No Safe Spaces — You have the right to remain silent

More and more often, I ask myself a question: Do I still have a right to express my opinions freely, or do I have to contact some licensed practitioner of political correctness, to have them approved first?

Freedom of speech?

The First Amendment — the most important amendment to the US Constitution — is under attack in America today. An increasing number of Americans believe that you have the right to speak your mind only if your view of the world is the same as theirs. And if that’s not the case — too bad — you’re not allowed to speak (at least at the environment they control, aka college campuses).

The movie

A new documentary created by comedian and podcaster Adam Carolla, along with radio talk show host Dennis Prager — “No Safe Spaces” — just hit the theaters. Carolla and Prager, with help from a few other smart people, deal with the growing problem of freedom of speech suppression coming from people who (a long time ago) use to be in the avant-garde of its defense — intellectuals or, let’s call them pseudointellectuals. (Real intellectuals don’t silence people, they debate them.)

We’re creating this environment where liberals and leftists and progressives on campuses think that they need to get government authority or university authority to protect their ears from stuff they don’t like, or stuff that’s actually offensive, or stuff that is racist or is sexist or is horrible. And I just think that’s a very dangerous view.

Van Jones
Directed byJustin Folk
Screenplay byJohn Sullivan
FeaturingAdam Carolla
Dennis Prager
Ben Shapiro
Tim Allen
Alan Dershowitz
Sharyl Attkisson
Van Jones
Dave Rubin
Candace Owens
Cornel West
Ann Coulter
Jordan Peterson
Release date October 25, 2019 (USA)

Safe space is a waste of space.

Most (pseudo) intellectuals want to silence proponents of views that don’t follow the official line set by the thought police. Some of them (I assume, those still innocent and delicate) advocate for “safe spaces” — areas where they can isolate themselves from the reality and the risk of meeting someone who doesn’t share their politically correct take on life. It would be much simpler and chipper to putt blindfolds on, and pack a couple of pounds of cotton in each ear. There’s no need to waste any real estate, so a bunch of “snowflakes” can feel safe.

The term safe space refers to places created for individuals who feel marginalized to come together to communicate regarding their experiences with marginalization, most commonly located on university campuses in the western world, but also at workplaces, as in the case of Nokia.


What happened? It used to be about exchanging ideas and alternative points of view but today…

Today, instead of presenting and defending their opinions, more and more people (especially at institutions of higher education) want to force their beliefs on others. No one cares about alternative points of view. It’s either their way or a highway.

Why are they afraid of debate?

There’s nothing wrong with having different opinions. The problems start when people, instead of presenting and then explaining/defending their point of view, do a presentation and replace explaining with attacks on anyone who dares to challenge that point of view. It’s not just that they don’t want to listen to any counterarguments; more importantly, they don’t want anyone else to hear them.

So, why is it?
I believe that the main reason why a person would not want to allow any alternative opinions to float around is fear that their views will not hold up when compared to those of others.
They know they’re wrong.

Thank You For Reading

Sylvester Stallone New (Trumpian) Rambo Movie Drives The Leftists Insane

Ladies and gents, as a result of substantial pressure from my politically correct friends, I finally see the need to add a new word to my already extensive, official vocabulary!
The word is:


Trumpian is an adjective form for President Donald Trump. The term is primarily used by critics to characterize his language, conduct, and policies.

Rambo: Last Blood – the fifth (probably the last) installment in Rambo saga just hit theaters near you (September 20, 2019) and some people out there don’t like it. They don’t like it, because the storyline of the latest motion picture from action-movie legend Sylvester Stallone, lands way to close to the point of view represented by Pres. Donald Trump, therefore, they branded the movie; Trumpian.

Sly says a few words about the PTSD and brutal violence in the movie.

Directed byAdrian Grunberg
Screenplay byMatthew Cirulnick
Sylvester Stallone
StarringSylvester Stallone
Paz Vega
Sergio Peris-Mencheta
Adriana Barraza
Yvette Monreal
Genie Kim
Joaquín Cosío
Oscar Jaenada
Release dateSeptember 20, 2019 (United States)

So, what’s broken?

Let’s start with a couple of headlines.

