Today, the news broke that Oliver Stone has been accused of sexual assault. Just as the truth was coming out about Harvey Weinstein, Ben Affleck, Amazon Studios chief Roy Price, Oliver Stone has been accused by Carrie Stevens of grabbing her breast at a party 26 years ago, when she was 22 years old.
Carrie Stevens was Playboy’s Playmate of the Month for June 1997, and was on the cover of a Gene Simmoms’ magazine fall 2002 issue. Stevens is an American Model, actress, and entrepreneur.
On Monday at about 3:00 PM ET, CBS reported that legendary rock and roll artist Tom Petty had passed away after being rushed to the hospital, having been found unconscious and in cardiac arrest. This information had allegedly come from the LAPD. At 3:59 PM ET, CBS posted an update to the previous report stating that LAPD could not confirm that Petty had passed, and apologized for any inconvenience.
Seemingly, all of twitter had written Tom Petty’s epitaph within less than an hour of hearing the news of his alleged death. I think two valid arguments could be made after a mistake like this causes the world to think someone dead when they are still fighting for their life, the first of which I don’t claim to be my own.
The important fact here is that someone reported the death of Tom Petty before he was confirmed dead. It could’ve been an honest mistake, and it could’ve been an overzealous news outlet. If it was an honest mistake, it was still a reckless one. Just remember that there are a lot people who have a connection to Tom Petty, for some, such as family and friends, it is a personal connection. Announcing to the world that he is dead can possibly have an overwhelming impact on every single one of these people.
2. Everyone wants to be among the first to say R.I.P and send their thoughts and prayers over twitter.
It’s not that death is something that happens more often these days, it’s that it has become a trend in pop-culture to exploit the death of a celebrity for personal gain, in the form of songs, blog posts, poems, or memorial posts.
I support giving thoughts and prayers to the friends and family of someone who has passed. I support paying tribute to someone who has passed in whatever way one deems fit.
I do not support exploiting the death of a person for personal gain.
That's all.
but
North Korea is being pretty scary lately and it’s got the world afraid that they’re gonna start WWIII.
As The Washington Post reported, U.S intelligence officials are sure that North Korea has managed to produce a miniaturized nuclear warhead. This warhead can apparently can fit inside North Korea’s missiles. It is said that North Korea look to be making much progress to becoming a nuclear power. The intelligence community seems to have reason to believe that North now has nuclear weapons for ballistic delivery, and according to the July 28 dated assessments verified by two U.S officials, they include delivery by ICBM-class missiles.
President Trump has responded to threats from North Korea by warning “Fire and Fury and frankly power, the likes of which this world has never seen before,” if the threats to the safety of the United States continue. President Trump has tried to get China to work with the U.S on containing North Korea, to little avail. The President posted on his personal twitter account; “So much for China working with us – but we had to give it a try!” He also said about China; “I am very disappointed in China. Our foolish past leaders have allowed them to make hundreds of billions of dollars a year in trade, yet they do NOTHING for us with North Korea, just talk. We will no longer allow this to continue. China could easily solve this problem!”
If you read the recent headlines from mainstream media outlets about the current North Korea situation, you might notice that they won't criticize the North Koreans. Instead, they focus their energy on thinking of ways to try to discredit the Trump administration.
Kim Jun Un has posed a real existential threat to western world, and it's becoming clear that he wants to destroy our country and our way of life in the United States of America.
North Korea has most recently threatened to strike U.S military targets in Guam, not long after President Trump warned them of the "Fire and Fury" in which the U.S would rain upon them if they strike.
Other than reporting the very news of these threats from both sides, major news outlets seem to have trouble siding with the U.S on this issue, and don't seem to be making an effort to condemn the North Korean Supreme Commander.
CNN host Reza Aslan was fired by his network, and his show “believers” was cancelled just days after his anti-Trump tweets. Aslan tweeted these remarks after President Trump’s tweets reacting to the terror attacks in London. Aslan referred to Trump as an “embarrassment to America and a stain on the presidency” and a “piece of s—t.” Aslan later apologized for these statements after they caused controversy, stating that “I lost my cool and responded to him in a derogatory fashion. That’s not like me. I should’ve used better language to express my shock and frustration at the president’s lack of decorum and sympathy for the victims of London. I apologize for my choice of words.” The idea that it isn’t like Aslan to use this choice of words is an interesting claim, because this isn’t nearly the first time he has used this kind of language to describe people, including President Trump. Many news sites have published articles with pointing out the same thing, while including links or screenshots of his many others tweets that use profanity. This is the second time in the span of about a week since CNN has dropped a host due to controversy, since comedian Kathy Griffin was fired after a disgusting and graphic photo she released. Griffin also lost her one sponsor, and all of her gigs.
