Media Pushes a New Anti-Trump Story, And It's...

Rolls d1

...Another #FakeNews Lie

See, a d1 only gives you one result. So everything they report is a lie.

Statistics and D&D humor and right-wingery. This place has it all.

But on to the story: The media pushed the lie that Trump's State Department was objecting to a UN resolution pushed by the EU because Trump loves rape committed during wartime.

The claim was made that this resolution was anti-warcrime rape, and therefore, Trump must be pro-warcrime rape.

Another lie. It's all they do. Lie, lie, lie.

And then whine that you're "putting their lives in danger" when you call remorseless liars remorseless liars.

The headlines were dismal. "US threatens to veto UN resolution on rape as weapon of war," The Guardian blared. The BBC was more subtle but equally condemnatory: "United States Dilutes UN Rape-in-War Resolution." The Washington Post, meanwhile, made sure to get the "T"-word in its headline: "The UN Wanted to End Sexual Violence in War. Then the Trump Administration Had Objections." Social media outrage radiated as users shared these stories. To readers so inclined, the story was one more reminder of the Trump administration's bottomless perfidy: Of course it would object to ending sexual violence in armed conflict! Of course President Trump would try to "dilute" protections for women raped in war!



Here's the real reason the resolution was objected to: It called for "comprehensive health services, including sexual and reproductive health."

That's right, the European countries were trying to smuggle a worldwide UN declaration on the right to abortion in via a resolution supposedly aimed at reducing wartime rape.





... The European Union countries consistently push "the same agenda on everyone else," this diplomat said, namely contraception, abortion and comprehensive sexual education. Resolutions at the Security Council gain the force of law. Thus, permitting the Germans to pass their original draft resolution at the council would have codified into international law opinions about abortion, gender and sexuality that run contrary to the sense of right and wrong shared by people across Africa, Asia and Latin America. Not to mention many Americans.

So you know what happened?

After Trump's State Department objected to that particular pro-abortion language, the Germans dropped it from the resolution and then it... passed.

I bet the Washington Post then ran a story with the headline, Trump spearheads UN resolution against rape, right?

Which in fact he did do: Because Russia and China were threatening to veto this resolution, due to this language.

With the language removed, they merely abstained, and permitted the resolution to pass.

You'd think that if the Washington Post really gave a shit about rape they might pretend to care that this resolution did in fact pass.

But instead of reporting the facts, the Washington Post again lied to its readers for propaganda and Rage-Farming the rubes who still believe it's in the news business.

It's gotten to the point that, when I come across a WaPo or NYT story, I can't say to myself, "Well, that's roughly what happened, because WaPo or NYT (or any number of outlets) say so." Rather, my immediate instinct is: "What ideological bullshit are they trying to pull on me?" — Sohrab Ahmari (@SohrabAhmari) April 25, 2019

This is an outrageous slander. https://t.co/Wyqwo0rMvS — Sohrab Ahmari (@SohrabAhmari) April 25, 2019

I'm not on Twitter anymore, but I bet you that when the left started this social media outrage stampede, most of the usual NeverTrump suspects merrily retweeted along with their very good friends on the left.

There are two kinds of people in America: those who still believe what their college-indoctrinated, urban-culture Overclass tells them to believe, and who wish to join that class and cultivate its approval, and conservatives.