Mediaboss Marketing

MichaelLucas.com

by Aaron Klein9 Oct 20170

Lucas slammed liberals for being largely silent amid increasing reports of gay people being persecuted in the Muslim world. And he said that he has noticed a trend in which theleft-wing focuses on a specific countrys leadership instead of political Islam when attributing blame for anti-gay policies and actions.

Lucas said he is noticing a trend in which more and more gays are leaving their base and the party line because the party line is Islam is a good thing. Islam is our friend.

Lucas is the founder and CEO of Lucas Entertainment, New Yorks largest gay adult film company and one of the biggest gay porn production companies in the world.

He was speaking in an interview Sunday night on this reporters talk radio program, Aaron Klein Investigative Radio, broadcast on New Yorks AM 970 The Answer and NewsTalk 990 AM.

Listen to the interview below:

Fifty-seven people were reportedly arrested by Egyptian authorities in recent days in what the news media have described as the widest crackdown on the countrys gay community.

According to Amnesty International, as well as lawyers for some of those detained, forced anal exams were carried out on some of the individuals accused of having homosexual sex. Egyptian Judicial sources cited by Reuters did not deny the anal examinations, instead defending the procedures as legal and not a form of abuse, as human rights organizations have charged.

Lucas said the liberal world has been struggling to react to the events in Egypt and other recent reports of homophobia across the larger Islamic world.

He stated:

Now that we are talking about Muslim homophobia, it is becoming very inconvenient for liberals because liberals are apologists for Islam. So it is becoming very inconvenient, and that is why they usually tie it to some specific person; specific bad leader. For example, it would be [Egyptian President Abdel Fattah] Sisi, or it would be in Chechnya the leader [Chechen President Ramzan Akhmadovich] Kadyrov, or it would be one individual that is responsible or maybe at the most one political party, but not political Islam. So that is exactly what is happening here in this situation.

This was happening before Sisi. This is happening all over the Muslim world all of those Muslim countries to one degree or another. For example, in Saudi Arabia, it is a daily routine, while in Egypt there are waves.

Gay Media Censorship

Even though Lucas is a celebrity in Western gay culture, he said that most gay publicationswhere he regularly penned articles in the past gradually stopped publishing any of hispiecesrelated to Islam. Hecharged thatthis censorship, as helabeled it,escalatedashe started noticing what he described as a change in theattitude of talkbacks within the U.S gay community toward Islam.

Lucas stated: Gays, no matter how much you brainwash them, it is very difficult in the end to say, No, Islam is not an enemy of gay people. So as public opinion of gay people was changing, gay publications, most of them stopped publishing my articles about Islam.

And that is actually very interesting. I could write about anything but not about Islam because gay people should be in their own box It is becoming dangerous that gays are leaving their base and the party line because the party line is Islam is a good thing. Islam is our friend.

The latest crackdown in Egypt, meanwhile,began on Sept. 22 when a handful of attendees at a concert by the Lebanese alternative rock band Mashrou Leila raised a rainbow flag, and the incident went viral on social media. Authorities arrested at least four people for hoisting the flag at the concert.

Reuters further reported on the timeline of events following the concert:

Almost immediately, local media, dominated by state-aligned television personalities, began a campaign against homosexuals, saying they were receiving foreign funding and hosting callers who compared their threat to Islamic State.

Egypts media regulator then banned homosexuals from appearing in the media unless they were repenting, calling homosexuality a shame and a disease that should be kept under wraps, not promoted in order to protect public morality.

The overwhelming majority of those arrested are not involved in the flag case, however, and have simply been arrested over their perceived sexual orientation in the following days. Police have raided homes, parties, and used online dating apps to lure gay men a common tactic in Egypt to arrest most of them, their lawyers say.

Aaron Klein is Breitbarts Jerusalem bureau chief and senior investigative reporter. He is a New York Times bestselling author and hosts the popular weekend talk radio program, Aaron Klein Investigative Radio. Follow him onTwitter @AaronKleinShow.Follow him onFacebook.

Original post:
EXCLUSIVE - Gay Porn Kingpin Michael Lucas: Muslim Homophobia ...

The horror show that was the 2016 election will be examined and reexamined for years, and depending on how bad things get, quite likely decadesto come. There were, of course, a lot of factors: Cultural change, economic change, racism, liberal complacency after Barack Obama, the FBI manipulating the election, the Russian government manipulating the election, hatred of feminism and so on.

But it's also important to noticethat Donald Trump's election is the culmination of decades of right-wing media teaching its audience that liberals are subhuman scum, and that hating liberals whatever their stereotype of a "liberal" looks like is far more important that minor concerns like preventing war or economic destruction.

Friday morning, the phrase "preparing for Trump" started trending on Twitter. It appears to have started withliberals tweeting out an article by Peter Dreier laying out a 10-step process to resist Trump's attempts to turn our government into a kleptocracy at best, and a fascist state at worst. But of course the meme was soon taken over by right-wingers eager to exclaim how excited they were about the Trump presidency.

