Heineken’s Open World Agitprop Campaign

On the 20 April, the Dutch brewing company Heineken decided to deprioritize selling beer, and alienate its traditional consumers by going into the business of progressive political ads, perhaps as an end rather than a means to an end, strange as that may seem.

The political ad in question is called “Worlds Apart”, and you can watch it here if you have the stomach to endure 4 minutes and 25 seconds of modern-day agitprop – very telling considering that Heineken’s logo is a red star – which is as fake as CNN or MSNBC.

A bit of research into this political ad reveals that the agency behind it was Publicis London, which is part of the Publicis Group, a French multinational advertising and public relations company founded by Marcel Bleustein-Blanchet in 1926, and currently one of the largest marketing and communications companies in the world, by revenue.

There are two relevant pieces of information worth pointing out about this company before going back to Heineken’s agitprop campaign.

The first is that a US subsidiary of the Publicis Groupe, Qorvis MSLGroup, was caught helping Saudi Arabia “whitewash” its human rights record, according to the Independent.

The second piece of information is that the company’s CEO since 1987, Maurice Lévy, was – according to Wikipedia – in January 2008:

“…bestowed the International Leadership Award 2008 from the Anti-Defamation League in recognition of his stance towards tolerance and diversity.[4] He also financed the 2008 concert at the Trocadéro to celebrate the 60th anniversary of the founding of the state of Israel.”

This is relevant to the Heineken’s “Worlds Apart” and “Open Your World” campaign because they’ve gone ahead and added the following to the back of their UK bottles: “To a world without borders or barriers. To the belief that there’s more that unites us than divides us. To finding common ground. So raise a bottle with the person next to you. Because a stranger is just a friend you haven’t had a cold Heineken with yet.”

If Maurice Lévy seems keen to promote tolerance, diversity, and a world without borders or barriers in the UK, one can only assume the same is not true of Israel, where it’s likely he’d get the bottle of Heineken smashed around his head if he did the same, due to their clear understanding of the dangerous consequences of insecure borders.

And what to say about the “whitewash” of Saudi Arabia’s human rights record? It certainly doesn’t seem to align with the “Open Your World” campaign they created – lets not forget that women have been referred to “terror” courts for driving in Saudi Arabia. Enough said.

So what on earth is Heineken playing at? Is there really money in promoting this kind of progressive propaganda? Do they seriously think that the migrants squatting in Calais waiting to get into Britain will spend the little money they have boozing on their beer?

It will remain to be seen what happens to their sales in the UK – hopefully consumers will vote with their Pounds – but there is the sneaking suspicion that this could be an EU attempt to influence Brexit Britains snap election on 8 June, announced by Theresa May on the 18 April, two days before the ad was launched.

Whether they’ll have any success is unlikely, but in any case this is another manifestation of the progressive madness making companies put politics before profits. The left often uses the threat of boycott to bully companies into acquiescing to their progressive demands, and now it’s time the right fights fire with fire in this culture war for the West.

Advertisements

Trump Versus Merkel’s EU

After meetings of Nato and the G7 group of wealthy nations last week, German Chancellor Angela Merkel had the following to say according to the Guardian:

“The times in which we could completely depend on others are to a certain extent over,” she told an election rally in Munich on Sunday. “I’ve experienced that in the last few days. We Europeans truly have to take our fate into our own hands.”

The chancellor told a 2,500-strong crowd in the Bavarian capital that Germany and Europe would strive to remain on good terms with the US, Britain and other countries, “even with Russia”, but added: “We have to know that we must fight for our future on our own, for our destiny as Europeans.”

Notice how she says “we Europeans” instead of “we Germans.” It seems evident from Merkel’s past behaviour that she has an aversion to any manifestations of national pride, most probably the result of growing up in Communist East Germany, and the trauma caused by an official history of the country which begins with Hitlers ascent to power, and ends with the Holocaust.

Also, one is left wondering how many of the 2,500-strong crowd were recently settled “refugees,” who she has so enthusiastically welcomed into the country – not her own home of course – to the detriment of the countless victims of violent crimes, which have surged since the migrant crisis was engineered. Considering this it’s hard to believe that 2,500 Germans would still want to listen to her, much less give her their votes.

The leaders did vow to fight protectionism, reiterating “a commitment to keep our markets open”. They also agreed to step up pressure on North Korea, cooperate more closely on terrorism and look into placing tougher sanctions on Russia.

Keep markets open to China and their unfair trade practices? While they flood the EU and the US with their cheap – in both senses of the word – products while our manufacturing industries go out of business and blue-collar workers are left jobless, the effects of which are felt throughout the economy?

So she mentions Russia twice. The first time is to express her wish to remain on good terms with it, then the second mention is a kick in the proverbial balls by suggesting tougher sanctions on a country she would be wise not to provoke considering how badly their last war together ended for Germany.

But while six of the seven present renewed their commitment to the 2015 Paris accord on climate change, Trump said he needed more time to decide.

Merkel said the result of the “six against one” talks was “very difficult, if not to say very unsatisfactory”.

He needs more time to decide if the CO2 we exhale is a toxic armageddon gas?

