Jump to content
fixer

Upcoming article about My Militia on The Guardian news site

Recommended Posts

heads up we have been contacted by The Guardian and they were making some accusations about the site its members and myself

 

i spare the details but wanted to let you know of a potential smear campaign that may be heading our way

 

let me clear the waters right now

 

My Militia is build on a large server in Dallas this is a VPS server that i personally manage i have 2 webspaces set up on it.. one webspace is https://www.mymilitia.com only. the other webspace is home to embrey enterprise which is my web development initiative. I am a wordpress reseller and build and host many sites for clients all the details are here www.embreyenterprise.com you can go to the websites page and see the websites i have built, i also have done freelance programing and graphic work for over 50 other websites.

 

when it comes to  e-commerce i built the site and set up the store and show the client how to use it and they upload there own inventory, i also built gateways for payments and shipping and integrate between their website and bank accounts

 

i have no interest in the sites other than the initial set up fee (prices are listed on the site)

 

So tonight i was contacted by a reporter for the guardian and they wanted to know the connection between ar2.0 My Militia and .... lets just call it site x

 

they told me site x contained white supremacy audio records forsale

 

completely blind sided me, i took a look and was not very happy with what i saw

 

i contacted the client, offered them a full refund and to move their site to another server to show i have no connections to that at all

 

with in the next 24 hours this site will be removed along with all webdata, i have also removed my self as admin from their facebook page (i have to be page admin in order to complete some integrations with facebook) 

 

they told me its not what it looks like and assured me they were not racists 

 

i understood but told them they have to move away from me , my clients and my properties for the wellness of us all. they understood and are cooperative 

 

so why this post? you can bet your ass that these reporters are going to twist this all up to where we has some sort of affiliation with the site x. which is not true we were not even aware of the content mostly because all the records are in german language... the album covers do not look too good and can be seen how they may be construed as being bad mojo.

 

its all been taken care of!

 

Racism will not be tolerated by My Militia or any clients or affiliates. Upon discovery of such content immediate action will take place

 

thank you

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Honestly, you should just tell the Guardian that you don't make personal judgments about what other people want to post on their own websites, and you don't reject clients based on your own moral values or anyone else's. They are painting you into a corner by tricking you into trying to take personal responsibility for the thoughts and actions of others. It's called cancel culture. The best way to stand up to it is to assert that everyone has a right to free speech, the best response to a bad argument is a better argument, and the Guardian should take their problem up with the person whose speech they dislike. Since you were willing to cancel your client, the Guardian will be able to easily take the moral high ground when they coerce others into canceling you.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Author of the topic Posted
7 hours ago, RayanneKennan said:

Honestly, you should just tell the Guardian that you don't make personal judgments about what other people want to post on their own websites, and you don't reject clients based on your own moral values or anyone else's. They are painting you into a corner by tricking you into trying to take personal responsibility for the thoughts and actions of others. It's called cancel culture. The best way to stand up to it is to assert that everyone has a right to free speech, the best response to a bad argument is a better argument, and the Guardian should take their problem up with the person whose speech they dislike. Since you were willing to cancel your client, the Guardian will be able to easily take the moral high ground when they coerce others into canceling you.

That was my stance, i told them why you contacting me? you should contact them

 

when i looked at the site i was like wtf? 

 

And i have many clients and some new ones coming that most definitely would not want any sort of connections to something like that

 

the people are free to sell what they want but i dont want my name or my companies name associated with it

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Posted (edited)
55 minutes ago, fixer said:

That was my stance, i told them why you contacting me? you should contact them

 

when i looked at the site i was like wtf? 

