February 24, 2017 at 9:47 pm #2251
I wanted to get your thoughts on this, as it is currently becoming a relatively large topic in political news.
Milo Yiannopoulos, who you have referenced on the podcast has had a pretty rough 24 hours. Some video has emerged of Milo “defending pedophilia.” You may have heard this by now. If not, please see here.
His words are damning. Pretty hard to dispute. He attempted to address the matter in an “explanation” or “apology” video on Facebook earlier. It has since been removed — which is odd. (UPDATE: It was not removed. It was made within the comments of one of his statements.)
His apology was to say he wished he had used different words. And to explain that he was in a “similar” situation such as the one he was referring to. He was 17 and his gay lover was 29. They went on to have a ten-year long relationship, which he says was critical to his emotional development as a young gay male.
Among blaming himself and offering other apologies (improper phrasing, tone, etc.), he points some blame towards the framing and editing of his comments. I don’t know about that.
My problem with all of this? The timing seems too convenient. He’s sort of KILLING the Left right now. Major book deal, protests (riots) at Berkeley, being asked to join Bill Maher this weekend — then asked to join CPAC, which was a bit shocking in itself. He has been driving the Left nuts. He’s gay, partially Jewish, dating a black man and the EXACT sort of person the Left stereotypes as their own. And with all of his momentum, he’s driving those on the Right crazy, also. He’s not their typical flag carrier, and many dislike him. See Matt Walsh.
So my question is whether you think this could be an attempt at character assassination. The whole thing seems calculated to me (the timing in particular). After all, the video of his comments is nearly two years old.
Worth noting: In his explanation today, he discusses having used his journalistic efforts to out three pedophiles — which is something significant. Not just because he showed little sympathy in outing them, but also because he’s outed three more pedophiles than most of his critics.
Anyway, he lost his book deal today. Was disinvited from CPAC and I’m even reading stories of Breitbart employees staging a walkout if he isn’t canned.
Sounds like the perfect outcome for a well executed attempt at character assassination — presuming it is one.
And John, if I recall correctly, you mentioned Milo as someone willing to discuss the Pizzagate story, but was being warned “not to go there yet.” Do I recall this correctly? How ironic that these accusation are coming out.
FWIW: I like Milo — or I did. I’m sort of on the fence at the moment. I can see all angles of this story — including the side of conspiracy. Am I nuts for this???
Love the new look/feel of the site, btw. The changes are subtle. but I dig what’s going on.February 24, 2017 at 9:48 pm #2252
Reports that users on 4chan saw this coming the morning before the tapes were released…
And if you’ll recall, Milo made efforts to acquire 4chan in October of last year. I’m not sure that this is significant, but it’s interesting.February 24, 2017 at 9:48 pm #2253
I must say… he handled this pretty well.
I’ve never agreed with him on everything. Not even with his style or approach. But his explanation makes sense to me — and he sounds as if he’s being genuine. I pray I’m not backing an advocate of pedophilia by choosing to believe him.
Damn this is a touchy subject.February 24, 2017 at 9:48 pm #2254
Yes, it is a “touchy subject” (no pun intended), and yes, I do believe this was a carefully calculated attempt at character assassination. The way the media is handling this is hypocritical at best, and criminal at worst, because they’ve ignored and covered-up for the real elite pedophiles and child abusers for years. Then along comes this provocateur who is a threat to the establishment (and the politically correct order), and the sycophantic vampires go directly for the jugular.
Look, what Milo was essentially saying (and I’m not condoning what he said) was that from his experience in the gay community it’s not that uncommon for older gay men to have a sexual relationship with a gay teenager. And “sometimes”, according to him, this can be healthy, especially for young gays who need emotional support and guidance. Yes, he used the term “boy”, but that’s just him not being more careful with his words. After all, he was on the Joe Rogan show, which is known for its unguarded off-the-cuff banter (and the main reason for its popularity by the way). There’s no bullshit. Same with the other podcast I assume. He was just trying to be honest about shit, and he even said there’s a lot of complexity and nuance with these type of relationships, but most people obviously can’t handle that. So instead, he’s now getting shit.
