Similar posts

Bro. Randy #fundie net-4-christ.org

As someone who is legitimately a Christian, you are also a new creature. The things of the world you once enjoyed should no longer be pleasurable to you. If you drank liquor, the Spirit of God should convict you of that. If you were one who spent time in dance clubs, and you are saved, the Spirit should have shown you that modern dancing is a sin! Likewise, when you were saved, the Spirit of God should show you that immodest apparel is a sin also. As a new creature, you have the individual soul liberty to do what you want to do, but what you want to do should reflect becoming a new creature through salvation.

So what should a modest lady avoid? Over the years, styles of dress have changed. Sadly, the styles of dress have become more revealing to the point where many women, whose character is far from harlotry, are dressed in ways which could easily cause a man to stumble into sin. Hollywood, the popular music culture and the fashion industry all encourage you to show off your body, but a Christian lady should know that her body is not her own.

1Cor 6:19-20 What? know ye not that your body is the temple of the Holy Ghost which is in you, which ye have of God, and ye are not your own? For ye are bought with a price: therefore glorify God in your body, and in your spirit, which are God’s.

As a Christian, you have been purchased already. Paul referred to himself as a servant. Literally, a bond-slave belonging to Christ. Therefore, since we are not our own, we belong to Christ and we should do the will of Christ. For a lady, dressing modestly is the will of Christ.

MEP Kristiina Ojuland #fundie news.err.ee

[Bolding in original]

Kristiina Ojuland, a former Foreign Minister of Estonia and former member of the European Parliament, voiced her disapproval of the European Commission’s migrant quota plan on her official Facebook page, by calling for a pan-European campaign against admitting any refugees in the EU.

In a post that was more reminiscent of a far-right extremist, than a former Vice President of the European Liberal Democrat and Reform Party (ALDE), Ojuland said that the “white race is threatened” by dark-skinned immigrants (Ojuland actually used an Estonian word “neeger” which is not officially considered offensive in Estonia, but nevertheless becoming socially unacceptable).

“Today yet again I see a fully able young Negro begging for money in Italy, from people who have worked hard to earn a lunch. I think that we should start a pan-European campaign to collect signatures to ensure that not a single so-called refugee gets across the Mediterranean. Enough of this nonsense!” Ojuland, the former high-ranking politician who for years campaigned Estonia to join the EU, wrote.

Her posting has so far gathered over 2,000 “likes”, 500 shares and 300 comments. While many people pointed out her offensive remarks and some called her racist, one would have thought that the former foreign minister would back down, but it didn't turn out to be so. Instead, Ojuland chose to rigorously defend her statement and even went offensive against the moderate commentators who asked for common sense.

“Stop using a word 'racist'! As a white person, I feel that the white race is threatened today! Are Estonians also so brain-washed now that they start talking some kind of politically correct bullshit?” Ojuland said.

Another reasonable commentator was told by former liberal MEP that by being a member of the European Union does not mean “accepting people who would squeeze Estonia's social system”. “Estonia needs to say clear no to Mediterranean migrants!” exclaimed Ojuland.

Frazier Glenn Miller #conspiracy timesofisrael.com

OlATHE, Kan. (AP) — The white supremacist who shot dead three people at two Jewish sites in Kansas City in 2014 told the court Friday that the killings were necessary, an argument the judge in the trial rejected as a defense.

Johnson County Judge Thomas Kelly Ryan said the “compelling necessity” defense could not be used in the guilt phase of the capital murder trial of Frazier Glenn Miller, 74, of Aurora, Missouri. Ryan didn’t rule out the possibility of letting Miller use the defense if he is convicted of the killings and jurors have to decide whether he will be sentenced to death.

Miller does not deny gunning down Dr. William Lewis Corporon, 69, and his 14-year-old grandson, Reat Griffin Underwood, at the Jewish Community Center in Overland Park, and Terri LaManno, 53, at the nearby Village Shalom care center on April 13, 2014. He said he felt it was his duty to kill Jewish people before he died; he didn’t know all three were Christians.

Miller spoke Friday for nearly an hour about his planned defense, explaining that the Declaration of Independence gave him the “right” to do what he did and insisting that “there is no legal way to save the white race.” His rambling presentation touched on Caitlyn Jenner, AIDS, Israel, the wars in Iraq and Afghanistan, British wartime leader Winston Churchill, the Rev. Billy Graham and a Jewish conspiracy he alleged was behind the sitcom “All in the Family.”

Ryan said there was no connection between the argument Miller made and the killings. In ruling from the bench, Ryan used guidance provided in the case of abortion opponent Scott Roeder, who unsuccessfully attempted to present a similar defense during his trial for killing late-term Kansas abortion provider Dr. George Tiller.

Miller, who is representing himself with defense attorneys available to help, responded to the decision by calling Ryan an “egg-sucking mule.” The hearing was marked with frequent outbursts and occasional anti-Semitic remarks from Miller, who at one point called himself a Nazi.

Ryan ruled against Miller on a series of motion, starting when he refused to step down from the case because he said there weren’t grounds for the request. Miller argued that Ryan was obstructing justice by not ruling quickly on motions or allowing him a computer with online access.

The next hearing is set for Aug. 5. The trial is scheduled to begin Aug. 17 with jury selection.