After this most recent Islamic terror attack at the Ariana Grande concert, I decided to go back and reflect on all of the Islamic terror attacks of the past two years. I genuinely didn’t expect there to be as many as there have been, it’s disturbing. I’ll post a link to the Wikipedia page I’m referring to at the bottom of this paragraph. According to this wiki page, it is “a list of Islamist terrorist attacks that have received significant press coverage since 1979.” Note that it only includes ones that have “received significant press coverage”, which means there could be ones that aren’t listed because they didn’t receive significant press coverage. To clarify what qualifies as a “terror attack”, the article at the top of the wiki page states that ”The attackers have used such tactics as arson, vehicle rampage attacks, bomb threats, suicide attacks, bombings, spree shooting, stabbings, hijackings, kidnappings and beheadings.”
Link to the wiki page: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_Islamist_terrorist_attacks
While I was brushing up on the recent islamic terror attacks, I decided to also read up on some statistics on Islam in the Middle east, Europe and the United States. Here’s some of what I found:
According to a Pew Research Center estimate, there were 1.6 Billion Muslims in the world as of 2010. This makes up roughly 23% of the global population. Pew Research center estimates that 10% of all Europeans will be Muslims by 2050. Anti-semitism is found to be common among muslims. The Anti-Defamation League released the results of polling 53,100 people in 102 countries in 2014, for evidence of ani-Semitic attitudes and beliefs. 74 of North African and Middle Eastern residents registered anti-Semitic beliefs. This includes 92 percent of Iraqis, 69 percent of relatively secular Turks, and 74 percent of Saudis. Read more at: http://www.nationalreview.com/article/428146/more-than-few-islamic-extremists
A survey was conducted by ICM Research for the channel 4 documentary, “What British Muslims Really Think,” The results for this 615-page survey show that 100,000 British Msulims sympathize with people who commit terror attacks, including suicide bombings. Also, 23% of British Muslims say that Sharia law should replace British law in places that are mostly populated by muslims. 52% percent of muslims claimed to believe that homosexuality should be illegal, compared to 22% non-muslim Britons. Almost half of them believe it is unacceptable for a gay or lesbian to teach their children. The poll also found that 31% of muslims think that polygamy should be legalized. 35% of 18 to 24 year- olds think it is acceptable to have more than one wife. 39% of muslims surveyed think that women should always obey their husbands. Only 5% of none muslims belived the same thing. One in three british muslims refuse completely to condmen the stoning of women who were accused(not proven to have actually commited it) of adultery.
Some of these facts may be disturbing and worrying for the future of the free world, but don’t be too afraid. Free Speech is on the rise, and the tolerance of a deadly ideology will only be discouraged as the light continues to expose the truth.
– Josh Smith
Follow our magazine on twitter @SpeechforFree1
There’s a bill that’s been introduced by Organ Representative Earl Blumenauer invoking the 25th Amendment, that would allow presidents and vice presidents to vet their successors. I would love to see trump interview the candidates for the next election. You know he’s hired a lot of people, he knows his way around a job interview. It would be hilarious to be in the room for that. Trump seems like he’d be intimidating to sit on the other side of a desk from. Most of the media tries to make a joke of the him, but you have to remember that trump is a big and tall guy, and he’s certainly experienced in making big deals, and based off of the stories in his book: “The Art of the Deal”, I think that a lot of this is because he’s figured out how to present himself as the authority in the room. Have you ever watched “The Apprentice”? I feel bad for some of the people sitting around the table; they look nervous, intimidated. They’re trying to make a good impression with a guy who wants his apprentice to be the absolute best person he can find, and he’s relentless when digging through all of the candidates for the position. I have to sympathize with these people. At some point they might just wonder, “what’s it worth if I’m only gonna get sent home?” I guess that’s just how it is in business.
Regardless of who’s doing the interview, imagine how nervous presidential candidates would get in a job interview for the position of President of the United States. Everyone gets nervous in job interviews, even the interviewer, but when the job you’re trying to get is the highest political office on the planet? That’s some crazy stuff. What questions would these interviews consist of? “What makes you qualified for this position?” I feel like that question wouldn’t go over well with some of our past presidents. Especially because the interviewer would call them on it when their answers were clearly nonsense. The interviewer could easily have all of your past mistakes in politics or in other jobs you’ve done on a sheet of paper in front of him, it’s not like you could just leave it off your resume. For a lot of interviews, the interviewer might have never heard of the person they’re interviewing, so the act that the interviewee tries to put on might be a little more believable.
These interviews would probably be televised too, just like the debates are. When the debates were first televised, the two main election candidates were U.S Senator John F. Kennedy (D), and Vice President Richard Nixon (R). Television made a big impact on this election, because for the first time the American people could see the candidates interacting in real life. They could see how these men answered questions in real time, and answered the other man’s arguments. The temperament that a person shows on TV during a presidential election has a big impact on how people vote. A lot of people think that Trump showed a temperament that wasn’t so good, others think that it was perfectly fitting for a president. It was a similar story with Clinton, but she didn’t do so well with the blue collar/working class voters like Trump did. I wouldn’t be surprised to learn that in a parallel universe where there isn’t TV or internet yet, that Hillary won by a landslide. It would be understandable, because she can come across as more professional and diplomatic when her words are transcribed into writing, which might be more effective than the way that Trump comes across in the same platform. I also wouldn’t be surprised if that election had the same outcome as ours, because controversial headlines gain a lot of attention, which is a big reason why Trump won. Either outcome in this past election could’ve happened, and either one would result in an all-out war between the two sides of the media. Not to mention everything that goes on around the internet after an election, and the riots in the streets we see at the moment.
