.S. find ways to build bridges to Moscow, not to burn them. Whatever the precise formula that the Trump administration agrees to, it is vital to uphold the principle of Ukrainian national sovereignty while simultaneously working to pull Russia into the Western security architecture. We gain nothing if we push Russia further into the arms of Beijing. We win a lot if we pull Russia toward us and leave China out in the cold where it belongs, as long as it continues its expansionist ambitions in the western Pacific. This project will hardly be easy to carry out, but for the incoming peace president, this could be a legacy goal for the century. Russell A. Berman is a senior fellow at the Hoover Institution and formerly a senior advisor at the State Department. Kiron K. Skinner is the Taube Family Chair professor at Pepperdine University’s School of Public Policy, the W. Glenn Campbell research fellow at Stanford University’s Hoover Institution, and the former director of the Office of Policy Planning at the Department of State. READ MORE: Biden Is Trump-Proofing the World Is Biden Trying to Start World War III Before Trump Takes Office? North Korea Is in the Fight The post Ukraine Policy: the Big Win appeared first on The American Spectator | USA News and Politics.
Like
Comment
Share
Conservative Voices
Conservative Voices
49 w

Making Friends: AI and Companionship
Favicon 
spectator.org

Making Friends: AI and Companionship

Near the climax of Terminator 2, war-weary mother Sarah Connor reflects on the robotic killing machine that has become her son’s protector. “It would never leave him,” she muses. Further explaining: And it would never hurt him, never shout at him, or get drunk and hit him, or say it was too busy to spend time with him… Of all the would-be fathers who came and went over the years, this thing, this machine, was the only one who measured up. The titular robot doll in 2022’s M3gan has the same inhuman protective drive; there, though, it’s the source of a murderous rampage. That idea of a designed persona — gone right, or horribly wrong — is part of what makes AIs such compelling heroes and villains. Increasingly, it also drives AI relationships in the real world. Apps like Replika offer custom-designed companions, dates, or even spouses. Some users credit AI with helping them rebuild their lives. In another case, one lawsuit argues that a chatbot girlfriend encouraged a teen to commit suicide. We look for the familiar in inanimate objects, imagining faces in the clouds and photocopiers that hold a grudge. AI magnifies these tendencies, as even the chatbots of the 1960s were occasionally mistaken for real humans. Today, we face what technologist Derek Schuurman calls “ontological confusion”: the loss of our ability to distinguish genuine personhood from mechanical imitation. In response, it’s tempting to reject artificial companions wholesale — an urge not helped by their marketing. In one baffling ad for “Friend,” a wearable AI, a young woman trades banter with a (human) romantic interest. Conversation pauses, and her hand drifts automatically to activate the Friend, which she wears like a pendant. At the last moment, she snatches her hand back — but the cultivated habit is clear. Why choose human interaction, with all its messy awkwardness, when the machine always knows what to say? Why pursue people who might fail or hurt you, when you can buy an AI social network that will affirm you to your exact specifications? Perhaps that’s the greatest risk — not confusion, but a conscious rejection of the work of dealing with other people. And yet that work is vital. Relationships are “people-growing machines.” It’s in dealing with other human beings, with all their fragility and mess, that we learn gentleness and patience. As any parent can attest, there’s no surer way to discover you are not the center of the universe than to meet someone else who thinks they are. If we abandon the labor of human connection, we lose our best tool for refining ourselves. And yet sweeping rejection of AI companions seems too broad. Imagine a shut-in who buys a pet for company; surely we don’t condemn that as a cheap substitute for human interaction! A dog is not a person, of course — and maybe that’s the key. We rejoice with the lonely person who buys a dog. We look askance at someone who talks only to dogs, let alone someone who marries them. As with much of our technology, AI can function in two modes: as creating new kinds of actions, or as replacing existing ones. Whether tech connects or isolates us often depends on the mode in view. When we’re distant from our families, video chat is a blessing, allowing a closeness that’s otherwise impossible — but as lockdowns proved, it’s a poor alternative for all other human interaction. In the same way, we might use AI to create new social roles, rather than supplant human ones. Artificial pets or caretakers could meet our needs for physical or emotional support in specific ways, without a pretense of human intimacy. AI tutors are already a blessing for students who cannot otherwise afford help. We could imagine something similar for social roles. An AI might help users practice professional norms, or learn the niceties of high-class social events. In a more targeted way, an AI could help build confidence in small talk or basic conversation — say, for children with autism, or Japan’s growing population of self-isolated hikikomori. Critically, such systems could be intentionally limited. A guide for autistic children could be designed to ultimately encourage its wards away from itself and toward human interaction. A robotic caretaker might take orders or sit for conversation, but a good design would respect the boundary between “butler” and “friend.” The more an app blurs these lines, the greater the risk of further impoverishing our human connections. Ultimately, the choice to cultivate ontological confusion — as designers, as users — is a choice. The existence of AI does not force us to depend on it for pseudo-companionship. One thing AI has not changed: if all our friendships are fake, it’s because we chose to make them that way. READ MORE: AI Snake Oil: Separating Hype From Reality in Artificial Intelligence AI Chatbots Lean to the Left. That’s a Problem for Elections. How I Learned to Stop Worrying and Love AI The post Making Friends: AI and Companionship appeared first on The American Spectator | USA News and Politics.
Like
Comment
Share
Conservative Voices
Conservative Voices
49 w