Llewellyn H. Rockwell Jr.; various Randroids #racist mises.org

Open Borders Are an Assault on Private Property

Whether we’re talking about illegal immigration from Mexico and Central America, or birthright citizenship, or the migrants coming from the Middle East and Africa, the subject of immigration has been in the news and widely discussed for months now. It is an issue fraught with potentially perilous consequences, so it is especially important for libertarians to understand it correctly.

This Mises Circle, which is devoted to a consideration of where we ought to go from here, seems like an opportune moment to take up this momentous question.

I should note at the outset that in searching for the correct answer to this vexing problem I do not seek to claim originality. To the contrary, I draw much of what follows from two of the people whose work is indispensable to a proper understanding of the free society: Murray N. Rothbard and Hans-Hermann Hoppe.

Some libertarians have assumed that the correct libertarian position on immigration must be “open borders,” or the completely unrestricted movement of people. Superficially, this appears correct: surely we believe in letting people go wherever they like!

But hold on a minute. Think about “freedom of speech,” another principle people associate with libertarians. Do we really believe in freedom of speech as an abstract principle? That would mean I have the right to yell all during a movie, or the right to disrupt a Church service, or the right to enter your home and shout obscenities at you.

What we believe in are private property rights. No one has “freedom of speech” on my property, since I set the rules, and in the last resort I can expel someone. He can say whatever he likes on his own property, and on the property of anyone who cares to listen to him, but not on mine.

The same principle holds for freedom of movement. Libertarians do not believe in any such principle in the abstract. I do not have the right to wander into your house, or into your gated community, or into Disneyworld, or onto your private beach, or onto Jay-Z’s private island. As with “freedom of speech,” private property is the relevant factor here. I can move onto any property I myself own or whose owner wishes to have me. I cannot simply go wherever I like.

Now if all the parcels of land in the whole world were privately owned, the solution to the so-called immigration problem would be evident. In fact, it might be more accurate to say that there would be no immigration problem in the first place. Everyone moving somewhere new would have to have the consent of the owner of that place.

When the state and its so-called public property enter the picture, though, things become murky, and it takes extra effort to uncover the proper libertarian position. I’d like to try to do that today.

Shortly before his death, Murray Rothbard published an article called “Nations by Consent: Decomposing the Nation State.” He had begun rethinking the assumption that libertarianism committed us to open borders.

He noted, for instance, the large number of ethnic Russians whom Stalin settled in Estonia. This was not done so that Baltic people could enjoy the fruits of diversity. It never is. It was done in an attempt to destroy an existing culture, and in the process to make a people more docile and less likely to cause problems for the Soviet empire.

Murray wondered: does libertarianism require me to support this, much less to celebrate it? Or might there be more to the immigration question after all?

And here Murray posed the problem just as I have: in a fully private-property society, people would have to be invited onto whatever property they traveled through or settled on.

If every piece of land in a country were owned by some person, group, or corporation, this would mean that no person could enter unless invited to enter and allowed to rent or purchase property. A totally privatized country would be as closed as the particular property owners desire. It seems clear, then, that the regime of open borders that exists de facto in the U.S. and Western Europe really amounts to a compulsory opening by the central state, the state in charge of all streets and public land areas, and does not genuinely reflect the wishes of the proprietors.

In the current situation, on the other hand, immigrants have access to public roads, public transportation, public buildings, and so on. Combine this with the state’s other curtailments of private property rights, and the result is artificial demographic shifts that would not occur in a free market. Property owners are forced to associate and do business with individuals they might otherwise avoid.

“Commercial property owners such as stores, hotels, and restaurants are no longer free to exclude or restrict access as they see fit,” writes Hans. “Employers can no longer hire or fire who they wish. In the housing market, landlords are no longer free to exclude unwanted tenants. Furthermore, restrictive covenants are compelled to accept members and actions in violation of their very own rules and regulations.”

Hans continues:

By admitting someone onto its territory, the state also permits this person to proceed on public roads and lands to every domestic resident’s doorsteps, to make use of all public facilities and services (such as hospitals and schools), and to access every commercial establishment, employment, and residential housing, protected by a multitude of nondiscrimination laws.

It is rather unfashionable to express concern for the rights of property owners, but whether the principle is popular or not, a transaction between two people should not occur unless both of those people want it to. This is the very core of libertarian principle.

In order to make sense of all this and reach the appropriate libertarian conclusion, we have to look more closely at what public property really is and who, if anyone, can be said to be its true owner. Hans has devoted some of his own work to precisely this question. There are two positions we must reject: that public property is owned by the government, or that public property is unowned, and is therefore comparable to land in the state of nature, before individual property titles to particular parcels of land have been established.

Certainly we cannot say public property is owned by the government, since government may not legitimately own anything. Government acquires its property by force, usually via the intermediary of taxation. A libertarian cannot accept that kind of property acquisition as morally legitimate, since it involves the initiation of force (the extraction of tax dollars) on innocent people. Hence government’s pretended property titles are illegitimate.

But neither can we say that public property is unowned. Property in the possession of a thief is not unowned, even if at the moment it does not happen to be held by the rightful owner. The same goes for so-called public property. It was purchased and developed by means of money seized from the taxpayers. They are the true owners.

(This, incidentally, was the correct way to approach de-socialization in the former communist regimes of eastern Europe. All those industries were the property of the people who had been looted to build them, and those people should have received shares in proportion to their contribution, to the extent it could have been determined.)

In an anarcho-capitalist world, with all property privately owned, “immigration” would be up to each individual property owner to decide. Right now, on the other hand, immigration decisions are made by a central authority, with the wishes of property owners completely disregarded. The correct way to proceed, therefore, is to decentralize decision-making on immigration to the lowest possible level, so that we approach ever more closely the proper libertarian position, in which individual property owners consent to the various movements of peoples.