 

And i have many clients and some new ones coming that most definitely would not want any sort of connections to something like that

 

the people are free to sell what they want but i dont want my name or my companies name associated with it

First of all...don't act guilty. It was an honest mistake. A story that could go into Fixer's Follies, but a mistake. Second, you know the story would eventually come anyway, despite the fact if anyone actually read the content on this site, I am sure they could figure out it is not bad. I read a story on Yahoo today about one of the Michigan legislators. The story said that she was so scared to walk to the Michigan Capitol, that she hired armed "blacks and hispanics" (not kidding) to escort her to work. They had a pic of one of the protestors screaming, and they literally had a video of her walking with these thugs across the lawn and into the Capitol building. NOBODY ELSE AROUND!!   I just shook my head....and SHE WAS BLACK!!! The "protestors" were called white supremacists. How's that for IRONY... Anyway, I was thinking that if we protest ever, we should all wear Mickey Mouse shirts and hats and walk with balloons with smiley faces. They would have a hard time calling us bigots and dangerous... The lies ...  https://www.yahoo.com/news/armed-activists-escort-black-lawmaker-to-michigans-capitol-after-coronavirus-protest-attended-by-white-supremacists-184000180.html

 

Man, Fixer....you do get into some shit sometimes....damn!!

 

 

Mickey.jpg

picture of smiley - Yahoo Search Results copy.jpg                                                             

Edited by KCS

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Guest FreedomWillCost
12 hours ago, fixer said:

That was my stance, i told them why you contacting me? you should contact them

 

when i looked at the site i was like wtf? 

 

And i have many clients and some new ones coming that most definitely would not want any sort of connections to something like that

 

the people are free to sell what they want but i dont want my name or my companies name associated with it

The Guardians biggest donator is guess who? Let's see who knows the answer. A. Bill Clinton B. Warren Buffet C. Bill Gates or D. None of above

 

There narrative has to play by the rules of those that are paying the bills. I don't trust nothing on the guardians news outlet. 

 

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
On 5/8/2020 at 5:41 AM, RayanneKennan said:

Honestly, you should just tell the Guardian that you don't make personal judgments about what other people want to post on their own websites, and you don't reject clients based on your own moral values or anyone else's. They are painting you into a corner by tricking you into trying to take personal responsibility for the thoughts and actions of others. It's called cancel culture. The best way to stand up to it is to assert that everyone has a right to free speech, the best response to a bad argument is a better argument, and the Guardian should take their problem up with the person whose speech they dislike. Since you were willing to cancel your client, the Guardian will be able to easily take the moral high ground when they coerce others into canceling you.

This is one approach.  You are invited to do some work for a group, and discover that they are hard-core communists, aiming to build a Soviet America, after exterminating 20% of the population .... and you just say,  '"everyone has a right to free speech, the best response to a bad argument is a better argument" and while I don't agree with destroying America ... hey, if your money is good, I'll work for you and do the best job I can to help you spread your message." '

 

Here's another approach: we don't want to government to decide who is legitimate and who is not. So we don't call on the government to outlaw groups based on their beliefs. (As every single liberal member of Congress did do in 1954 when they unanimously passed the 'Communist Control Act' which made mere membership of the Communist Party illegal.)  

 

However, a private person can choose for whom to work, who gets to rent space on his webserver, etc. And he can choose not to work for hard-core communists, hard-core fascists, racists, anti-Semites, white supremacists. These people are often not fools, and will try to hide their beliefs, but then we have a duty of care to investigate them a bit. Being too trusting is not a good idea.

 

That's the approach we have to take.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Just a point of interest: One of the Guardian's associate editors, and a columnist for them, was one  Seumas Milne, who is an apologist for Stalin's Soviet Union.  (He left the Guardian to become an advisor to the hardline pro-IRA, pro-HAMAS guy who headed the Labour Party for several years and who led it to, thank God, a resounding defeat in the most recent British election.) Here is what he believes, from the Wikipedia entry on him:

 

Quote

 

Milne argued in 2006:

For all its brutalities and failures, communism in the Soviet Union, eastern Europe and elsewhere delivered rapid industrialisation, mass education, job security and huge advances in social and gender equality. It encompassed genuine idealism and commitment... Its existence helped to drive up welfare standards in the west, boosted the anticolonial movement and provided a powerful counterweight to western global domination

 

[Source: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Seumas_Milne#Communism]

So ... not so bad, then.

