Yesterday we saw a video of TIM Cook start to go viral. He was speaking to the Anti Defamation League and he said that hate, division and violence are not welcome on their platforms. He brag about banning a violent conspiracy, theorist knock. You tell a normal person that you want to remove hate, division and violent speech from your platform, though, probably say: ok that sounds reasonable, but becomes problematic when you start to look into the definitions of those three words: what is division What is divisive while some things are in some things are: who gets to choose? What is hate? Who gets decide what haters and there now saying these activists that words are actually violence not calls to violence, not physical violence, but actually just offending. Someone is violence and if ur gonna,

that things are getting rather worrisome. What's interesting about the speech is that TIM Cook actually said it was a sin and why that's interesting because it seems like intersection, eighty or social justice, as colloquially known, is becoming a non theistic religion. The rules don't make sense. Everything is offensive and people in power are hypocritically calling to support these rules when, in fact, TIM Cook himself supports hate speech on his own platform and has for many years a day. Let's take a look at various examples where we can see. Those in power using the idea of intersection reality as a religion to control people and push for their political ideology, but before we get started pleased that our patriotic dotcom forts left him cast. If you wanna support my work and a lot of you, Samuel. I see more on the ground reporting, so I am currently building a mobile studio and it could take about a month really is your support, so had patriotic dotcom ports lifetime gas. If you'd like to help me. From NBC News Apple, CEO, TIM Cook, says TAT needs to take. A

moral stand against hate speech. You have no place in our platforms. You have no home cooked set of people who push division and hate technology, companies must take a moral stand against hate speech, said Apple, CEO, TIM Cook. On Monday, during a speech at the Anti Defamation league, I sometimes day that I worry less about computers that think, like people and more about people, think like computers, without values or compassion without concern for sequences. The apple ceo had a message for anyone trying to push hated, division or violence. You have no place on our platforms. You have no home. He said technology companies have faced increasing pressure this year to stop acting as a vehicle for hate speech and to proactively clean up their platforms. However, action from TAT Giants hasn't always been swift or decisive, and cook admits. There is still plenty of work to do. Take. For example, the case of Alex Apple pulled the info wars, conspiracy, theorist podcast from its platform in August, but didn't remove his Infoworld up until September Facebook and Youtube suspended Jones in July, but didn't abandoned until August Twitter didn't ban Infoworld content until September,

If we can't be clear on moral questions like these and we ve got big problems. Cook said about tackling hate at apple. We are not afraid to say that our values drive our duration decisions, and why should we be doing what's right, creating experiences free from violence and hate experiences that empower creativity and new ideas is what our customers want us to do. Another reason TIM Cook has a hypocrite is because he's talking about a specific group of ideologies that he wants to ban the obviously want to all hate speech only speech from people he doesn't like, and I think that can be problematic. You must have your rules be consistent, because the truth is not that long ago, who was called out for hosting many things which are overdue hate speech, yet they don't seem to care the song by easy e from nineteen. Eighty called nobody

and the lyrics are so extreme. I literally cannot say them on Youtube because Youtube could buy me. I wonder, then, why TIM Cook allows the song to exist on apple, in fact, there's about four or five different versions that all pop up, when you do a search in this song, easy e talks about robbing a bank. He then tries to force himself on a woman at gunpoint and pushes onto a backroom only to discover it's actually a trans woman. He then switch is the pronouns from her to him and then talks about using his gun to maim the individual's private parts. This is on Itunes, the songs from nineteen. Eighty eight now certainly not saying the song should be banned. I don't know what they should do, but I do find it interesting that TIM Cup wants to speak to the end information league when its platform house this kind of hate speech, but yet he will brag about banning a violent conspiracy. Theorist he's not banning hate speech

from other individuals- and this is just the most extreme song, because as many of you no going back decades, there are tons of songs about people inadvertently hooking up with Trans people and being rather upset about. What these songs all exist on itunes- and it seems like TIM Cook- doesn't actually care he's not being serious or he's just a please hypocrite. The daily wire wrote the story up, but they specifically referred to his language when he says it was a sin. Do not ban these people specifically, he said, I believe the most sacred thing that each of us has given is our judgment, morality, our own and eight desire to separate right from wrong choosing to set that responsibility aside at a moment of trial is a sin. The choice of language was interesting. To me, because we have seen James Linsey Helen pluck Russian Peter Promotion give a speech about intersection. Eighty, as and in fact I made a video about it yesterday, highlighting some examples that it seems today the left is

grace and what I would call a non theistic religion, I note might be a little bit hyperbolic, but it's a set of dogmatic rules. They abide by almost as if its religion and to me it basically feels the exact same way flows. It art, familiar actually group Catholic, and I took issue with many of the pepper critical claims made by people around me who are religious most, notably as you problem we heard from many people on the left when it came to the issue of gay marriage you'd here people site Leviticus than a man shall not lie with the man ass. He does a woman its assent. Therefore, gay marriage is unacceptable. I disagreed with that because you certainly don't Anyone abiding by the other rules of Leviticus. They would pick and choose which rules made sense for our society, in which rules didn't and to me, look if you have rules, they have to be consistent, or there is no logic, and this is what ultimately, as a young person led me to say Don't think religion is right for me and I see the exact same behaviors from the regressive left. They claim.