Ralph Raico, our great libertarian historian, once wrote:

Free immigration would appear to be in a different category from other policy decisions, in that its consequences permanently and radically alter the very composition of the democratic political body that makes those decisions. In fact, the liberal order, where and to the degree that it exists, is the product of a highly complex cultural development. One wonders, for instance, what would become of the liberal society of Switzerland under a regime of “open borders.”

Switzerland is in fact an interesting example. Before the European Union got involved, the immigration policy of Switzerland approached the kind of system we are describing here. In Switzerland, localities decided on immigration, and immigrants or their employers had to pay to admit a prospective migrant. In this way, residents could better ensure that their communities would be populated by people who would add value and who would not stick them with the bill for a laundry list of “benefits.”

Obviously, in a pure open borders system, the Western welfare states would simply be overrun by foreigners seeking tax dollars. As libertarians, we should of course celebrate the demise of the welfare state. But to expect a sudden devotion to laissez faire to be the likely outcome of a collapse in the welfare state is to indulge in naïveté of an especially preposterous kind.

Can we conclude that an immigrant should be considered “invited” by the mere fact that he has been hired by an employer? No, says Hans, because the employer does not assume the full cost associated with his new employee. The employer partially externalizes the costs of that employee on the taxpaying public:

Equipped with a work permit, the immigrant is allowed to make free use of every public facility: roads, parks, hospitals, schools, and no landlord, businessman, or private associate is permitted to discriminate against him as regards housing, employment, accommodation, and association. That is, the immigrant comes invited with a substantial fringe benefits package paid for not (or only partially) by the immigrant employer (who allegedly has extended the invitation), but by other domestic proprietors as taxpayers who had no say in the invitation whatsoever.

These migrations, in short, are not market outcomes. They would not occur on a free market. What we are witnessing are examples of subsidized movement. Libertarians defending these mass migrations as if they were market phenomena are only helping to discredit and undermine the true free market.

Moreover, as Hans points out, the “free immigration” position is not analogous to free trade, as some libertarians have erroneously claimed. In the case of goods being traded from one place to another, there is always and necessarily a willing recipient. The same is not true for “free immigration.”

To be sure, it is fashionable in the US to laugh at words of caution about mass immigration. Why, people made predictions about previous waves of immigration, we’re told, and we all know those didn’t come true. Now for one thing, those waves were all followed by swift and substantial immigration reductions, during which time society adapted to these pre-welfare state population movements. There is virtually no prospect of any such reductions today. For another, it is a fallacy to claim that because some people incorrectly predicted a particular outcome at a particular time, therefore that outcome is impossible, and anyone issuing words of caution about it is a contemptible fool.

The fact is, politically enforced multiculturalism has an exceptionally poor track record. The twentieth century affords failure after predictable failure. Whether it’s Czechoslovakia, Yugoslavia, the Soviet Union, or Pakistan and Bangladesh, or Malaysia and Singapore, or the countless places with ethnic and religious divides that have not yet been resolved to this day, the evidence suggests something rather different from the tale of universal brotherhood that is such a staple of leftist folklore.

No doubt some of the new arrivals will be perfectly decent people, despite the US government’s lack of interest in encouraging immigration among the skilled and capable. But some will not. The three great crime waves in US history – which began in 1850, 1900, and 1960 — coincided with periods of mass immigration.

Crime isn’t the only reason people may legitimately wish to resist mass immigration. If four million Americans showed up in Singapore, that country’s culture and society would be changed forever. And no, it is not true that libertarianism would in that case require the people of Singapore to shrug their shoulders and say it was nice having our society while it lasted but all good things must come to an end. No one in Singapore would want that outcome, and in a free society, they would actively prevent it.

In other words, it’s bad enough we have to be looted, spied on, and kicked around by the state. Should we also have to pay for the privilege of cultural destructionism, an outcome the vast majority of the state’s taxpaying subjects do not want and would actively prevent if they lived in a free society and were allowed to do so?

The very cultures that the incoming migrants are said to enrich us with could not have developed had they been constantly bombarded with waves of immigration by peoples of radically different cultures. So the multicultural argument doesn’t even make sense.

It is impossible to believe that the US or Europe will be a freer place after several more decades of uninterrupted mass immigration. Given the immigration patterns that the US and EU governments encourage, the long-term result will be to make the constituencies for continued government growth so large as to be practically unstoppable. Open-borders libertarians active at that time will scratch their heads and claim not to understand why their promotion of free markets is having so little success. Everybody else will know the answer.

Pomidor Quixote #racist dailystormer.name

[From "UK: Radical Eugenicist Tory MP Proposes Street Combat Knife Crime Policy to Purge the Weak"]

I do not usually appreciate African culture, or feel enriched by it. I am often annoyed or disgusted by its bestial lack of depth and only rarely do I like anything about it.

But I need more of these knife fight videos.

They bring me joy.

The best way for me to get more of these videos is for all UK citizens to be taught street fighting unarmed knife defense combat skills.

Sir Christopher Chope agrees with me.

Daily Mail

Children should get ‘fitter’ so they are more able to repel the growing threat of knife attacks, an outspoken Tory MP told senior police officers today.

Sir Christopher Chope says more youngsters should be encouraged to try judo and taekwondo to avoid them feeling the need to carry a blade themselves.

