Antisemitism, Antizionism, Jihadism and the Reunited Germany. News by Fred Alan Medforth
By Andrea Widburg
I finally caught up with Bud Light’s latest commercial. I think it was meant to be a light-hearted look at the fact that people make mistakes but, hey, we’re all in this together, and everyone should just lighten up. That’s my theory. But of course, the reality is that the commercial is one of the most insulting things Bud Light could ever have done. It’s useful, though, as a reminder that corporate America doesn’t like and, especially, doesn’t respect the people who buy its products.
So, to recap, Bud Light decided to partner with Dylan Mulvaney, the pedophile’s delight (a grown man who pretends to be a sexualized little girl), by making beer cans with his images. The obvious intention was that he’d promote Bud Light on his popular social media outlets. What happened, instead, was that actual Bud Light drinkers were disgusted and began to view the brand with revulsion instead of merely seeing it as the acceptable beer equivalent of elevator music.
At this point, all that the company needed to do was apologize and promise never to drag transgenderism into its beer’s image again. Instead, it attempted to sidestep the issue:
To stem the hemorrhage, Bud gave its Vice President of Marketing, Alissa Heinerscheid, a “leave of absence.” Then, Budweiser made a fawningly pro-American ad that failed to impress Americans.
Brendan Whitworth, the CEO of Anheuser-Busch InBev issued a statement, saying, “We never intended to be part of a discussion that divides people.” Americans recognize a non-apology apology when they see one and, again, were unimpressed.
Anheuser-Busch’s CEO tried next: “We will need to continue to clarify the facts—that this was one can, one post, not a formal campaign or ad.” Hey, guys! It’s another non-apology apology. And we’re not going anywhere without a real apology.
Next, it apparently funded a drag show:
Despite tumbling sales and negative press coverage as a result of its partnership with transgender influencer Dylan Mulvaney, Bud Light is reportedly co-sponsoring an “all-ages Pride event” in Flagstaff, Arizona, according to the Flagstaff Pride website.
The party, which is called “Pride in the Pines” and includes drag queens and other performers, listed Bud Light as one of the companies sponsoring the June 17 event. (Bud Light was initially mentioned prominently in one of the posters.) The event is listed as a “family festival event” and a family-friendly, “safe space” for all visitors.
The implication was obvious: Bud was telling boycotting customers that they are fundamentally wrong.
So, perhaps it shouldn’t be a surprise that the latest Bud ad shows its ordinary, straight, mostly white customers as…stupid and inept:
Yes, you can view the ad to say, “We all make mistakes, but can’t we all get along?” However, I think most Bud drinkers would say that, without an apology, no, they can’t get along. More importantly, though, the ad aligns with the general attitude many in corporate America have toward their customers in “flyover country.”
We tend to view the corporate world’s excessive wokedom as (a) an expression of management values and (b) an effort to inculcate those values in the rest of us. Both of those are true, but there’s actually something in between (a) and (b); call it (a)1, if you will.
That intermediate point is that those who do not embrace management values are stupid. It’s not just our values that are wrong. We’re wrong. And the only way to fix us is to prod us relentlessly with Pride and DEI and BLM and all the other garbage. It’s not just to change our values; it’s to try to make us less stupid.
Then, as with the Bud commercial, corporate types periodically figure, “What the heck. Let’s just use their stupidity to our advantage. Those dumb hicks will surely forgive us now that we lovingly show them rising above their foibles and being brought together by our product.”
I tend to the opposite view: Give me common sense and good values any day. What’s coming out of academia and infecting corporate America is credentialism layered over ideological fantasies untethered to either facts or wisdom. Now that corporate America is revealing itself, these people deserve our disdain, and the best way to display that disdain is to leave their products to rot on the shelves or, as with Target, to avoid their outlets entirely.
https://www.americanthinker.com/blog/2023/06/bud_light_apparently_hates_its_customers.html
On the 24th of June, the Allahabad High Court dismissed a plea for police protection filed by an Interfaith Live-In couple. The couple had come to seek the court’s protection against alleged harassment by the Police. While dismissing the plea, the High Court observed that in Islam, any sexual, lustful, affectionate acts such as kissing, touching, staring, etc before marriage is prohibited.