But what's fascinating is how few of them, had anything positive to say about Trump and his coming presidency, despite their apparent love of the Great Orange Grimace. On the contrary, the contributions of Trump supporters on the thread were almost exclusively negative: They are gleefully certain that he will rain destruction on the heads of the hated liberals.

Trump's fans on Twitter don't seem to think that he'll improve the economy or foreign relations or anything at all, really.In fact, they seem wholly opposed to the concept of improvement. Their worship of the man lies with their belief that he's an agent of destruction, who will hurt people they have been trained by the likes of Rush Limbaugh and Sean Hannity to believe are evil.

Original post:
Conservatism turned toxic: Donald Trumps fanbase has no ...

A statue of Confederate commanding general Robert E. Lee is seen in the crypt of the US Capitol in Washington, DC on August 24, 2017.

AFP/Getty Images

A daily roundup of the biggest stories in right-wing media.

The monuments debate dominated conservative discourse on Thursday. At National Review, Victor Davis Hanson argued that liberals are unwilling to take down monuments to their racist historical figures:

Liberal icon and Supreme Court Justice Earl Warren pushed for the internment of Japanese Americans during World War II while he was Californias attorney general. President Woodrow Wilson ensured that the Armed Forces were not integrated. He also segregated civil-service agencies.

Why, then, does Princeton University still cling to its Woodrow Wilson School of Public and International Affairs? To honor a progressive who did a great deal of harm to African-American causes? ...

At the Daily Caller, Rob Shimshock reported that a Canadian teachers union would like to remove the name of Canadas first prime minister from Ontario schools:

The Blazes Jon Street noted that former U.N. ambassador Andrew Youngs opposition to removing Confederate monuments, which he articulated in interviews with CNNs Anderson Cooper and NBCs Chuck Todd, telling the latter that Klan supporters of Confederate monuments are almost the poorest of the poor. Youngs argument for why Confederate monuments should stay in place echo the argument that President Donald Trump made throughout the 2016 campaign, which was that the forgotten man and forgotten woman in the West Virginia coal mines or the Michigan factory would be forgotten no more, Street wrote.

Multiple outlets ran posts on a New York Times article reporting that Hispanic and black students are more underrepresented at elite colleges now than they were 35 years ago. The NYT found that black students only made up 9 percent of freshman students, while Hispanic students represented 15 percent of students at Ivy League Schools, the Daily Callers Amber Randall wrote. White students enrollment also went down, while the percent of Asian-American students on the Ivy League campuses increased slightly. National Reviews David French:

Read the rest here:
Today in Conservative Media: Are the Liberals Ever Going to Admit They Have a Racist Past Too? - Slate Magazine (blog)

In that guide, the S.P.L.C. claims that I am a propagandist far outside the political mainstream and warns journalists to avoid my damaging misinformation. These groundless smears are deeply offensive, as I have dedicated much of my adult life to calling out the true extremists: organizations such as Al Qaeda and ISIS. Yet you will look in vain for the S.P.L.C.s Field Guide to Muslim Extremists. No such list exists.

Thats a shame, because Islamic extremism a movement that aims to impose a caliphate and Sharia law by violent means is as toxic as white supremacy. In the past two decades, it has certainly been responsible for many more deaths.

Like neo-Nazis, Islamic extremists despise liberalism. They deny the equality of the sexes, justify wife-beating and, in some cases, even the enslavement of female unbelievers. The Islamic State and groups like it regularly murder gay people in the most heinous ways. Islamic extremists are also virulently anti-Semitic, like the Nazis before them. And like todays American Nazis, they brandish swastikas, chant slurs and peddle conspiracy theories.

The terrible consequences of Islamic extremism are on display on a weekly basis around the world. In the days after Charlottesville, five men in Barcelona used a van and knives to kill 14 and injure scores of innocent people. Another Islamic extremist went on a stabbing rampage in Finland. In wealthy societies like the United States, most plots to kill in the name of Islamist supremacy are foiled. But poorer societies in the developing world lack the means to do that, which is why the majority of victims of the extremists are in countries like Afghanistan, Iraq, Nigeria, Pakistan and Syria.

It is not surprising that, when I point out such facts, I am viciously attacked and threatened by those who are dedicated to Islamic extremism. But it has always struck me as odd that so many supposed liberals in the West take their side rather than mine, as happened three years ago, when Brandeis University rescinded their offer to me of an honorary degree. I would have expected a civil-rights organization supposedly committed to justice to speak out against those who would oppress women, gays and people of other faiths. But the S.P.L.C. has nothing to say about Islamic extremists; only about their opponents.

Another voice the S.P.L.C. has tried to silence is that of Maajid Nawaz, who was included in the same field guide as me. (He is suing the organization for defamation.) Mr. Nawaz has written extensively about his past as an Islamic extremist in England and Egypt, just as Ive written about my time in the Muslim Brotherhood as a teenager. For the past decade, he has run Quilliam, an organization dedicated to countering Islamic extremism in Britain and elsewhere, notably in Pakistan.