The Brexiteer, who represents Christchurch in Dorset, suggested martial arts would help youngsters be ‘physically able to deal with the situation’ by either disarming a rival or fighting back.

[...]

Dave Thompson, Chief Constable of the West Midlands Police, told MPs today that the ‘best knife prevention technique is to run away, as fast as you can’.

Sir Christopher replied: ‘You do need to be fit to do that’.

I assume that Sir Christopher winked at someone as he spoke those last words.

It’s clear what he meant to say. Some people are more fit than others. None of us chose for things to be this way. This is how things are ordered in nature.

[Pictures of Hitler's quote "Those who want to live, let them fight, and those who do not want to fight in this world of eternal struggle do not deserve to live", of "Pyramid of Capitalist System" and of a food chain]

Sir Christopher was tired of reading good news about the economy. He stood up and bravely declared it to be self-evident that Parliamentary authority be justified only through its adherence to one first principle. Parliament must strengthen the British people. To strengthen the collective spirit, each individual Briton must know mortal combat. To strengthen the national bloodline, the weak must be purged.

Sir Christopher’s radical politics of civilizational bloodsports seen through virality algorithms of mass surveillance footage are the logical extension of his ecofascist worldview. He believed in the genetically determined Neitzchean superman as the only valid social goal. He believed in himself, and in his own imperative to supply me with ever-increasing sacrifices of relatively athletic knife fight videos with moral consequences to jungle barbarians.

It does not matter what has to happen to society in order to produce the imagery.

The violence was fast-paced and tactical, but Sir Christopher knew that there could be more. To achieve his goals, society would have to be repurposed away from the production and consumption of consumer goods, and towards the attainment of the ideal human form through mass sacrificial combat.

Ecofascists such as Sir Christopher Chope believe that the three factors which conspire to determine a nation’s destiny were land, divine fortune, and blood nobility. Britain’s land mass was already sufficient to sustain many more Britons (if only they would breed in captivity!) and in any case could not be increased because there were no more wars.

A worldly man, Sir Christopher reasoned well that divine fortune was often indifferent to man’s interests and could not be surely appeased with any policy of Parliament.

For one revolutionary MP, it is racial destiny itself which must be mastered. Of all the factors incumbent upon the United Kingdom’s inevitable destiny, it is only this factor which could be improved upon through its subjugation to Parliamentary policy. Through mass conscription of the civilian population into a street fighter knife defense training program, Sir Christopher saw the most expedient path to the completion of German idealism, and the justification of previous acts of Parliament.

The Briton would be forced to confront knife-wielding barbarians, which had already been brought to roam their homeland through previous acts of Parliament, as a test of personal strength.

The Briton would share this experience of Victory with all other Britons through their culture, and recall the culling of the weaker Britons in their collective racial memory. This test of martial nature would define their national identity and embolden their will to exist and to struggle as a People. If the Briton were to achieve his perfect form, it would not matter to him if society were to collapse or if government were to fall into corruption and chaos.

Civilization was created once through collective spirit of will to power. As long as the spirit of greatness is within man, he can create it again, stronger.

Hecuba #sexist radicalhubarchives.wordpress.com

Julie Bindel is well known within malestream media and her capitulation to the trans issue which is totally anti-feminist and promotes male domination over all women, will be viewed by men and Male Supremacist System as another feminist finally accepting she is wrong and men are right. Malestream media and its virulent MRA followers will delight in saying to Feminists ‘look another Feminist Icon has capitulated to male domination and it won’t be long before all you women fall in line and kiss the feet of us superior males.’

Yes we all know women have to ‘make deals with the devil, (meaning we live within the Male Supremacist System) but there is a huge difference between deciding what is best for our well-being and security and blatantly reneging on one’s politics. Ms. Bindel has time and again declared she is a Radical Feminist but she has swiftly capitulated because her career is far more important than her politics.

Ms. Bindel is not a fool and she knows what happens when women capitulate to male demands, because it is men as usual who win and the woman will not be accorded any kudos or financial security. Capitulating to male oppressors only ensures the Male Supremacist System continues to wage war on any woman who dares to speak out against male domination over all women.

Ms. Bindel is no longer a feminist and she should say so rather than attempting to pander to a male in a frock. Note this male promotes virulent women-hating and male contempt for women.

Mr. Noname #fundie fanfiction.net

(=Another review for another homophobic fanfic of "The Loud House"=)

"They didn't choose this. They can't help it, they were born this way."

Simon Levay would beg to differ. Next time, please check your facts.

"Was the gay rights movement of the '60s for nothing?"

Pretty much. 'Gay rights' are a hoax. Not just Bible verses, but I've already given you people a list of things to look up yourselves to better understand the position that the author and I have taken: Christopher Doyle, ex-homosexuals in general, 4 myths about homosexuality debunked by natsumihanaki20 over on DeviantArt...I mean, you DO know how to use a search engine, right? Or a library?

*sigh* Michael Savage was right: Liberalism IS a mental illness.

Other than that, I'm going to end it right here. You detractors can debate this all you want, but the author has just as much right to share this story with the world as does anyone else. There are indeed a lot of grammar errors and plenty of poor sentence and paragraph structure, and maybe the Bible lessons DO seem rather overdone; "rubbed in our faces" and such. Fine, I get it. But all I'm saying is that if you don't like it, you can always find another story to read. Simple as that. I mean, nobody's FORCING you to read this one, correct?