 

The British security services held their breath during the election, for fear this man would become a leading figure in the government:

https://www.thesun.co.uk/news/8496237/jeremy-corbyns-top-aide-seumas-milne-is-a-national-security-risk-after-backing-palestinian-terrorists-and-russia-ex-mi6-boss-says/

 

And they weren't kidding. Milne has a long record as a pro-Stalin Communist: the full story is here: https://standpointmag.co.uk/issues/december-2015/features-december-2015-michael-mosbacher-seumas-milne-jeremy-corbyn/

 

Now Fixer did NOT deliberately choose to work with that white supremacist record company. He just took on business from an apparently ordinary client. Maybe he should have investigated further, but ... who among us would have done that. But the Guardian deliberately, consciously, chooses to make an apologist for Communism one of its 'associate editors'.   So these people have no moral authority whatsoever.

 

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
On 5/9/2020 at 7:24 PM, Doug1943 said:

...

 

Here's another approach: ... a private person can choose for whom to work, who gets to rent space on his webserver, etc. And he can choose not to work for hard-core communists, hard-core fascists, racists, anti-Semites, white supremacists. These people are often not fools, and will try to hide their beliefs, but then we have a duty of care to investigate them a bit. Being too trusting is not a good idea.

 

That's the approach we have to take.

 

The outrage mob will never leave you alone if you take this approach.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, RayanneKennan said:

 

The outrage mob will never leave you alone if you take this approach.

If you are a non-political enterprise -- say, a grocery store -- then you are correct.  Anyone, communist, fascist, Baptist, Muslim, atheist -- can buy a loaf of bread.

 

But if you are political enterprise -- as the militia movement is, whether it likes it or not -- then the people with whom you associate -- even it's just hosting their website, or posting their announcements -- will be taken by the rest of the world to be the people with whom you feel you have some important things in common.

 

If Fixer had been approached by some Anti-Fa musicians, who wanted to make music celebrating the destruction of America,  boasting about how they had attacked Trump supporters at a rally and given them bloody noses ..... if he had been approached by a militant Islamic group, who wanted a website to publicize jihad ... perhaps he would have thought of himself as a grocery store owner, and would have taken their business.  But it would have been a mistake to do so, just as it was a mistake -- an honest one -- to take the business of these racists.

 

Of course, you are correct that the outrage mob -- whose outrage is artificial, and selective -- will never be satisfied. 

 

It's like war.  It is war.  The enemy over on the other side will never, so long as they exist, stop shooting at us.

 

But we needn't stand up and give them a nice easy target.

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

There's another point to make about the "moral outrage" fakers.

 

There are all kinds of people who can be correctly called "racists" .... ranging from real nasty KKK types, at one end, to people who simply believe that Black and white will only prosper when they live in separate countries, at the other ... and everything in between.  

 

Since the Left try to make honest discussions of race impossible, most of us aren't aware of the complexities of various attitudes on the issue.  As for the militia movement, all we need to do is to insist that we are open to all American patriots, regardless of color and creed, and not open to those who want to divide American patriots on the basis of color or creed. 

 

But ... the Left have far more to worry about than we do!  It turns out that some of them OPENLY and CONSCIOUSLY -- not as the result of a good faith acceptance of a customer -- associate and approve of a notorious racist, someone who praises Adolph Hitler ....  but let the Washington Examiner tell the story:

 

 

 

Quote

 

Editorial: Farrakhan and the Left

 | March 08, 2018 06:05 AM
  •  
 

The powerful Jews are my enemy,” remarked Nation of Islam leader Louis Farrakhan at his organization’s annual “Saviours’ Day” celebration in Chicago in late February. That was just one of several choice anti-semitic tropes. Another one, oddly stated in the third person: “The FBI has been the worst enemy of black advancement. Can you prove that Farrakhan? You see, the Jews have control over those agencies of government.” With the exception of CNN’s Jake Tapper, hardly anyone in the mainstream media seemed to notice or care.