I met Mr. Nawaz in 2010 at a debate in New York City, where the subject was the nature of Islam. Our passionate disagreement was on full display: Mr. Nawaz is a secular Muslim, whereas I am not a believer any longer. Yet we both agreed the path to a successful reformation of Islam lies in more debate, more scrutiny and more critical thinking. It is exactly these activities that our opponents, now including the S.P.L.C., describe as extremism.

Cui bono? That question is nearly always the right one to ask of organizations like the S.P.L.C. Who really benefits from their activities? Repeatedly, and for more than a decade, journalists at publications ranging from Harpers to Politico to The Nation to The Weekly Standard have pointed out that the centers founders seem more interested in profiting off the anxieties and white guilt of Northern liberals than in upholding the civil rights of poor Southerners, or anyone else. Theres a less cynical explanation, though, which is that liberals are deeply and increasingly uncomfortable with calling out Islamic extremism for fear of being smeared as Islamophobic, or worse.

Regardless, the S.P.L.C.s decision to target those who speak up for the civil rights of Muslims is a travesty.

Muslims today cannot freely debate the role of their religion in most Muslim-majority countries, where the charges of heresy or apostasy can mean a death sentence or a lynch mob. Here in the West, too, free discussion of Islam is getting harder not least because Islamic organizations like the Council on American-Islamic Relations pounce on any criticism of Islam, branding it hate speech, the modern word for heresy. Unwittingly or not, the S.P.L.C. is abetting Islamic extremists by branding critical thinkers like Mr. Nawaz and me extremists.

Taking a stand against the neo-Nazi display we saw in Charlottesville is an impulse that should be cheered and Apple, JP Morgan and the Hollywood A-list can and should do more to counter political violence and intolerance in all its forms. But they need to find more trustworthy and deserving partners to work with than the S.P.L.C.

An earlier version of this article misstated the name of an organization. It is the Council on American-Islamic Relations, not the Council of American Islamic Relations.

Continue reading here:
Why Is the Southern Poverty Law Center Targeting Liberals? - The ... - New York Times

The WA Liberals moderate faction, aligned with deputy federal leader Julie Bishop, is pushing for changes in the state partys preselection process. Photograph: James Ross/AAP

The West Australian Liberal party is facing a potentially bruising fight over its preselection process, with members trying to replicate the voting reforms championed by Tony Abbott in New South Wales.

A special meeting of the partys state executive was held in Perth on Wednesday evening to discuss the reform proposals but the fiery meeting ended in disagreement.

As a consequence, the partys state conference on 2 September will now be asked to consider whether more rank-and-file Liberal party members ought to be allowed to vote in preselection contests, without first having agreed on the proposed model.

It is unclear whether the members pushing for reform will have the numbers at the state conference. They will need 75% of votes to be successful.

The reform push is coming from WA moderates aligned with the deputy federal Liberal leader, Julie Bishop, and Senator Linda Reynolds. If they are successful, it will dilute the power of the dominant WA conservative faction led by the finance minister, Mathias Cormann, and Liberal state MPs Nick Goiran and Peter Collier.

The moderates reform push has gained considerable traction since last month, when the Liberal partys NSW convention passed a motion championed by Abbott to grant members the right to vote in preselection contests.

Interestingly, the push for change in NSW came from Abbott-led conservatives, not moderates, because Abbott has long been trying to dilute the influence of party moderates in the preselection process in the state.

Candidates in WA are currently chosen by a committee of delegates appointed by branches but the state conference next month will be asked to vote on a proposal to change the preselection process.

One motion will propose amending the partys constitution to give all members (of at least 18 months standing) the right to vote in a plebiscite for candidates and senior office bearers.

The plebiscite motion is being heavily pushed by the moderates. It was written by Andrew Reynolds, the brother of Senator Reynolds.

A second, alternative, motion will propose retaining the existing preselection arrangements but also allowing a greater number of branch-appointed delegates to vote.

Liberal party members have told Guardian Australia it will be difficult but not impossible for the plebiscite proposal to get 75% of the votes at the state conference.

The prime minister, Malcolm Turnbull, is scheduled to attend the conference on 2 September, as is Abbott.

At the NSW Liberal party convention last month, Turnbull spoke in favour of plebiscites as a way of giving more power to members and building the partys membership base. He described plebiscites as a fundamental element of party democracy.

Abbott, who has been criticising the direction of the federal government under Turnbull, said afterwards: Now we can go forward as one united party.

Abbott also told reporters that those who opposed his one member, one vote motions were advocating fake democracy.

A key proponent of the NSW reforms, the Warringah electoral conference president and powerbroker, Walter Villatora, said last month the NSW party membership had clearly spoken and the reforms would make NSW the most democratic division in Australia.

Abbott is in WA this week and will be speaking at the Samuel Griffiths Society conference in Perth on Saturday.

Follow this link:
WA Liberals braced for bruising contest over preselection process - The Guardian