You can't make us change our minds any more than we can make you change yours. Stalemate.

Thank you for understanding, and have a nice day. (walks away and gently closes the door behind)

...

Sorry about that, author. You might consider putting a warning notice at the beginning of one of the chapters. You could write something along the lines of: "This story/chapter contains strong anti-homosexuality sentiments (not to be confused with homophobia). If you don't like that, please don't read." Or in the main story description, if you can fit it in.

Unnamed Austrian official #fundie nytimes.com

Gay Afghan Teenager Denied Asylum in Austria Because He Didn’t Fit Stereotype, Rights Group Says

BERLIN — A gay Afghan 18-year-old who was seeking asylum in Austria because he feared persecution in his country had his application denied because the authorities said he did not act like a stereotypical gay man, citing his walk, behavior and clothing, according to a Vienna-based organization that helps refugees.

In a case that illustrates the plight of many L.G.B.T. refugees coming to Europe, the organization, Queer Base, said the teenager, whom it did not identify, provided testimony at an asylum hearing this spring that he became aware of his sexuality when he was 12 and living in Afghanistan.

He migrated to Austria as a minor, according to the organization, which kept all other details of the teenager’s life and journey confidential at his request.

But after he applied for asylum, the document outlining the decision quoted an official as saying that the man’s claim that he was gay was not believable based on how he had acted while living in Austria.

“Neither your walk, nor your behavior nor your clothing give the slightest indication that you could be gay,” says the decision, which was more than 100 pages.

“They reported that you frequently got into fights with roommates,” it said. “You clearly have the potential to be aggressive, which would not be expected in a homosexual.”

lso said that the young man was not described as having many friends while in Austria. “Don’t homosexuals tend to be rather sociable?” it said.

Human Rights Watch said in its 2017 report on Afghanistan that the country’s law criminalizes consensual same-sex sexual conduct, and the report cited harassment, violence and detention of gay people by the police. The organization’s report this year noted that same-sex relations are punishable by five to 15 years in prison under a law that bans all sex between individuals not married to each other. Advocates for L.G.B.T. people operate largely underground out of fear of persecution, the organization said.

And while laws in places like Austria are much more gay-friendly, L.G.B.T. refugees often face challenges coming out, even if it would help their cases for seeking asylum, gay-rights experts say.

On the other hand, pretending to be gay or lesbian to increase one’s odds in the asylum process is relatively rare, those experts say. It’s more common for L.G.B.T. refugees to continue to hide their sexual identities and to lie about the reasons for seeking asylum, said Patrick Dörr, who runs Queer Refugees, a German state-sponsored program for L.G.B.T. refugees coming to Germany.

“Many of them have to overcome shame and stigma,” Marty Huber, a founder of Queer Base, said in an interview on Thursday.

The teenager was interviewed for his application in late April and the decision was handed down in early May. The decision gained international attention this week when a Vienna weekly newsmagazine, Falter, published details of his case.

Nina Horaczek, who wrote the initial article, published the key excerpts from the document that described the institution’s response to the teenager’s asylum request based on his sexual orientation.

The teenager continues to live in Austria as he appeals the decision. He has declined to be interviewed, Ms. Huber said.

Christoph Pölzl, a spokesman for the Austrian Interior Ministry, confirmed on Thursday that the decision was authentic. He said that the country’s Federal Immigration and Asylum agency had made decisions on about 120,000 asylum requests.

“In the asylum process, the asylum seeker must make his reason for flight credible,” he said. He declined to discuss the specific case of the Afghan teenager.

Migrants who flee their home countries for Europe face perilous and sometimes fatal journeys crossing by boat or over land, often at the hands of unscrupulous human traffickers.

The office of the United Nations High Commissioner for Refugees said this month that more than 1,500 refugees and migrants had died trying to cross the Mediterranean Sea in the first seven months of 2018, with 850 deaths in June and July alone.

About 60,000 people have crossed the Mediterranean so far this year, around half as many as during the same period last year, the refugee agency said. Spain has become the primary destination, with more than 23,500 people arriving by sea, compared with around 18,500 in Italy and 16,000 in Greece, the agency said.

Most of the migrants who have ended up in Austria have traveled by land through the Balkans.

Austria has recently tightened its asylum requirements. One such change gives the government control over where refugees are placed, which can mean that L.G.B.T. people find themselves in conservative states where it is harder to integrate.

In June, Navid Jafartash, a gay refugee from Iraq, said on Austrian television that he was asked during an asylum application interview to explain what the colors on the rainbow flag stood for. When Mr. Jafartash, who lived with an Austrian partner at the time, was unable to do so, his asylum application was initially denied, he said in the television interview.

Activists say that L.G.B.T. refugees are especially vulnerable because in many cases they do not want to discuss their sexuality at an official hearing. Translators often act as more of an impediment than the Austrian officials because they come from the same community as the asylum seeker.

“Many of them have to overcome shame and stigma,” said Ms. Huber, whose organization is helping more than 400 L.G.B.T. refugees in Austria.

The asylum seekers also run into trouble in the asylum centers, where they are forced to live among their peers after they have outed themselves to an immigration official.

Sometimes refugees are not aware that their sexuality could help their case for asylum, Mr. Dörr said.

As for the decision in the Afghan teenager’s case, “it’s scandalous misconduct,” he said. “It just makes you shake your head.”

Monk of Failure #racist #crackpot incels.co

[LifeFuel] Normie looking Balkancel should go to Eastern Europe.