Yes, the talks were extremely unsatisfactory for a woman used to getting her way, especially when the odds are six against one. Perhaps Trump should send her an autographed copy of The Art of the Deal.

At the Nato summit in Brussels on Thursday, Trump repeated past accusations that other members of the alliance were failing to meet its military spending commitment of 2% of GDP, saying this was “not fair” on US taxpayers.

He also failed to endorse the pact’s article five mutual defence clause – an omission seen as especially striking as he was unveiling a memorial to those killed in the 9/11 terrorist attacks against the US, the only time it has been triggered.

President Trump gave them a stern telling off, and in typical schoolboy fashion a few of them giggled as his back was turned. If NATO member nations insist on maintaining an organisation whose usefulness ended with the Cold War, then the bare minimum they can do is pay what they agreed on.

Article five may have only been triggered once, but from the sounds of it Merkel and her lackeys were repeatedly triggered by Trump.

Speaking of lackeys:

By contrast, Merkel said she wished the new French president, Emmanuel Macron, every success and promised Germany would do what it could to help France in a bid to revive the ailing Franco-German engine that has long powered Europe.

Macron will certainly have the same success Merkel has had destroying the nation she presides if he has his way. His power handshake with Trump was meant to project the image of a strong leader onto this upstart beta male, establishment stooge, and former Rothschild banker, but he certainly didn’t fool Donald Trump with his act.

Maxine Waters: Cut Off Her Mic!

Maxine Waters is at it again. Not content with endlessly ranting on about the Trump-Russia election collusion conspiracy theory – and that’s being generous about it – and even bizarrely claiming in February that Putin invaded Korea, this time the African American Caucus is seeking a formal apology after she was cut off during a state convention speech, as reported by the Los Angeles Times:

Waters, a Los Angeles Democrat known for her comments on President Trump, had been speaking at a caucus meeting during the event Saturday night when the sound to her microphone was cut off.

Her microphone was cut off? Understandable, so far so good.

In a statement released late Wednesday, the caucus said it had concluded an investigation with the Sacramento City Council and executive staff from the California Democratic Party to determine what transpired. They found the state party retained the event planning firm Frontrunner to produce the convention, attended by nearly 3,000 people from across the state. Frontrunner subcontracted the audio and visual work to a separate firm that has not been identified.

The caucus said it was an employee of that firm that approached Waters and interrupted her remarks by pulling the plug connecting her microphone to the audio system.

The requests include the formal apology, “a commitment to sensitivity training for contracted and subcontracted employees and better training on protocols when meetings run longer than the contracted time.” It also is asking for reimbursement of the meeting expenses associated with the event, and for party leadership to work with the caucus and develop better security protocols.

So the real story here is that the audio guy had been sitting around for what seemed to him – and probably more than a few sitting in the audience – an interminably long period of time listening to this delusional woman stuttering through whatever speech she’d prepared on her favourite topic, punctuated here and there by extemporary ranting on more of the same, and finally decided he’d had enough after politely reminding members of the caucus several times beforehand about the meeting running longer than the contracted time.

Of course this employee knew that it was either pull the plug and be done with it or wait around for a few more unpaid hours while these sore losers disparage the man you voted for, because he did nothing more than promise to lower your taxes and build a wall to stop Mexicans from illegally entering the country and undercutting your company, leaving you without a job and no way to pay for your skyrocketing Obamacare premiums.

Not content with this, the caucus had the gall to request that the firms employees be subjected to sensitivity training – presumably this has to do with the fact that the employee in question is white, and the caucus had the knee-jerk reaction so typical of Democrats, that there was a racial motivation to his actions – and a reimbursement of the meeting expenses! Undoubtably if it had been President Trump refusing to pay a firm with a black employee, that would have been another motive for impeachment, and sensitivity training for the remainder of his term.

On the contrary, this employee and his firm should immediately be contacted by the White House, congratulated, and paid in advance for the audio and visual work required for President Trumps second inauguration in 2020. That would surely send the kind of message Maxine Waters and the Democratic Party deserve for the lies they continue to spread with the assistance of their puppets in the legacy media.

Thoughts On The Manchester Arena Terrorist Attack

Coinciding with the first day of President Donald Trumps first visit to Israel, a British national identified by CBS News as Salman Abedi, reportedly decided to blow himself apart with what police described as an Improvised Explosive Device, taking the lives of 22 others as he did so.

That there were children among his victims we can only assume that this child of Libyan refugees, who moved to the UK to flee Muammar Gaddafi’s regime, was unconcerned about.

We can only assume because dead men make poor witnesses. We have to take the authorities word for the events surrounding what has become an all too familiar series of attacks by muslims living in Europe, or as the left would prefer us to believe, European muslims. Post 9/11 this is hard to do.

That’s not meant to cast doubt on the fact that Western Civilisation – not for the first time it should be added – faces an existential threat from Islam and the fifth column firmly embedded and exponentially procreating amongst us. That the term “Improvised Explosive Device” has now entered civilian police parlance is a wake up call to those more familiar with the targeted “bombing” campaigns of traditional European political extremist organisations.