Now, we can argue that a teenager can never give consent and, legally if you’re under the age of 16 (some states are 17, others 18), then you’ve broken the law. In Canada it’s 16, and in Mexico it can be as young as 12! Nowhere is there consent below the age of puberty which, by the way, is the true definition of pedophilia. Milo is correct, however because everyone uses the term “pedophilia” as a catch-all for anyone younger than 18, people immediately lose their minds and thus begins the witch-hunt.
Personally, I think any adult over the age of 25 (the age when the brain is fully developed), male or female, who engages in a sexual relationship with a teenager below the age of 18 has serious issues that need to be addressed regardless of the “age of consent”. Hell, a 21 year old dating a 17 year old is problematic. It’s risky, often criminal, certainly suspicious and, let’s be honest, persons prone to this type of behavior most likely have serious emotional development problems.
Quite frankly, I think they should just simplify the law and make the age of consent 18 across the board. No adolescent under this age should be having sex with an “adult”, regardless of what nature has designed biologically.
That said, cultures have different values about when a person comes of age. Think of our own culture’s Sweet Sixteen, the debutante balls, Bar and Bat Mitzvahs, or Latin America’s Quinceaneras, all are celebrations of the transition from childhood into womanhood or manhood. And all occur before the age of 18! So it’s very confusing, and we’re getting mixed messages.
Unfortunately, the media plays the issue at their convenience. No nuance, no mercy, especially when attacking their perceived enemies. Yet at the same time, they deliberately ignore the real sickos out there (many in their own midst) who are committing the most heinous crimes imaginable. Not to mention all the sexual imagery that’s peddled in the media and fashion industries. Again, they’re hypocrites and it makes me angry.
The media apparently have great difficulty handling the truth. Which is why crimes like the Franklin Scandal, Jimmy Savile, the Dutroux Affair, and many others involving young children are essentially covered-up until years later. Instead, they feed us nonsense.
But all that’s changing now due to the Internet, and I’m pretty sure Milo was attacked as a preemptive strike against him speaking out about Pizzagate (pedogate). He’s a got a huge platform/audience, and the scumbags whom he referred to in the Rogan podcast are probably freaking out that he’s gonna talk. Regardless, it won’t work. The truth’s gonna come out (much of it already has) and the real shit is gonna hit the fan.
No, you’re not backing an advocate for pedophilia by defending Milo. He’s not a pedophile, nor is he an advocate for it. In my opinion, you’re on the right side of this issue, as you’re looking at it honestly and critically. History will show who the real enemies (and pedophiles) are, some of whom right now are doing the attacking.
Again, fuck them.February 24, 2017 at 9:49 pm #2255
John, that was a fantastic reply. You’ve read my mind on most points — especially concerning the hypocrisy being displayed.
I need to listen to his appearance on the Rogan show. You make a great point about this seeming like a preemptive strike. The idea of elites ruining his credibility on this subject is a seemingly intelligent decision. Similar in a way to how Trump is branded a racist for wanting to enforce border security and uphold current, on the books immigration laws.
I’ve been looking at this whole thing with Milo as a political take-down for reasons related to his growing influence. Maybe you’re right about this being connected to something much more sinister than Milo’s growing popularity. If Pizzagate is true… and if Milo is sniffing out the rats… then this could snowball quickly.
IMO, this is one of the most interesting stories this year.February 24, 2017 at 9:49 pm #2256
I agree, it is one of the most interesting (and explosive) stories of the year. Lots of researchers and “citizen journalists” are definitely sniffing out the rats, and the establishment does NOT want this to go mainstream. That said, I’m a big proponent of innocent until proven guilty, so I’m not willing to jump on the Pizzagate accusation train just yet. That said, I do believe where there’s smoke, there’s fire. And right now, there’s a lot of smoke.June 28, 2017 at 3:20 pm #2750
Altright scumbag. Who cares about the timing?
So the corporate media doesn’t like him? So what?
Neoliberals love to fain racial harmony and anti sex crimes but they don’t give a damn about black,white, Asian e.t.c. if your poor.
This is a hall of mirriors.
You must be logged in to reply to this topic.