I'm using a normie looking balkan guy for chadfishing and has set the location "St Petersburg" Russia. He got 25 matches within 17 minutes on Badoo with 3 holes messaging him first. Balkancels should move to Eastern Europe. @anon

Note: Balkan is in southeast Europe not Eastern Europe and the people of Balkans despite being of slavic origin look good because they have Germanic and Mediterranean ancestry in them. They mog eastern Slavs.

jkhbsa #racist reddit.com

Liberals love to say it's the white people who don't live in a multicultural society who are the most racist since they don't have their lives enriched by the vibrant toilet cultures of the 3rd world, but as someone who lives in Toronto as most of you already know I can say that this is far from the case. I don't consider myself racist but a few of my friends are definitely white supremacists and they are products of shame and self loathing of their formative years where they grew up to worship the Outliers, to smoke weed and mourn the gr8 2pac shaker. Luckily I had a decent upbringing where I was frequently mocked for dipping my toes into the sewer, so living in Tha Toylet didn't do much damage.

Nabih Berri #racist #conspiracy jpost.com

The Lebanese Parliament speaker Nabih Berri apparently had no qualms about using an antisemitic slur in a meeting with Jewish American politician Eliot L. Engel.

The Lebanese daily Al-Jumhouriyya quoted Berri as saying during his meeting Engel, "How to Recognize a Jew? If you see a pregnant woman, get close to her and toss a piece of gold near her or at her feet. If the fetus jumps out from his mother's womb and grabs the gold, you know he is a Jew."
The meeting, which took place several days ago, was meant to focus on negotiations between Israel and Lebanon on demarcating the maritime border between the two countries, which would impact oil and gas drilling rights in the Mediterranean.

Al-Jumhouriyya reported in its article on May 29 that Berri made the comment when he as asked what he thinks is motivating Israel to soften its position and agree to demarcate the land and maritime borders simultaneously.

“The Israelis want the oil [in the Mediterranean] and want to produce the oil and gas found in the Palestinian waters,” Berri continued. “If they had companies capable of drilling and producing [the gas and oil themselves], they would have acted immediately, without delay. But they need [the help of] international companies, and the latter are apprehensive.

Belongs_to_the_nords #racist reddit.com

I look around me, and I see my family, my people. I live in a white pocket in the Midwest United States. I love this. I love these people. I don't ever want this to change, indeed, I want it to spread. But that isn't going to just... happen. We've all just sat idly by waiting for non-whites to adopt our way of living, not realizing that they just don't want to. The supreme arrogance of the western man was his assumption that the rewards he has reaped for himself can be shared with those who did not earn it. Freedom, the Republic, Westernism, our very way of life. But they don't want it. Arabs don't want a Secular Republic; that's why they always replace them with Theocratic Dictatorships. Africans can't handle the nation-state; that's why there's always famines and war. The European fails to see that the world not only doesn't want his values, but also wants him dead. To us who recognize this arrogance, it seems hopeless.

But it isn't. The European is the one who tamed the world. The Spaniard discovered a New World and spread their language and customs to all of South and Central America, and even parts of Asia. The Frenchmen revolted against an oppressive regime that used God as an excuse to oppress its own people. The Anglo-Saxon tamed the whole damn world in a never-ending quest for domination. The German fought against adversity from all sides to finally unite into a single state. The Italian helped to build the "west" as we know it, first with the Roman Empire, then as a hub of Christian influence. The Greek also helped to created this all, to establish the ideals of the west, and fought hard against foreign oppressors to regain freedom for their people. The Slav has made impressive conquests eastward and has endured centuries of misrule, either from genocidal Germans or Turks, (((Communists))), or just plain corrupt dictators, and has emerged with a staunch will to never falter again. The Magyar has not always been a European, but has joined the ranks through quality of character and ready embracement of everything that makes the west, "the west." The Norseman has struggled through adversity, and may well falter in times coming, but has always emerged strong, even against its all-conquering neighbors.

So, back to my first statement, about how I have to find faith in something other than God. After seeing our history, and how we compare to others, I can only come to the conclusion that the only thing I can put my faith in is, truly, the Iron Will of the European. Hard times are coming, but, as always, we will emerge victorious. I can only hope that, this time, we don't long to share our victory.

Hulk Hogan, brothers. May the European and the West never be broken.

ikester7579 #fundie boards.atlanticrecords.com

No, your not sorry for the sarcasm. And I more or less expected it. Because sarcasm is all that people can come up with to prove their point when they know their point really can't be proven.

<p>[snip a few lines]

<p>So why don't you tell us what you really think about God and all who follow him. Don't be modest, it's not very becomming of your style.

Royce E. Van Blaricome #fundie christiannews.net

Royce continues to insist that Jesus is named in the U.S. Constitution, but refuses to show where.

MarkSebree:
"Ever watch Bill O'Reilly when he gives the "Word of the Day"? If so, you'll be familiar with "Go look it up. If someone gives you the answers you don't learn anything and you don't remember it.""

No, I do not watch Bill O'Reilly, or any similar show. And I have looked it up. I have read through the US Constitution and its Amendments numerous times. Your claim is unsupported.

"Thank you for posting the website address for all to go to. I appreciate that. I actually went there and I appreciate you proving yourself wrong."

Actually, that site proves that you are the one that is wrong.

"It's right there on that very site you gave in black & white, MUCH APPRECIATED!!"