Sylvester Stallone’s perpetual warrior returns in a revenge story that couldn’t be more toxic and Trumpian.
( Rolling Stone – subtitle )


Rambo: Last Blood review – Stallone storms Mexico in a laughable Trumpian fantasy.
( The Gurdian )


Rambo: Last Blood Is Part MAGA Fantasy, Part Saw Movie. The new movie completes John Rambo’s transformation into a Trumpian hero.
( Slate )

and the last but not the least

Rambo: Last Blood’ Is a Trumpian, Anti-Mexican Nightmare.
( Daily Beast )

Critics consensus – everything is broken.

And Stallone is a very bad Trumpian dude…

There’s a lot of angry comments aimed at this film. The reviewers take issue with a number, in their opinion, offensive themes, and plots used in the movie.

Let’s dig a little dipper into some of the examples.

  • The depiction of Mexicans as criminals and thugs.
    It’s a matter of the fact that criminal characters in Stallone’s movie look substantially Mexican. But complaining about it would only make sense if the Mexican drug cartels were composed exclusively of tea-sipping English gentlemen and the members of the Royal Family. (Fortunately for English gentlemen and the Royals, this isn’t the case.)
  • The inability of the female victims to retaliate against their abusers.
    It appears that it is not cool anymore for a woman to be feminine. For some reason, members of the politically correct part of our society don’t like that female characters in Stallone’s movie are shown as regular women instead of Special Ops G.I. Janes capable of killing a man (even some machete waving psychopath) by driving a toothpick thru his forehead.
  • The portrayal of Mexico as a collection of slums, graffiti-covered buildings, streets overcome with garbage, stray dogs, and frightening residents.
    Mexico is beautiful. One can expect to see stunning architecture, eat delicious food, and meet amazing people. But Mexico is a vast country, and there’re many areas not as friendly as Cancún or island of Cozumel. Stallone is exposing the worst of the worst because that was the movie’s storyline. Rambo was looking for a kidnapped girl turned into a sex slave. In a case like that, no one sane is going to investigate archeological sites or historic churches.

Finally, everything is clear.

And I’m in shock.

The movie plot makes perfect sense. But because the story calls for main characters to cross the U.S. border couple of times and because some of those characters are Mexican, the guardians of political correctness have reached the conclusion that Stallone uses his movie to support President Trump border-agenda, and of course they (the P.C. guardians) hate that.

What’s the best way to unload all that accumulated anger?
Spread of lies and misinterpretations about the movie.

So, they insinuate that:

Rambo: Last Blood is a brutal, unadulterated attack on the entire population of Mexico. That opinion is based on the grounds that…
Stallone hired Latino actors to play Mexican criminals. What can I say? It’s perfectly obvious, Stallone is a racist who believes that all Mexicans are drug dealers, rapists, and psychopathic killers.

And that’s not all.

Stallone is also a sexist. He dares to portray women in his movie as soft, feminine human beings with feelings.
That’s not O.K.

And all those scenes with decaying neighborhoods.

How can Sly even suggest that such places exist, and worse, that they exist in Mexico? It looks like Stallone hates Mexico and everything associated with it – especially taco. Is he xenophobic?

Bad Sylvester. Bad, bad Sylvester.

And now on a little more serious note…

(Just a tiny bit more serious)

The last thought.

At first, when starting to write this paragraph, I wanted to drop a couple of short sentences containing my thoughts on all the reviews I’ve read so far and maybe something about the authors who’s written them. Then all of a sudden it hit me – I’ve realized that I haven’t read any reviews of the newest Stallone movie yet.

The articles I’ve read which claimed to be movie reviews, were not, in fact, reviews. Those were attempts by politically opinionated writers at convincing potential moviegoers to stay home or to pick some other motion picture to enjoy. Those “reviews” push leftist political agenda when accusing Stallone of supporting right-wing ideas.

Why all that opposition to a simple action movie sporting some senior-citizen tough guy inflicting damage on a bunch of bad actors who definitely deserve whatever has been served to them?
Well, Stallone managed to break every major rule of politically correct movie making.

He chose the wrong thugs for Rambo to kill, the wrong line of crime for them to be in and the wrong geographical area in which his film’s action was set. There’s Mexican cartel involved in drug/sex trafficking, making a weekend journey across totally unsecured U.S. southern border with intentions to take out some old, quiet veteran.