At certain things are hate speech, while absolutely pudding, hate speech on their platforms, because it's only hate speech if it's against their ideology, and we also. The example that's often touched by the left of science denial shore. There are people on the right. You don't agree with the intergovernmental panel on climate change about what's going on with climate change, They also talk about early Ninetys and the denial of the theory of evolution. Well, today, Quit let has a story about the left's denial of science, something that I've absolutely highlighted. The new evolution deniers, and this is written by common right, who was actually an Evolutionary biologist right has a phd in evolutionary biology and pen this article four Kuala on November thirtieth talks about how intersection of feminist or the regressive left do not believe that there are actual evolutionary region As for the behaviors and men and women sang at first left wing. Push back to evolution appeared largely in response to the field of human evolutionary psychology,

since Darwin, scientists have successfully applied evolutionary principles to understand the behaviour of animals, often with regard to sex differences. However, when scientists to begin applying their knowledge of evolutionary underpinnings of animal behavior to humans, the advancing Europe, ass. It began to threaten beliefs held sacrosanct by the left. The group that most fervently opposed and still opposes evolutionary explanations for behavioral sex differences in humans were are social justice active Evolutionary explanations for human behavior challenge there, a priori commitment to blank slate psychology, the belief that male and female brains in human start out identical and that all behaviour, sex linked or otherwise is entirely the result of differences in social innovation. We can see a parallel to the evangelical Christians. Right from twenty or thirty years ago to the regressive left today, whenever you're stances, I know there are certainly gonna, be some people who are our religious and oppose the social justice left for their religious reasons and that's kind of a mirror to

the intersection rules, but there are moderate individuals left centre and right for the most part who do not believe in this. When I was younger, I did meet several people who were conservative, who did not adhere to these christian beliefs, and I find it interesting that they be willing support, Republicans who were overtly religious, when they didn't actually believe in that they would often say that they were fiscally conservative and socially liberal, and I wondered why they would then vote for people who would push religious values, and I said well for these specific financial reasons, and now we can probably something similar. Why is it that mainstream Democrats are willing support policies that are overtly dogmatic and hypocritical? Probably for the same reasons, but it seems to me that the power has shifted. There's been a lot of discussions about the evangelical right is no longer in power and no longer relevant, but the regressive left. The intersection rules have been gaining power on the left and it seems like a parallel to what we saw

a few decades ago. Early this year and the blog atheists and the city, they wrote this article social justice, the new religion of the left, sank. Traditional religion Belief is dying, especially among younger generations like millennials and the new year. Below them Genji, and the left in particular, is jettisoning traditional religion at a phenomenal pace between two thousand seven twenty fourteen disbelieving, God grew among liberals from ten percent to ninety percent. According to plan, Well, there's all music to my ears. A growing concern I share with traditionalists is what is going to replace traditional religious beliefs in recent years. It's is that an answer is starting to emerge. Traditional religious belief is being replaced by so Justice philosophies, ass, religions, social justice

is in a way becoming the new religion of the less they right here are some of the dogmas of modern day, social justice philosophy, gender as a social contract. Biological sex differences aren't real objective things. Sex engender are all based on ideas from patriarchal societies, and we know this isn't true from our Phd evolutionary biologist friend common right in the previous article. There are no inherent differences between men and women, and this plays in the social contract. Part again, we know it's not true. He adds criticising Islam. Is racist? Muslims are oppressed by western cultures both historically end today, and that makes them April class Islam is a religion of peace and Mohammed was a feminist as such, neither Islam nor Muslims can be criticised, and any such criticism is racist, bigoted and Islamophobia. Any claim that there is a legitimate criticism of Islam is just disguised whites. Lemme see. However, Islam is a religion not erase and all Muslims.

Are not in fact arabic, for instance, unimportant distinction when talking about Islam is that Indonesia is eighty seven point, two percent islamic. He adds black and brown people and women are always more oppressed. This is obviously the idea of white privilege what's interesting, but the idea Privilege is that it is, it is an inherent fault that can only be done away by joining the church of Intersection entity. It is kind of like the idea of original sin once again, another parallel you're. Not talk about women's issues if you're a man or talk about racism. If your white and finally, if you do not want to engage in adult activities with a Trans person, you are Trans phobic, it is no longer acceptable to have a gender. Reference with whom you will have relations with unless you're gay refusal to date or have relations with the Trans person must be due to sit sexist, homophobic, patriarchal hetero, normative attitudes, Navy S,