There’s nothing more brave and edgy than talking about ideas and calling real people cowards when your profile picture is a mask.
2. See a post you disagree with on the internet? Start an Argument.
When you see someone express their opinion on the internet about a current event in politics or pop culture in which you disagree with, you cannot let it go unanswered. In fact, it is only noble to go after that person with your conflicting argument and possibly call them a few names if nothing else works. Always remember to make it look as if you have the moral high ground before your opponent does, especially if it appears as if you’re losing. When they ask you a difficult question, take the opportunity to sidestep the question and begin to speak on a moral argument that has nothing to do with said question.
3. Retweet a Snopes, Huffington Post, or The Young Turks article.
Snopes, Huffington Post, and The Young Turks are clearly the authorities in modern day honest and noble journalism.
There’s nothing more progressive and open-minded than hating on White-house cabinet members and other right-wingers for the color of their skin and maybe their gender.
In light of recent events, using They or Them to refer to a single person instead of He or She is now considered grammatically correct. Remember: calling yourself one gender is putting yourself in a box and we can’t have that. Feel free to express yourself though your gender and gender pronouns. Anyone who tells you that according to biology, there are only two genders, is a hater and anti-progress.
In today’s heated debate scene in politics, presidential candidates have to speak and present themselves in a way that appeals to the American people. It would be very difficult for a politician to gain the vote of the people by telling them the bitter and ugly truths that they don’t want to hear. There is science behind this.
When a candidate is on stage talking about a key issue in an emotionally charged way, pandering to a certain group in hopes of gaining their vote, it travels past the logical part of the brain called the cerebral cortex, and enters through the limbic system. Which is the more primitive and less rational part of the brain. The masses of people don’t care how rational it is. They don’t care to do much needed research, they don’t want to engage in intellectual discourse and compare view points and try to come to a conclusion through an honest debate. They just want to be told what they want to hear. They just want to get what they want in life without having to bust their butts to get it. Thankfully, this isn’t you. I write in hopes to reach an audience of mostly entrepreneurs and hard-working people. The kind of people that are willing to do the dirty work and spend long hours working to make progress in a new startup or some new project they’re pumped about.
Sir Frances Bacon had it figured out in 1620. He called it “Confirmation Bias”. In my own words; when a politician says something that contradicts one’s preexisting emotions and memories, he is surely in trouble. The statements made enter the brain, and the brain compares it to its preexisting beliefs on the topic. If the new information contradicts them, the brain reacts in a very negative way emotionally. You see, everyone carries a memory of biases, stereotypes, and preexisting beliefs around in their brains. When they are deeply rooted, it is very hard to uproot them, and most people don’t have the integrity to do so. They are only looking for confirmation of what they already believe.
There is a clear difference between evaluating information in search of a conclusion, and searching for information that supports a pre-determined conclusion. Robert Cialdini teaches in his book “Influence: The Psychology of Persuasion, that we naturally value consistency more than we do being right. This causes cognitive dissonance. If you don’t already know, cognitive dissonance is the mental discomfort or stress caused by two or more contradicting beliefs, the confrontation of facts that contradict one’s preexisting beliefs, ideas or principles, or performing a task that contradicts one’s preexisting beliefs, ideas, or principles.
Studies show that we are more likely to buy a product from a salesperson that we consider to be attractive. It makes sense that people might choose one candidate over another based on looks. Likability also can play a role in who we vote for. Ever since the first televised presidential debates in 1960 with John F. Kennedy and Richard Nixon, looks, charisma, and overall charm has played a big role in the presidential elections. When the voters can see the candidates speaking and engaging in discourse, they can decide within moments who they think is the more likeable character. Sadly, this is the deciding factor for some people.
I try my best not to play the partisan game when deciding who to vote for, because I don’t want to be the guy who just votes for one given party 100% of the time, despite the actual policies of the candidates. I believe that it is an act of intellectual integrity to vote for your policies rather than your party. Sadly, you probably won’t find someone that you agree with 100% on every notable issue, so I find it best to find a balance between what a candidate believes, and how much of an overall positive difference I believe they could make.
Social Proof is one of the key factors in how an election is decided. If the media all points one direction politically, the masses of people consuming the media will be encouraged to vote for that given candidate, and looked down upon for voting against them. Especially with all of the different media platforms that exist in 2016; TV, radio, tabloids, magazines, social media, blogs, etc. “Where all think alike, no one thinks very much” – Walter Lippmann. I believe this quote summarizes my talking point here. I published an article about two months ago called “Nonconformity is The New Conformity”. My main goal with it was to point out the irony in considering yourself a hipster or a rebel, and yet voting for the candidate that the media is telling you to vote for. Some people were very kind and gave it some positive feedback.
Thanks for reading, feel free to give any feedback in the comments below, and follow me if you wouldn’t mind seeing more of these.
To Read, or Not to Read 