What the hell was Sly thinking when writing the script? Isn’t he aware that there’s absolutely no crime in Mexico? Isn’t it evident that no one is able of trafficking anything or anyone across our southern border, because it is a hundred and ten percent secured? I’ve thought that smart dude like Stallone would know that.

The second last thought.

Personal note to Sly Stallone. (I hate to say it, but I will say it anyway.)

Sylvester Enzio Stallone, you have royally screwed up! My favorite ass-kicking movie character is going to end up in the museum of cinema with a huge stamp across his forehead saying – TRUMPIAN HERO. Sly I will never forgive you for that.

However, if you’ll come up with another Rambo movie, where you’ll replace all those Mexicans with white guys wearing MAGA heats and set the action in the center of Manhattan during upcoming 2020 election, I will consider rewriting the previous paragraph.
I see multiple Oscars and the Nobel Peace Prize coming your way.
Good Luck!!!

Thank You For Reading

Steve Bannon’s (Huawei) Claws of the Red Dragon

Does Chinese telecom giant Huawei have ties to the People’s Liberation Army?

Jan Jekielek sits down with Steve Bannon to discuss how the Chinese communist elites have gained power and wealth through access to Western capital and technology and used that power to stifle dissent and advance their self-serving global ambitions.

Steve Bannon is former White House chief strategist to President Donald Trump and former executive chairman of Breitbart News. He is also the Co-Founder of the Committee on the Present Danger: China.

Is it still worth it to do business in China?

Published on Aug 24, 2019
by The Epoch Times

Chinese business model is simple.


  • The Chinese government lets western businesses open factories in China. Western companies like it because labor is cheap.


  • The Chinese government asks western businesses to transfer their technology to Chinese partners. (In many sectors, Beijing will only let foreign firms operate through joint ventures in which Chinese partners have the majority stake.)


  • The Chinese partners of western businesses use newly acquired technology to create “their product,” and manufacture it using laborers trained by, guess who, western businesses.


  • The Chinese partners of western businesses export “new” cheaper product all over the world, creating competition for other western companies.


  • Other western businesses, which don’t have factories in China, can’t compete. They ask the Chinese government for permission to open a factory in China.


  • The Chinese government lets other western businesses open factories in China. The western companies like it because labor is cheap.


Rinse and repeat. As many times as possible.

I know this is extremely simplified explanation, but…

Simplicity is the ultimate sophistication.

Leonardo da Vinci

And I feel very, very smart right now.

Thank You For Reading

The Hunt – Hollywood Slaughtering Deplorables

Presidential Tweet

President Trump has dropped a no-holds-barred, hard-hitting tweet aimed at Hollywood.

Liberal Hollywood is Racist at the highest level, and with great Anger and Hate! They like to call themselves “Elite,” but they are not Elite. In fact, it is often the people that they so strongly oppose that are actually the Elite. The movie coming out is made in order to inflame and cause chaos. They create their own violence and then try to blame others. They are the true Racists, and are very bad for our Country!

Pres. Donald Trump

Although he doesn’t mention any specific title, it appears that the President is talking about new (set to hit theaters Sept. 27), filled with a high level of violence, movie titled The Hunt.

The Hunt

“The Purge” producers – Blumhouse Productions in Cooperation with NBC, Comcast and Universal generated the motion picture in which liberal elites stalk deplorables (Yes, the same term Hillary Clinton infamously dubbed Trump supporters during the 2016 election,) called “The Hunt” (Original title: “Red State Vs. Blue State”.) The movie stars Betty Gilpin and Hilary Swank, representing opposite sides of the political spectrum.

Character 1:

“Did anyone see what our ratfucker-in-chief just did?”

Character 2:

“At least The Hunt’s coming up. Nothing better than going out to the Manor and slaughtering a dozen deplorables.”

Is Hollywood trying to get us used to the idea of people with “wrong” political views being hunted and killed for sport? I hope not.

It looks like guys at Blumhouse haven’t learned anything from Kathy Griffin’s “political statement” fiasco and decided to go bigger and better. The movie features two politically opposing groups of people: Wealthy thrill-seeking liberals (aristocracy) and working-class conservatives (deplorables) where aristocracy kidnaps deplorables and then hunts them for sport, in some secluded five-star resort. Unfortunately for rich killers, one of the hunted is pretty good in sending bed guys to hell and in the end does precisely that.