ICC Fails Afghan Women. Filmmakers Step In.
Favicon 
spectator.org

ICC Fails Afghan Women. Filmmakers Step In.

I’ve just watched the film Bread and Roses, co-produced by actress Jennifer Lawrence and Nobel Laureate Malala Yousefzai, and directed by Sahra Mani. If only American women were half as brave as the on-camera real-life women activists in Kabul! We see them willing to risk being beaten, arrested, tortured, and even murdered by the Taliban because they’ve  dared to demonstrate for “Work, Bread, and Education.” You’ve issued warrants for Israel’s Prime Minister Netanyahu, but not for … the Taliban. Something is wrong with this picture. Wearing hijab, but naked-faced, identifiable, these heroes march, chant, hold placards aloft, scrawl their demands on walls and even on the snow, meet secretly — and continue to do so even as the Taliban death-threatens, beats, and arrests activist after activist, even after they murder many. The women demand the return of their arrested sisters — and in one instance, they actually prevail. Strong Women Against the Taliban Bread and Roses depicts Afghan women who tried to get to the airport on the days before the Taliban stormed into Kabul; they found that all the airport “gates” were closed to them. Thereafter, the women left behind were, essentially, placed under house arrest, forbidden to work, (even if they were doctors and dentists), forbidden to attend school, go out without a male escort and without wearing the Afghan burqa, the garment I view as a sensory deprivation isolation chamber. Both schools and beauty shops were shuttered. Music was forbidden. Impoverished families began selling their very young daughters to much older, already married men.  Women were forbidden to take taxis alone. Courtesy of body camcorders and hidden cameras, we see these women activists being beaten by the Taliban with whips and sticks. These are the women who say, on camera: “Not everyone is brave enough to risk their lives against terrorism.”  We see an enraged Talib break a door down, we hear about a Talib “who beats me at home more than women in prison are beaten.” The women bond, they tell each other that they are “warriors;” one woman says: “For me, it’s God and then you guys;” “We are tired of captivity;” “Strong women are always lonely;” My crime? I demanded freedom for women;” “We should write our own histories, write our own stories.” The information is in. The Taliban are women-killers. It is their version of Islam. UN Women are you listening? Hey, International Criminal Court: You’ve issued warrants for Israel’s Prime Minister Netanyahu, but not for the Iranian mullahcracy or the Taliban. Something is wrong with this picture. Will a film like Bread and Roses make any difference? If this film were shown at the United Nations would they sanction and isolate the Taliban and its supporters? Would the ICC issue arrest warrants for these Islamist death-eaters — or are warrants only issued to Israeli leaders fighting an existential war of self-defense, even as they are accused of countless blood libels? Would the UN find ways to free Afghan women? Would Europe or the United States? To be fair, they did, but only a little and for a little while. Nothing went smoothly during these efforts; but that’s an entirely different and important subject. However, when governments fail, individuals can and do step in. I did. In 2021, together with British Sikh-Indian activist, Mandy Sanghera, I co-led a team which rescued 398 women from Afghanistan. I was once held captive in Kabul and wrote about it in An American Bride in Kabul. When Mandy asked me if I wanted to help rescue Afghan women, I told her that I’d been waiting for this opportunity for sixty years. I am certain that the United States did not enter Afghanistan to improve the lives of women but only to find Bin Laden. Staying on, boots on the ground, led to far more freedom for girls and women than Afghanistan had ever known. Women became physicians, lawyers, professors, business owners, grade school teachers, artists, and athletes; they prosecuted wife-batterers and opened shelters for battered and raped women. The question of how much blood and treasure the West is obligated to expend in order to do what is morally necessary — but which ultimately cannot succeed, at least not in a land-locked, tribal, impoverished, and radically Islamist country — remains a haunting question. Nevertheless, President Biden and his administration are, in part, responsible for this exceptionally dystopian Hell. The Democrats pulled out of Afghanistan in a totally irresponsible way, and left  billions of dollars of military equipment behind. They did not rescue many of their Afghan allies and/or the educated women who were desperate to get out. Had President Biden seen this film — had he known what would come after — would he have abandoned Afghanistan in quite this way? Brave Filmmakers Take on Islamist