The court observed that the couple, a 29-year-old Hindu woman and a 30-year-old Muslim man, did not show any intention to marry soon. Subsequently, the two-judge bench comprising Justices Sangeeta Chandra and Narendra Kumar Johari stated that according to Muslim law, sexual relations outside of marriage are not recognised.
The court said, “Zina which has been defined as any sexual intercourse except that between husband and wife includes both extramarital sex and premarital sex and is often translated as fornication in English. Such premarital sex is not permissible in Islam. In fact, any sexual, lustful, affectionate acts such as kissing, touching, staring, etc. are “Haram” in Islam before marriage because these are considered parts of ‘Zina’ which may lead to actual ‘Zina’ itself.”
The bench added, “The punishment for such offence according to Quran (chapter 24) is a hundred lashes for the unmarried male and female who commit fornication together with the punishment prescribed by the ‘Sunnah’ for the married male and female that is stoning to death.”
Essentially, the petitioners claimed that they are facing harassment from the police. Claiming that they come under the ambit of the Apex Court’s ruling in the case of Lata Singh vs. the State of UP (2006), the couple claimed that they should be given protection by the Court.
The court remarked that the Supreme Court’s opinions on ‘live-in’ relationships “cannot be considered to promote such relationships”. Referring to previous cases which touched on the subject of Live-In relationships vis-a-vis laws of the land, the court titled its remark in favour of the institution of marriage.
The Court stated, “The Observations of the Supreme Court as aforesaid however cannot be considered to promote such relationships. Law traditionally has been biased in favour of marriage. It reserves many rights and privileges to married persons to preserve and encourage the institution of marriage. the Supreme Court is simply accepting a social reality and it has no intention to unravel the fabric of Indian family life.”
The Court stated that on several occasions, the Supreme Court observed that section 125 CrPC is not meant for granting maintenance to the “other woman” – a case where a man, having a living lawfully wedded wife, either marries for a second time or starts living with a concubine.
The Court further noted that the apex court refused to broaden the definition of the term “wife” mentioned in section 125 of the CrPC to include live-in partners seeking maintenance claims.
The court’s ruling highlighted the importance of raising awareness among young individuals about the emotional, societal, and legal challenges that can arise from being in a live-in relationship.
The court observed that in this particular instance, the petitioners have only claimed that, since they are of legal age, they have the right to live with whomever they choose. However, the mother of one of the petitioners had expressed her dissatisfaction with this relationship. The Court remarked that writ jurisdiction is not made out in such matters of dispute between two private parties.
The Court observed, “Writ jurisdiction being extraordinary jurisdiction is not made to resolve such type of dispute between two private parties. We believe that it is a social problem which can be uprooted socially and not by the intervention of the Writ Court in the garb of violation of Article 21 of the Constitution of India unless harassment is established beyond doubt.”
The Court also stated that if a live-in couple faces genuine issues with their parents or relatives who interfere with their live-in relationship, to the extent that their lives are threatened, they have the freedom to take certain actions. These actions include filing a First Information Report (FIR) under Section 154 (1) or Section 154 (3) of the Criminal Procedure Code (CrPC) with the Police, submitting an application under Section 156 (3) of the CrPC to the appropriate Court, or initiating a complaint case under Section 200 of the CrPC.
The Honourable High Court made these observations while dismissing the protection plea (against police harassment) filed by an interfaith couple. They had alleged that the mother of the woman was unhappy with their Live-In relationship and lodged an FIR against them.
A court in Milan on Friday annulled the transcription into the Italian civil register of the foreign birth certificate of a child born to a male homosexual couple through gestational surrogacy carried out abroad, upholding a request from the public prosecutor’s office based on a ruling by Italy’s Supreme Court of cassation last December.
Instead it rejected the prosecutor’s request to also annul the transcription of the recognition of the children of three lesbian couples, born abroad through assisted fertility, by their intended mothers, ruling that another procedure involving removal of the child status is required. The Milan tribunal annulled the transcription of the birth certificate pertaining to the child of the gay couple born through surrogacy, which is illegal in Italy, on grounds that “it was in violation of the law in force which, by prohibiting the use of surrogacy, also prohibits the transcription of the birth certificate in the part where it states that the intended parent is also the parent”.
In their ruling the judges affirmed “that the child’s right to full recognition of the role played by the intended parent” in the “project aimed at his or her development, upbringing and education may be recognised through the adoption procedure in particular cases”.