I don’t have a problem with violent movies. As a matter of fact, I like to watch movies with lots of action in it. The more, the better. But, I don’t think that using political divisions, which there are a lot in today’s world, for profit is the right thing to do.

The latest news development.

It looks like Deplorables took The Hunt down.

On August 7, 2019, Universal announced that in the wake of the Dayton and El Paso mass shootings, they would be suspending the film’s promotional campaign. Later on, the film was pulled from the studio’s release schedule altogether.

While Universal Pictures had already paused the marketing campaign for The Hunt, after thoughtful consideration, the studio has decided to cancel our plans to release the film. We stand by our filmmakers and will continue to distribute films in partnership with bold and visionary creators, like those associated with this satirical social thriller, but we understand that now is not the right time to release this film.

Spokesperson for Universal Pictures

Thank You For Reading

Lashana Lynch Is New 007… Temporary Replacement

Martini got shaken and seriously disturbed. Is this the attempt to assassinate Bond? James Bond?

Bond 25

The movie hasn’t been made yet, but due to my extensive connections (?) in show business, I’ve got a short version of the movie plot which I’m going to share with you.

Do not panic. James Bond, the handsome guy with a gun, has not died yet. He decided to go on vacation in Jamaica, and some cute woman got a part-time gig, pretending to be 007 so that the real Bond could rest a little and recharge his batteries.

Off course, the life of a spy is not simple. Because the temporary 007 (the cute one), due to lack of training and glaring incompetents, is unable to perform her duties at the required level, real 007 (the handsome one) is called off his vacation.

Being forced to cut his Jamaican vacations short makes him mad as hell, and the kind of welcome he receives when landing in MI6 headquarters doesn’t help. The temporary 007 (the cute one) doesn’t want to return his 007 jerseys back to him.

After short argument inside the supervisor’s office, Bond pulls out his historic Walther PPK and skillfully places two .380 slugs in the temporary’s 007 (the cute one’s) forehead, inducing irreparable damage to the brain matter what in effect causes her to drop dead.

The supervisor fixes double martini (shaken, not stirred) in an effort to calm real 007 (the handsome one) down.

In the end, everything gets back to normal. Temporary 007 (the cute one) ends up in the plastic bag, real 007 (the handsome one) takes his jerseys back and then, after clearing his throat with a big glass of martini, gets back to work cleaning the mess the temporary 007 (the cute one) has created, providing this way the material for the next movie.

The End

Who’s next?

It looks like people at Bond franchise are testing the waters. They want to know how far they can go if it comes to reinventing Bond’s character. If the audience will like the idea of cute 007 and the movie will become successful, the next Bond will be very different from the rest of them…

Eddie Izzard is my choice to be the next full-time James Bond. He can be scary as hell and he looks good in a dress.

Thank You For Reading

Roe v. Wade

Roe v. Wade? Relax, It’s Just a Movie.

The pro-life movement is working on a new movie, and the pro-choice community is going crazy. Why?

A small group of people is working on a low budget movie with intentions to present a conservative take on January 22, 1973, Supreme Court landmark decision in Roe v. Wade that established a woman’s legal right to an abortion.

I don’t have a problem with it. Preventing others from sharing their opinions is not my thing. I don’t necessarily listen to what people have to say, but I’m not going to stop them in the middle of the sentence either. So, ladies and gentlemen, go for it – make that movie.

Now let me point your attention to the other player in this event – Progressives. (Progressive don’t like Conservatives because they believe that Conservatives are against progress, and Conservatives don’t like progressives because, in their opinion, the Progressive Movement is progressing in the wrong direction.) Men and women who subscribe to the progressive point of view believe that woman has a right to abortion at any stage of pregnancy so, understandably they get a little upset when someone decides to challenge the validity of that belief.

So. What’s up with that?

Roe v. Wade is not in theaters yet (Its release date is set for January, 2020), but the movie already caused enormous controversy and generated a very emotional, and unfortunately biased reaction from supporters of abortion. Critical statements about the film, ranging from comments about the movie and people involved in the production process – worthless flick, made by idiots, with idiots in it. Thru reports of catastrophic events, where actors and crew members were running off the movie set after discovering that they been unknowingly working on the pro-life project. And ending on an accusation of physical assault on the journalist by a member of a production crew.

Two teams, two entirely different viewpoints on the same subject – the right to choose.