Hatred There are many films that have shown the West what the lives of women in Muslim, Islamist countries are like. And yet, young American college students obediantly don hijab and kneel in Islamic prayer as if doing so is an anti-racist act, even as Muslim women elsewhere are being forced to wear burqas, chadors, and hijab, and are jailed or murdered for failing to do so. For many years, fictional films have portrayed the surreal hatred towards Muslim women within Muslim families, villages, and countries. In 1982, I began showing my students the film Yol, set in rural Turkey, in which a husband, a convict on leave, is forced to honor kill his wife due to his family’s allegations that she has been unfaithful to him while he’s been in jail. Dutifully, he walks her to her death; she is wearing cloth slippers, in freezing weather, trudging over snow-packed fields. It is a deeply shocking yet very moving film by Serif Goren and Yilmaz Guney. In 2003, Osama, directed by Siddiq Barmak, appeared. It  tells the story of a young (and very beautiful) Afghan girl-child who had to dress as a boy in order to be able to feed her family. She is scooped up, taken to a madrasa (an Islamic school), where they discover that she is a girl when she menstruates for the first time. She was spared death. Her punishment was being forced to marry a much older man who already had three wives, all of whom “hated” him. We see him literally locking her up after a bridal night rape. In 2009, the great Cyrus Nowrasteh directed The Stoning of Soraya M. It starred the beautiful Shohreh Aghdashloo, was based on a true story, (soulfully, carefully written by Freidoune Sahebjan). It happened in a small Iranian village, Kuhpayeh, in Isfahan province. A derelict, petty criminal husband, Ghorban-Ali, wants his wife’s property and wants to marry a 14 year-old girl and move her in. Thus, Ghorban-Ali falsely accuses his wife, the 35 year old Soraya, of adultery. He, a bought-and-paid-for religious authority, and the entire village rather joyfully stone the innocent Soraya to death. As yet, the UN has not sanctioned or isolated Iran — nor has the United States. The ICC has never issued arrest warrants for the Iranian mullahcracy. In 2007, directer Mark Foster turned Afghan-American Khaled Hosseini’s best selling novel, The Kite Runner into a film.  It depicts the Afghan Sunni Muslim persecution of Hazara (Shiia) Muslims, and the cruel practice of war-lords turning orphan or Hazara boys into “dancing boys” and sex-slaves. The film was mainly shot in China — because it was too dangerous to make it in Afghanistan. The World Cannot Claim Ignorance Can you now understand the bravery of the Bread and Roses demonstrators, seen naked-faced on camera, desperate to document both their persecution and their heroic opposition to it? Should the UN sponsor mandatory showings of this film? Might it shame them into doing something — anything — to uplift the women of that cursed country? We can never say that we did not know, that no one told us.  The entire world, including the world’s leaders and diplomats, have seen or heard about Islamic gender apartheid as practiced in Afghanistan and Iran via articles, books, and films. Even the members of the UN and the ICC must have seen one of these films or read about it. The title is a well-meaning but unfortunate one. Why? Because the 1912 textile worker’s strike in Lawrence, Massachusetts, run by the Industrial Workers of the World became known as the “Bread and Roses” strike. The problem is that strike ultimately failed, and the cause of the Afghan women demonstrators is too important to meet that same fate. READ MORE from Phyllis Chesler: Ban Face Masks: Our Safety Requires It The Stakes for Women in This Election Are Enormous The post ICC Fails Afghan Women. Filmmakers Step In. appeared first on The American Spectator | USA News and Politics.
Like
Comment
Share
Intel Uncensored
Intel Uncensored
49 w

HIGH OCTANE SPECULATIONS ABOUT THAT RUSSIAN MISSILE MESSAGE
Favicon 
www.sgtreport.com

HIGH OCTANE SPECULATIONS ABOUT THAT RUSSIAN MISSILE MESSAGE

by Joseph P. Farrell, Giza Death Star: (Today is Thanksgiving week in what was once the USA, and accordingly I will be “squishing” all of this week’s blogs into Monday, Tuesday, and Wednesday. We will return to our normal schedule for the first half of December, after which both Daniel and I will be taking […]
Like
Comment
Share
Showing 2378 out of 56669
  • 2374
  • 2375
  • 2376
  • 2377
  • 2378
  • 2379
  • 2380
  • 2381
  • 2382
  • 2383
  • 2384
  • 2385
  • 2386
  • 2387
  • 2388
  • 2389
  • 2390
  • 2391
  • 2392
  • 2393

Edit Offer

Add tier








Select an image
Delete your tier
Are you sure you want to delete this tier?

Reviews

In order to sell your content and posts, start by creating a few packages. Monetization

Pay By Wallet

Payment Alert

You are about to purchase the items, do you want to proceed?

Request a Refund