Then state the Article or Amendment, Section, and paragraph. You made the positive assertion, so you need to support it. Or do I need to post the entire text of the US Constitution to show that you are wrong? Nobody else sees what you claim is there.

You are the only one that is showing himself to be blind. Or more likely, dishonest.

Royce E. Van Blaricome:
"No, I do not watch Bill O'Reilly, or any similar show. And I have looked it up. I have read through the US Constitution and its Amendments numerous times. Your claim is unsupported."

Well, maybe you should. Might learn something. And thanks for showing that you're just as blind as the other yahoo's on here who deny what's right there in black & white.

"Actually, that site proves that you are the one that is wrong."

Nope. Just proves your either outright lying, too ignorant to read, or so steeped in your own delusion and denial that you can't see what's right before your very eyes. But hey, take comfort. There have been many others who were in the same boat and ALL have been proven wrong as well. So you're not alone.

"Then state the Article or Amendment, Section, and paragraph. You made the positive assertion, so you need to support it. Or do I need to post the entire text of the US Constitution to show that you are wrong? Nobody else sees what you claim is there."

I don't need prove squat to you. As I've repeated said here, you people can't read black & white right before your eyes so cutting and pasting it here isn't gonna help you!

You wanna post the "entire Constitution" to show me I'm wrong - have at buddy. I look forward to seeing you prove yourself a Liar and deceptive in public. Just as you did with your false statement that nobody else sees it. Others most certainly have.

"You are the only one that is showing himself to be blind. Or more likely, dishonest."

Take a chainsaw to that Giant Sequoia Tree sticking outta your eye socket and maybe you'll see better and not be so blind.

MarkSebree:
Sorry, but I am not the one that is blind. Unlike you, I do not need talk show hosts to learn things. I can research the subject on my own. And despite your claims, I am extremely literate, honest, grounded in reality, not in denial, and I can easily see what is in front of me.

You have not proven me wrong. You have been committing logical fallacies right an left. You have been trying to shift the burden of proof, probably because you cannot support your claims. You have been engaging in ad hominems for the same reason. You have also engaged in a few more logical fallacies.

Unlike you, I am not delusional. I cannot see what is not there.

You have made the assertion that the USA Constitution contains multiple references to "God", "Jesus", and "Christ" in its text. That is a positive assertion, and you have been challenged to support your claims. You have not even been asked to post the exact text, just the location of it. You have refused to do so repeatedly. Therefore, the only reasonable conclusion is that you are a liar. You cannot support your claims, and thus you have been defeated.

Royce E. Van Blaricome:
You're sorry, alright. And you are blind - spiritually-blind.

If you're so doggone literate, honest, and grounded in reality, then STOP telling lies and do the honest thing - cite the WHOLE Constitution right here so everyone can see you're lying!!

And now you lie openly. I never made the assertion that the USA Constitution contains 'multiple references to "God", "Jesus", and "Christ" in its text. Anyone can go back and see exactly what I said. Nice attempt at the typical Liberal tactic of Distraction & Diversion.

" You have refused to do so repeatedly. Therefore, the only reasonable conclusion is that you are a liar. You cannot support your claims, and thus you have been defeated."

ROTFLMBO!!!! So you think that's a reasonable conclusion? LOL When what I've said and maintained all along is 1) Go read the Constitution yourself, and 2) It would do me NO good whatsoever to actually copy & paste it here because it would still be in Black & White which you EVIDENTLY can NOT read!! LOL

I have supported my claims and you have NOT. Because you CAN'T!! The B&W text proves you wrong EVERY time!!!!!!!!! LOL

Defeated? Ha ha ha LOLOLOLOLOL It's easy to see who's been defeated. YOU and all the others who can't read and understand plain English! LOL

MarkSebree:
"You're sorry, alright. And you are blind - spiritually-blind."

Actually, I see very clearly. I removed the blinders that you wear decades ago.

"If you're so doggone literate, honest, and grounded in reality, then STOP telling lies and do the honest thing - cite the WHOLE Constitution right here so everyone can see you're lying!!"

I have not been telling any lies. And I have cited the entire Constitution and shown everyone that you have been lying.

"And now you lie openly. I never made the assertion that the USA Constitution contains 'multiple references to "God", "Jesus", and "Christ" in its text. Anyone can go back and see exactly what I said. Nice attempt at the typical Liberal tactic of Distraction & Diversion."

Actually, I have been telling the truth all along. It is usually a Conservative tactic to Distract and Divert the conversation, since you have been the one that has been engaging in that tactic, not me.

As far as when you claimed that the US Constitution contained multiple references to "God", "Jesus", and "Christ" in the text, you should really review your own posting history before making such a challenge. Its child's play to show that you are lying again.

[Reposts the conversation so far.]

Royce E. Van Blaricome:
[Calls each post dishonest, or lies, but offers no refutation.]