Let’s get ready to…

In the blue corner – Progressives. They’re pro-choice, and they have chosen to support woman’s right to abortion.
In the red corner – Conservatives. They’re also pro-choice, but they have chosen to support the right of unborn children to have a shot at life.

Facts Or Fiction? You decide.

Secretive movie.

In Blue Corner, Many bloggers described the Roe v. Wade as a secretly made movie (probably because The Daily Beast called it “the secretive project“). The Red Corner explained that production was kept quiet for a couple of weeks, both for the security of the cast and crew (probably to avoid problems like the, mentioned below, incident with Mr. Sommer) and to obtain shooting locations. Filming has started in mid-June, 2018 and first reports about the film began to come out early July. The Hollywood Reporter dropped the news on July 03, 2018 and The Daily Beast and few others followed on July 06, 2018. It looks like a short-lived secret.

Tomi Lahren and Milo Yiannopoulos in the movie.

“There are lots of surprising cameos from controversial people.” Said Roe v. Wade director – Nick Loeb, without giving any specifics. The Blue Corner started to circulate Names like Tomi Lahren and Milo Yiannopoulos as examples of those controversial personalities and multiple bloggers, writing about the project, had used those names in their articles. The Red Corner, so far, hasn’t denied that gossip but those two names are nowhere to be found on the Full Cast and Crew list.

Project too extreme for Kevin Sorbo and Stephen Boldwin.

Blue Corner – According to The Daily Beast, actors Kevin Sorbo and Stephen Baldwin turned down the project after reading the script.
Red Corner – In reality, both actors had prior commitments. Mr. Sorbo told The Washington Times: “I wanted to do the movie. I loved the movie and loved the part.” He said Roe v. Wade” would have allowed him to work alongside Oscar-winning actor Jon Voight, a friend, and fellow conservative. [ Read Full Story ]

Attack on journalist.

Blue Corner – The Daily Beast reporter – Will Sommer claims to be attacked on the set of Roe v. Wade. Mr. Sommer said, a crew member grabbed his notepad, crumpled the pages of notes and gave it [notepad] back to him.

Red Corner – On the other hand, Mr. Loeb and co-writer/co-director Cathy Allyn said The Daily Beast reporter intruded on the set during filming at the Lincoln Memorial, distracting the cast and crew in the process. “We have actual audio of him verbally abusing one of our interns,” said Mr. Loeb

The Referee – According to The Daily Beast, [t]he police officer, called to the set, “declined to stop the alleged attacker, reveal his name, file an incident report, or talk to other members of the crew, insisting that the problem had already been solved.” The way he managed the situation tells me which account of the event sounded believable to him.

Those are just a few examples of what can be delicately called…

Misrepresentation of facts,

and the question is: does it deliver the intended impact?

Yes and no. Yes, if one controls all the media. It’s worked great for Dr. Goebbels, who used to say: “If you repeat the lie often enough, people will start to believe it.” But, and there’s always a “but,” Mr. Goebbels didn’t have to deal with a little invention called The Internet. The Internet renders that old technique much less effective. Every time one side distorts reality with lies, the other can issue clear, easy to understand rebuttal.

Of course, I realize that all major social media platforms and many other huge corporations which provide a wide range of Internet-related services, lean toward a blue corner and your Internet presence can be significantly limited when suspended/banned by one of the big ones. There’s still lots of room on the Net for anyone in a red corner to share their opinions. Being banned from a social media platform is not the end of the world and more often than not, being under…

Attack by social media warriors can be beneficial.

As someone said: All publicity is good publicity. When hundreds of bloggers write about a movie, thousands, or even tens of thousands of people tweet and retweet about it, one can expect lots of attention brought to the project. It doesn’t matter if people who write about it love it or hate it. The name of the game is exposure, and in case of publicity, the more, the better (especially when it comes free of charge – nothing can beat that.)

In my particular case I found out about Roe v. Wade movie when googling something (forgot what it was), I saw a link titled What the F**k Is This Roe v. Wade Movie? (asterisks are mine), I’ve clicked on it, and I’ve clicked on that link for a very simple reason, I wanted to know what the f**k is this Roe v. Wade movie about and why someone is so pissed at it.
And now, I know.

Check Parler, new alternative to Twitter.
BitChute alternative to YouTube.

Thank You For Reading