This is in line with a Supreme Court ruling handed down in December 2022 according to which adoption by the intended parent rather than the automatic transcription of legal parental status established abroad is in the best interests of the child.
In March the government instructed city mayors to stop registering both members of a same-sex couple as the parents of a child via a procedure based on the transcription into Italian civil registers of the foreign birth certificates of children conceived via surrogacy or assisted fertility, which is only available to heterosexual couples in Italy, citing the Supreme Court of Cassation ruling This has led to concern that same-sex parent families will face multiple practical and legal problems, with only the member of the couple who is the biological parent of the child registered as its legal parent.
On Thursday the European Court of Human Rights rejected a series of appeals against Italy by same-sex couples asking the court to condemn Rome for no longer permitting the registration of foreign birth certificates of children born through surrogate mothers.
In one case, the appeal was filed by a heterosexual couple.
The court said the couples had had the option of adopting their children, and had not taken it.
The ECHR ruling is a blow against gay couples’ fights across Italy to keep the option of foreign surrogacy alive as parliament considers a bill filed by the right-wing Brothers of Italy (FdI) to make surrogacy a “universal crime”, meaning that henceforth couples who come back from abroad with kids had by a surrogate will be prosecuted.
French President Emmanuel Macron has suggested the imposition of a global taxation system in order to subsidise the green agenda to mitigate climate change.
Speaking at the Summit for a New Global Financing Pact in Paris on Friday, Mr Macron argued that actions from individual governments would be insufficient to deal with the alleged armageddon set to descend upon the world and therefore a new international taxation framework should be established.
“I’m in favour of an international taxation to finance efforts that we have to make to fight poverty and in terms of climate [action],” the French president said in comments reported by POLITICO.
“It doesn’t work when you do it alone, the [financial] flows go elsewhere,” Macron added, while shutting down calls for France to implement a new wealth tax to fund the green agenda.
“France already has in place two types of taxes that have been suggested: one on plane tickets, another on financial transactions,” he said adding that he was going to “make others follow us and mobilize” around these issues.
“There has been a great deal of discussion on the idea of international taxation, over and above what countries and institutions are doing. Whether it’s on financial transactions, maritime transport or certain other models, it will only work if it’s truly international, and so it presupposes an agreement, as we’ve been able to do on international taxation,” he said.
Macron suggested that the Paris-based Organisation for Economic Co-operation and Development (OECD) could be tapped for a negotiation process in the hopes of creating a global climate tax system for multinational corporations.
The French president, who is just one year into his second term, has faced months of turmoil in his own country, starting in earnest last Autumn amid the growing cost of living crisis in France and indeed throughout much of Europe as a result of the lockdowns and the failure of green energy to supply enough power to make up for lost Russian energy following the war in Ukraine.
The protests in France, which often devolved into riots and acts of vandalism, were often attributed soley to Macron’s controversial pension reforms, which raised the retirement age to 62 to 64-years-old, however, this was just the final straw for the working classes in their view of the government of the former Rothschild banker.
Last year, the globalist leader proclaimed that the poeple of Frane are “living through the end of abundance” — without aknowledging his own government’s role in the perpetuating policies, including the green agenda, that resulted in the economic devestation.
The brother of a 15-year-old teenager Shaïna Hansye who was stabbed, doused with gasoline, and burned alive by her Muslim boyfriend while pregnant with his baby, has expressed his anger over the prosecution’s decision not to appeal her killer’s prison sentence of 18 years.
The Juvenile Assize Court of Beauvais, northern France, sentenced her killer on June 9 after finding him guilty of luring Shaïna to a shed in the town of Creil and burning her alive back in October 2019. Forensic evidence provided to the court through the trial showed Shaïna had been stabbed multiple times with a knife and was alive when she was set alight.
The prosecution had pressed throughout the trial for a sentence in the region of 30 years’ imprisonment; however, the court ruled that because the killer had been 17 years old — and therefore a minor — at the time of the offense, a shorter penalty was proportionate.
At the time of the sentencing, Shaïna’s brother, Yasin Hansye, slammed the decision and shouted at the court, “18 years! That’s justice in France.”
It is understood the family of Shaïna wanted the prosecution to appeal the sentence, but no appeal has been filed and the timeframe to do so has now lapsed.