 

Farrakhan’s anti-Jewish rhetoric is well known and has a long history. In 1984, for instance, he said that “Hitler was a very great man”; and in 1985, “Don’t you forget, when it’s God who puts you in the ovens, it’s forever.” What’s far less known about Farrakhan is the warmth with which he’s embraced by some influential members of the American progressive movement.

 

Tamika Mallory, a co-leader of the Women’s March, was at the “Saviours Day” speech this year; two years before she posted a photo with Farrakhan to Instagram in which she offered him praise and birthday wishes. Linda Sarsour—the famed left-wing Palestinian-American activist and provocateur—commented on a photo of Farrakhan on the Instagram page of Carmen Perez, another Women’s March co-leader. “God bless him,” Sarsour said of Farrakhan.

 

How strange that self-proclaimed “intersectional” feminists such as Sarsour, Mallory, and Perez would support an openly misogynistic and racist demagogue like Farrakhan. Among his more recent offerings: “When a woman does not know how to cook and the right foods to cook, she's preparing death for herself, her husband and her children.” He’s also observed that “man is supposed to have rule, especially in his own house . . . and when she rules you, you become her child.” Directly to women he asserted: “You are a failure if you can’t keep a man, no profession can keep you happy!” One wonders what it is about him that these feminists find so alluring.

 

More troubling, perhaps, is the recently surfaced photo of a 2005 Congressional Black Caucus (CBC) meeting with Farrakhan. It featured then-senator Barack Obama posing for a photo with the Nation of Islam leader. The photographer, Askia Muhammad, now says the CBC asked him to suppress the image because it might have derailed Obama’s campaign. Nor is that the only time CBC members hobnobbed with Farrakhan: As Jeryl Bier pointed out in the Wall Street Journal in January, several of them can be seen shaking hands and hugging in a 2009 YouTube video.

 

We doubt the photo with Farrakhan would have hurt Obama, who easily weathered revelations of his long association with the similarly anti-semitic and anti-American Jeremiah Wright. These associations are troubling all the same, however the preponderance of mainstream journalists may wish to look the other way. We suspect that if a photo emerges some day of Donald Trump or George W. Bush grinning with Richard Spencer, the New York Times will make room for it on page 1A.

 

When asked about the CBC’s meeting and his relationship with Farrakhan, Rep. Danny K. Davis (D-Ill.) defended his relationship with Farrakhan by remarking that “the world is so much bigger than Farrakhan and the Jewish question and his position on that and so forth.” That phrase, “the Jewish question”—where have we heard that before?

 

 

We should throw the nauseating hypocrisy of the Left back in their faces!

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Whoops, one more point:  I think @RayanneKennan     is completely, totally, absolutely right on the central point of how to respond to the attacks of the Left that charge us with "racism":

We must not be defensive in the slightest!  Appearing to say, "Oh, sorry, we didn't realize .... "  is just cutting your vein open when a shark is circling.  Throw it back in their faces!

The Guardian makes Seumas Milne, an apologist for Joseph Stalin -- who deported whole racial groups to Siberia during his reign, and who was just about to initiate a blood-purge of Jews when he died -- as an "associate editor"!    The Guardian loves the British Labour Party and it really loved it when Jeremy Corbyn became the leader --- here is their hero's taste in art, which could have been printed in Der Sturmer under Hitler: 

British Jews rally in London to protest Labour Party's anti ...

[SOURCE:  https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Freedom_for_Humanity]

(Corbyn later said he made a mistake and didn't look closely enough at this painting -- he must have been blind! -- and of course the whole Left accepted this.  [https://www.independent.co.uk/news/uk/politics/jeremy-corbyn-anti-semitic-mural-mear-one-luciana-berger-east-end-a8271111.html]

 

Throw it back in their faces!