As alluded to above though, the timing of this seems a little too coincidental. As reported by Fox news, on Saturday President Trump signed a $110 billion arms deal to help Saudi Arabia boost its military “defence” system – we should ask the people of Yemen what they think of Saudi defence since their destructive intervention in that countries internal affairs.

After this first official trip as US President – involving a bizarre ceremony with the laying of his hands on an illuminated orb together with the Saudi King and the President of Egypt – he travelled on to Israel, who as we are regularly reminded by the legacy media in the US is its biggest democratic ally in the region, where he followed in the tradition of previous US politicians, and continued with the laying of his hands this time on the Wailing Wall, his perfectly combed hair crowned with a Kippah.

With regards to both Saudi Arabia and Israel, two countries that openly condemn the savagery committed by ISIS and it’s affiliates in Iraq and Syria, while obscuring the fact that it was they who facilitated the rise of ISIS in the region as a proxy war against Irans allies such as Syria’s Bashar al-Assad, we should ask ourselves how much they stand to gain by this and other such attacks throughout Europe and America.

In the case of Israel it’s a no-brainer. With the rise of “Islamophobia” there has been a continued post WW2 drop in antisemitism – at least by ethnic “infidel” europeans – and a general rise in the belief, including European populist “far-right” movements and political parties, that Zionist Israel is an ally in the 21st Century war against radical Islam.

Considering this, it’s unlikely that Israel will ever find herself in a situation similar to the Yom Kippur War, at least in the sense that Europe is unlikely to stand by indifferently if she is attacked again by her Muslim neighbours, especially after strategic terror attacks such as Manchester, and the latent resentment caused by the unassimilated muslim population and resultant societal problems, have had their effect.

With regards to Sunni Saudi Arabia, their biggest rival in terms of regional, and certainly religious hegemony, is Shiite Iran. Their implicit alliance with Israel is one of convenience rather than a natural one, especially considering the derogatory view of Jews expressed in parts of the Koran, and the resultant negative opinion of the muslim world against the Jewish state.

We should wait to see if forces within the UK government, rather than concentrating on the Brexit will of the people, will seize on the opportunity to follow the EU in its official appeasement of Islam and muslims in the old continent, while sanctimoniously voicing their determination to fight ISIS and other extremists in the middle-east who they preach threaten our democracies and freedoms, democracies which have been made a mockery of by the bureaucrats in Brussels, and freedoms which they will eventually extinguish themselves because of the threat of radical Islam and the ethnic European backlash which they themselves created and engineered.

There’s a way out of this madness, but paradoxically it seems that democracy will not facilitate it, at least certainly not if the legacy media in the West has its way, and continues to control the narrative which condemns moderate common sense nationalists such as Geerd Wilders, Marine Le Pen, and others closely aligned to their political ideology, as “fascists.”

It seems inevitable that if European nations cannot reclaim their future in fair elections – and yes, the implication is that elections are not only unfair, but even subject to criminal manipulation – then we’ll descend into an authoritarianism of some sort in the not so distant future.

Europeans need to decide if the authoritarianism is a “progressive” SJW revamp of the type already seen in the Soviet Union, and written about in books such as Orwell’s 1984, or a nationalist uprising resulting in a populist government which takes the necessary unilateral steps to save our civilisation and the lives of our innocents.

First of all we need – to paraphrase Republican candidate Trump – a total and complete shutdown of Muslims entering the West until we can figure out what the hell is going on, and the immediate repatriation of all non-citizen men of military age that have migrated here since the appearance of ISIS in 2013.

Secondly there should be a freeze on the construction of new mosques, and all Imams and muslim community leaders known to or suspected of voicing support for terrorists or terrorist acts should be immediately arrested under existing anti-terrorism laws, which should in any case be expanded to focus specifically on muslim extremism and provide the police and judiciary the powers they need to silence them.

Thirdly we should disentangle ourselves from the quagmire of the Middle East. Any intervention to fight extremists should be similar to Russias current engagement in Syria, where under the invitation of the official government they’re assisting the Syrian Army in bombing campaigns against ISIS positions.

Israel has nuclear weapons and is able to look after herself. If she can reach a peaceful two state settlement with the Palestinians, so much the better for peace and stability in the region, but if the illegal settlements continue to be built in the West Bank then all economic ties should be severed. Support for Israel can no longer be unconditional as this is the key to peace in the region, and with the muslim world as a whole.

Judging by the establishment opposition Donald Trump has faced in the US regarding his “muslim ban”, it seems unlikely that any of this can be implemented save a catastrophic event, such as a nuclear bomb exploding in one of our capital cities and extinguishing the lives of millions. Certainly a pessimistic prediction, but a terrifyingly real threat nonetheless – Hollywood has already primed us for this with films such as True Lies, and Unthinkable.

But it’s imperative we try, we owe it to the majority of decent people who want to raise their children in peace and safety, and who dream and strive for more than a retrograde existence. Platitudes will no longer do, the time to tell the truth and act accordingly – no matter how politically incorrect – has arrived, in order to avoid a complete catastrophe which leaves us with no way back from the brink of the clash of civilisations and dystopia.