In a statement on Thursday, Yasin wrote: “More than 10 days have passed since the Beauvais Assize Court sentenced Shaïna Hansye’s killer to 18 years in prison on June 10, 2023.
“No appeal has taken place in time — neither on the part of the defense, nor on the part of the prosecution — and so this decision has become final. The accused killed my sister because she was pregnant by him and wanted to carry her pregnancy to term. She was stabbed at least eight times in her stomach before having gasoline poured over her body and being set on fire.
“If the lack of appeal of the defense can be understood, the absence of appeal of the prosecution which had requested 30 years in prison with the lifting of the excuse of minority, raises questions,” he wrote.
Yasin contrasted the different approach taken in other criminal matters such as organized crime where he claimed the prosecution will often immediately exercise its right of appeal. However, in the case of “terrifying and tragic” violence against women, prosecutors don’t seem to pursue matters as far, he wrote.
Shaïna’s brother continued to criticize the “excessive delays of justice, the clumsiness and errors of judgment” throughout the proceedings, and said the “failing prosecution” had done little to appease the Hansye family.
“Violence against women remains a secondary matter and its judicial treatment — despite perpetual promises — is unsatisfactory. The Shaïna case should encourage us to act urgently. Personally, I will work on it over the weeks and months to come.”
“May the memory of Shaïna, valiant and free, resist these times and our shortcomings,” he added.
German newspaper Bild’s smear campaign against the family of AfD politician Björn Höcke, in which other “quality media” vigorously collaborated, could turn into a fiasco for the paper. Because: The alleged drug possession of the eldest son was fictitious. Bild has already had to modify its article.
The “quality media” spread the Bild report: Search of Björn Höcke’s house.
In the text of the newspaper Bild, the reader then learns that this is not a current event. No, the house search took place almost seven months ago, on November 28, 2022. And the offense in question is not attributed to Björn Höcke. But his now 15-year-old son, who – according to Bild – is accused of alleged drug possession.
Specifically, it should be about a small amount of marijuana or hashish, with which the then 14-year-old son of Björn Höcke was caught in another state. An absolute petty offense, which is normally punished with a penalty order, if the accusations against Björn Höcke’s son are at all true.
And they are obviously not. Because: The anti-AfD newspaper Bild seems to have freely invented the alleged drug possession of the eldest Höcke son. Bild has already altered its article. The article’s note now states:
*In a first version we had written that the house search had been carried out because of drug possession of the elder son. This passage was deleted and corrected by new information.
The “new” information that Bild is currently spreading around the world about an underage boy is now: house search because of “illegal possession of weapons”. Allegedly, the legendary “weapon find” is a scare gun. The acquisition is forbidden for minors, not however the handling in the own four walls.
It is correct: The media, in lockstep with the judiciary, are committing a massive violation of the personal rights of Björn Höcke’s son for the most transparent political motives, according to the Compact magazine’s statement on the brutal campaign. Also correct: “One can only advise Björn Höcke to take action against this statement of the senior public prosecutor Ulf Walther. The latter had let himself be quoted by Bild with the words:
“On November 28, the home of the Höcke family in Bornhagen was searched. A minor family member is accused. The public prosecutor’s office in Mühlhausen has filed charges.”
The identity of minors, as Compact magazine notes, is protected in the German legal system, even when it comes to the most serious capital crimes such as murder or grievous bodily harm. In this case, however, at least if the report in the Bild newspaper is to be believed, a high-ranking judicial official reveals the identity of a minor in the course of ongoing proceedings. Or was the information leaked by the so-called constitutional protection service? Haldenwang, the head of the politically controlled store that operates under the name of the Federal Office for the Protection of the Constitution, had secreted the following sentence on state radio last week: “Not alone the Office for the Protection of the Constitution is responsible for lowering the AfD’s poll ratings.” Not alone! The judiciary and the mainstream media are quite obviously in on it.
A disturbing incident has emerged in Bareilly in Uttar Pradesh, where a Hindu boy underwent a forceful circumcision performed by a doctor named Javed Khan. The two and half-year-old Hindu kid was originally scheduled to undergo tongue surgery. Upon discovering this distressing situation, the boy’s family protested outside the hospital. Several members of a Hindu organisation gathered and voiced their anger through slogans outside the hospital.