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
On 5/17/2020 at 6:13 AM, Doug1943 said:

f Fixer had been approached by some Anti-Fa musicians, who wanted to make music celebrating the destruction of America,  boasting about how they had attacked Trump supporters at a rally and given them bloody noses ..... if he had been approached by a militant Islamic group, who wanted a website to publicize jihad ... perhaps he would have thought of himself as a grocery store owner, and would have taken their business.  But it would have been a mistake to do so, just as it was a mistake -- an honest one -- to take the business of these racists.

 

Racism is not illegal. It is an opinion. Committing violence, as the Antifas and Muslims do, is a crime. So that is what I am getting at here. The outrage mob is attempting to surreptitiously convince us all that unpopular opinions are crimes. They are not. You can't just lock up people who disagree with you, nor should you. If said mob is so convinced that they are correct in their opinion, then they should have no problem contacting the owner of the website who disagrees with them, and convincing the owner. The fact that they are unable to convince people of their viewpoint without committing various forms of violence (economic violence in this case), just goes to show that they are wrong. Bullying people to force them into the appearance of ideological homogeneity should be far less tolerable than the existence of people with diverse viewpoints. That is where I'm coming from.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Hmmm....  here are three hypthetical unpopular viewpoints: 

 

  -----  (1)  All alcohol is evil. It should be made illegal, with long prison terms for anyone who even owns a can of beer.

   ----- (2)  Jews are the spawn of Satan, and should all be rounded up and put through gas chambers.

   ----- (3) There is nothing wrong with a man having sex with a 13-year old boy. It should be made legal.

 

I would have no difficulty hosting a website, or printing a magazine, for the first viewpoint.

I would not want to do so for the second or third.

 

Here is one reason why -- not the only reason, but an important one: If I, as a conservative, host eccentric and unpopular viewpoint (1) on my website, no one is going to think that I am necessarily sympathetic to it. 

 

But this is not true for (2).  Unless you have hosted several different political organizations, ranging from Communist to fascist,  the hosting  only of a racist group, and no others,  will  lead people to think that you are sympathetic to this group. You can argue until the sun goes down that Hitler was 'really' a socialist. It's just word-juggling, which no one who knows anything about politics takes seriously. The reality is, the fascists and Nazis were violent enemies of the Communists and Socialists, and this -- coupled with the fact that they were nationalists -- puts them 'on the Right' in the eyes of most people.  It's too bad, but .. the Left have to put up with the fact that the admirers of Kim Jong Un (or whatever the name of the psychopath who runs North Korea is) are put by most people 'on the Left'.  So we're quits.

 

It's very important that we repudiate and repel the anti-Semites and white nationalists/supremacists. They are NOT conservatives -- far from it -- and their politics would split the patriot movement.

 

And, as for (3), it's much more honest to associate it with the Left.  (NAMBLA was founded by a former member of the Trotskyist Socialist Workers Party.  When Roman Polansky had sex with a 13 year old girl, almost all Hollywood liberals defended him. The Nation magazine, one of the two flagship publications of the Left, ran some pro sex-with-boys articles in the late 80s, then backed away from this.)  

 

But if we were to host a website for a pro-pedophile group  ... not a group doing anything or calling for anyone to do anything illegal, just a group advocating making sex with children legal -- then we would inevitably be smeared by the Left as condoning, and helping, pedophiles.  It would be hypocritical on their part, for sure.

 

Therefore .... we need to draw a bright line between ourselves, and the white supremacists and anti-Semites.  Doing some sort of business service for them cuts across that. Thus we should not do it.

 

The mission comes first. Right now, the mission is to build the militia movement -- to move it into the conservative mainstream, to recruit people to it, and to help new (and old) militia groups become more and more professional and effective in their functioning.   Whatever gets in the way of this needs to be ruthlessly pushed aside.  The mission comes first.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.



×
×
  • Create New...