Who cares that the left is being dominated by this dogma? This non theistic religion, as I would describe it, and I think it's fair to say it can be an issue when you're dealing with politics and actually challenging politicians for one whether you like Laura looming or not she's, a very contentious figure. She was banned from twitter for criticising the politician, her specific tweet she said. Isn't it ironic? Other the twitter moment used to celebrate women out dvd Q and minorities is a picture of IRAN, Omar Olano, our is Pro Sharia is pro F g M under Sharia from are oppressed and killed. Women are views and forced to wear her job alone is anti jewish Eleanor as is an elected official, currently she's, a congresswoman Elect Laura homer was criticising her lorella, may be wrong by all means. You're on may not be for these things, but it is within Laura rumours right as a citizen of United States to criticise politicians. However, she was banned from twitter for saying these things,

funny, how people just say, oh TIM's, defending Laura Loom were well hold on. She was critical. Louis Farrakhan in our protest, who said several many things and is fine and she posted this statement and was banned. What that says to me what the apple situation says to me is that, if TIM is willing to support the song. Nobody move by easy, which talks. Literally murdering a Trans person, the issue? Isn't whether or not you're breaking the rules, it's weather or you are a member of the church. If you are a member of the charge, you can do no wrong. If Louis Farrakhan says things that are horrifying to most people Twitter will not ban. They actually said it wasn't a violation if Laura looming, who not a member of their church criticizes the politician she will be removed immediately. Now we can see this leftist ideology starting to move into the area of politics. Shore twitter is a private platform of Jack Dorsey wants to banner. That's the US what everyone says, but this about a citizen.

Directly criticising a politician. What happens then, when a citizen wants to challenge the political agenda of the elites, while now we're hearing that could be against the rules too, you can actually go to jail or have your media company down from express criticising migration could become criminal under a new plan the United Nations Global compact for safe, orderly and regular migration. Seeks to make immigration a universal human right, and Bp Marcel De Graf said, I would like to say some words on the global contact on migration. On the tenth and eleven of December, there will be an international Congress in Marrakech, Morocco, trading countries are set to sign this agreement and although this joint agreement is not binding in a still meant to be the legal framework on which the participating countries commit themselves to build new legislation, one basic of this new agreement, is the extension of the definition of hate speech. The agreement wants to criminalize migration speech.

Criticism of migration will become a criminal offence. Media outlets that give room to criticism of migration can be shut down. Many people have commented me that the regressive left intersection reality. The social justice warriors as it were, our not mainstream, when in reality they are because Twitter is one of the largest social media platforms and they have enacted rules based on this ideology. They have banned people for criticising politicians. Bernie Sanders made a statement in twenty. Sixteen that directly reflected the intersection of dogma. When he said when you were white, you don't know what it's like to be poor and pull it affects at. This is false, ten point: one percent of white people live in poverty. Now it is the lowest percentage wise, but because there more white people there actually more white poor people than some other races. Why what Bernie Sanders say that well, because the idea

our going mainstream, they are being embraced by left wing politicians, and I will say it again to me growing up in the nineties, into thousands seeing the evangelist Christians on the republic inside that kind of strict dogmatic ideology is now on the left, and I certainly won't support people who oppose then logic and science. Look if you deny evolution all day night, because you don't understand with furious you're free to do so. If you want to support blank slate psychology about gender, social constructs, etc, are also free to do so you're free to have those beliefs. They should not, however, impact science, and they should not impact our policy now, unfortunately, we do have a separation of ideology and state where the separation of church and state, but so long as what the left believes is political in nature. Of course, it will in fact the text. We will then start seeing laws reflecting this ideology in an article from intellectual. Take out, they say psychologist

social justice, the new religious fundamentalism- and this is from two and a half years ago, they quote psychologist Jonathan hate who sat. There is no nuance. You cannot trade. Any other goods with it. So if you organize around fighting racism, fighting homophobia fighting sexism again all good things, but when they become sacred, when they become a until the objects of worship, fundamentalist religion then, when someone comes to class, someone comes to your campus and they say that rape, culture is exaggerated. They have committed blasphemy. The reason why I highlight this is he mentions what becomes sacred. He says when they become sacred when TIM Cook of Apple said. I believe the most sacred thing that each of us has given is our judgment, our morality our own and eight desire to separate right from wrong. Choosing to set that responsibility aside at a moment of trial is Sinn. He is specifically saying that what he views as right or wrong is sacred to him and to ignore it would be

then it is fascinating to see someone as powerful as TIM Cook, speaking to the Anti Defamation league about what is sacred. What is a sin while simultaneously and hypocritically supporting hate speech on his platform? He band people that war to part of his church, but those were kind of outside the fight on old song from easy, fine. You know he recently heard that baby it's cold outside was banned from a radio station in Cleveland. That's fascinating! Have they banned Easy II for his offensive songs? Have they banned every other song, those considered offensive, they haven't. Why, then, do they target specific song? It would seem that it's entirely hypocritical they're not actually seeking to enforce hate speech or get rid of violent division. They're just trying to get anything that opposes their church, but maybe it's all but hyperbolic. Maybe I'm wrong what you think Kolokolo keep a conversation gun you can follow me on twitter of all places asked him cast stay from.

Because at four p m and I'll have more videos up on my second channel Youtube: dot com slashed him cast news start at six p m thanks rang out, and I was while next time.