Allegations have surfaced claiming that the hospital administration is exerting pressure on the parents of the victimised child to reach a compromise. Following the revelation of the incident, the police have initiated action, stating that an inquiry committee has been established and that legal measures will be taken by the applicable regulations.
Harimohan Yadav is a resident of the Sanjay Nagar area which comes under the Baradari police station. His two-and-a-half-year-old son Samrat could not speak. He was advised that if his son had an operation on his tongue, he would be able to speak.
Accordingly, Harimohan Yadav took his child to a private hospital in Delapir with the intention of getting a tongue operation done. The doctor at the hospital admitted the child for the scheduled operation. However, when they saw the boy after the operation, they found that no surgery was performed on the tongue. Instead, the doctor circumcised the boy. This left the family shocked.
Harimohan Yadav alleged that the doctors had deliberately done all this and converted his child from Hindu to Muslim. He said that the hospital authorities were pressuring him to compromise, but he would take action against the accused doctor so that the doctor could not carry out such an incident with anyone else again.
Carpenter Harimohan Yadav said that the doctor wanted to convert the child from Hindu to Muslim, which is why the name of the child was asked. At the same time, activists of Hindu Jagran Manch staged a protest after this incident.
However, the doctor defended his actions, claiming that he was told that the child had urinary tract problems and that is why he did that surgery. The doctor said, “The woman who works here is a neighbour of Ward Aaya. She brought the kid on Sunday. She knows what was the problem with the child. The child had problems related to urine. This is called phimosis disease. The cure for that disease is circumcision. It has nothing to do with religion.”
SP City Rahul Bhati said that the family had taken their two-and-a-half-year-old son for tongue surgery at Dr M Khan Hospital located under the Baradari police station area. There the baby has been circumcised instead of tongue operation. An application has been received in this regard. A committee has been formed to examine the application.
Following the incident, Hindu Jagran Manch reached the hospital and staged a protest. They alleged after circumcising a Hindu boy, now the hospital authorities are trying to reach a compromise with the family. They asserted that they will not led it happen.
https://www.opindia.com/2023/06/up-dr-javed-khan-circumcises-hindu-kid-admitted-for-tongue-surgery/
A man in Switzerland changed her gender via a simple box-ticking exercise in order to avoid mandatory military service for males and to shine a light on the absurd liberal transgender laws introduced last year.
Lucas Bänteli filled out a form expressing her desire to become a female, paid a €77 administration fee, and attended a 10-minute meeting at the Civil Status Office before having her application approved.
She has not changed her name, nor her public appearance in any way, and insists she continues to live as before, only now she is legally classified as female and as such does not need to comply with the obligatory military service that applies to every Swiss man between the ages of 18 and 30.
“I wanted to push this new regulation to absurdity, but I didn’t want to join the army either,” he said.
Under Swiss law, any individual who has the “personal conviction” that they identify as the opposite gender can now apply for legal reassignment. They can apply to have their gender modified on the civil status register via an accelerated procedure, without the need for a medical examination or court order.
The law came into effect at the beginning of last year, and Bänteli hopes that his decision to challenge the rules will make “politicians think” about how sensibly they are moving forward.
The 23-year-old could meet legal opposition, however. The Federal Office of Justice commented on the story to the Matin Dimanche newspaper, calling her approach illegal.
“Declarations of sex reassignment that are abusive or made lightly have no legal effect and are punishable. In case of suspicion on this subject, the circumstances must be clarified ex officio and, if necessary, a correction procedure must be initiated,” the federal office said in a statement.
Bänteli, however, thinks she could win in court due to “the absurdity of this regulation”.
“If only personal feeling counts, how could anyone prove that I didn’t really feel like a woman at the time of the change?” she asked.
A similar loophole was used by another Swiss man earlier this year who opted to modify his gender in order to retire a year earlier and start receiving his pension.
Michel Montini of the Federal Office of Justice admitted back in November last year that there were flaws with the new transgender laws, insisting that “people could declare themselves as a woman just before retirement and leave a year earlier.
“A single man who declares himself a woman can, for example, receive an AVS pension from the age of 64,” Montini added.
It may be unconventional, but it would seem that with the law as it currently stands, there isn’t much anyone can do about it.
https://rmx.news/article/swiss-man-pays-e77-admin-fee-to-change-gender-and-avoid-military-service/