Mrs. Parunak #fundie ladiesagainstfeminism.com

[The Top Ten Reasons Modesty Gets a Yawn]

My family and I have had the privilege of hanging out with some unbelievably awesome single guys lately. A big reason I say they are so awesome is that they actually care about winning the battle with lust. Most men gave up long ago. Titus talks about Cretans whose “god is their belly.” In our culture, deity seems to have migrated several inches south.
But these guys have a problem, and it’s a problem that we have to own as their sisters in Christ. Everywhere they go, women are unbelievably unhelpful. Flaunting. Revealing. Immodest. Out in the world, we wouldn’t really expect anything else, but when it’s women in the Church, that’s a different story. Over and over, our friends have lamented that Christian women just don’t seem to understand what they’re doing to their brothers. I think that’s because no one is out there trying to teach them. And guess what, ladies, that’s OUR job. The Bible says that it’s up to women to teach other women how to be discreet and chaste (Titus 2:5).But so many women can’t muster much passion about this issue. It conflicts with other values, or it just isn’t on the radar screen. So, in honor of awesome guys everywhere, I would like to present my Top Ten Reasons Why Modesty Gets a Yawn in hopes that all of us ladies can wake up, start being “teachers of good things” and consider how to provoke other women to love their brothers by making the gathering of the saints a safer place for battle-weary soldiers of purity.
10. I’m too old to be a problem.
You’re never too old to be discreet and chaste. Just because you don’t look like a teenager doesn’t mean that you don’t still need to be careful. When you’re bending over in tight jeans, your crow’s feet don’t show anyway. And if your cleavage is spilling out of your neckline, it’s likely to be a challenge whether or not you have a few gray hairs.
Even if, for the sake of argument, you really are too old to ever cause anyone to struggle, you’re still not too old to set an example for the younger women who are naively exhibiting themselves. After all, if their mothers and grandmothers are doing it, why shouldn’t they?
9. I don’t have a body like a Victoria’s Secret model, so who would ever lust after me?
This one is similar to #10 and reveals a way in which most women don’t understand men. Women think that they have to have a perfect total package to provoke anyone to lust. Actually a man will feel a twinge of arousal from seeing anything that is hyper-accentuated and immodest about a female body–even if something else is less than perfect.
8. But my husband wants me to dress immodestly.
Usually, when husbands express this, it’s because one of two things is happening (sometimes both at the same time). Either you are not paying attention to satisfying his deep desire for visual stimuli when you are alone (and wives, when you’re alone, go ALL OUT!); or he’s a lust junkie who’s getting a buzz anywhere and everywhere he can and is annoyed that he isn’t getting the same buzz from you. A man that is fighting hard will not want you to be as inconsiderate and unloving as all the women he has to put up with all day. But a man who’s wallowing in other women’s immodesty will want to pull you down into the pit with him with absolutely no regard for how many men you cause to stumble along the way. If your husband doesn’t care if other men are lusting after you, it is a huge red flag that he is probably lusting after everyone else.
7. Are you saying that if a man is lusting after a woman, that it’s her fault?!
Nope. Not even close. Lust is a sin. And if a man is committing it, God holds him and him alone accountable. I’m not advocating the Islamic stereotype “blame the woman for her own rape” kind of mentality that says that men are not responsible for themselves in the presence of a beautiful woman.
But we can help our brothers. Being immodest is like throwing a party for a bunch of recovering alcoholics and deciding to have an open bar. If your guests got totally smashed it would, of course, be their fault, but no one is going to think for a minute that you really loved them or cared about their struggles.
6. But my husband never has any trouble at all with immodest women.
Apparently, there really are a few men out there who are totally oblivious. I don’t personally know any of them, but I’ve gotten enough comments from wives insisting that their husbands are in this category that I’m willing to acknowledge the possibility. However, just like I am taking your word for it that your husband has no difficulty, you might want to consider taking my word for it that a lot of other men do.
5. If Christians look like freaks no one will want to be a Christian.
People who don’t want to be Christians don’t want to because the Gospel sounds outlandish, or because they firmly believe something else, or even sometimes because they don’t understand their own sinfulness and what they need to be saved from. That “Christians are too weird” is just an excuse, as evidenced by the “Christians are no different from anyone else” excuse that we hear equally often. God frequently asks His people to do things that make us look weird (turning the other cheek, not lying, esteeming others as better than ourselves, for example). We need to be concerned with what’s right, not what’s normal.
4. But I want to dress like my friends.
Sure, but somebody has to be a leader. Imagine how much easier it would be for your friends to be considerate in their dress if you were already doing it.
3. I want to look cute and stylish.
This is a hard one. Probably every woman really wants to have everyone think she’s beautiful, but at what cost? Is following fashion so important that it’s worth placing a stumbling block in your brother’s path? Now someone’s going to jump in right about now and say that we can be cute and stylish and modest, and, of course, that’s lovely when we can achieve it. But modesty needs to be the first priority. So often it’s the other way around, and “cute and stylish” trumps modest. When we decide that our own sense of style matters more than helping men avoid lust, fundamentally, it is just selfishness on our part.
2. Guys won’t pay attention to me if I’m dressed in a sack.
Yeah, a lot of them probably won’t. But you have to ask yourself what kind of attention you really want. Are you looking for a godly husband or a long trail of panting, drooling puppies who will abandon you in a heartbeat just as soon as another piece of meat strolls by? Quality men want virtuous women. The problem is that the world is mostly populated by non-quality men, so virtuous women necessarily get less attention. This isn’t really a problem when you consider that drooling puppies make lousy husbands (assuming they ever quit playing video games long enough get around to marrying you). You’re wasting your time if you’re trying to appeal to them.
1. But I don’t see any men lusting after me!
Ha! Yes, there are a few creepy guys out there who ogle women openly, but 99.9% of the men out there are much more subtle. They know that it’s socially unacceptable to stare, so they don’t. In fact, most men will not look at your body when you are looking at them. If your attention is on them, they’ll look at your face, nod politely, play the gentlemen. But turn around to talk to your friends, and they’re watching you out of the corners of their eyes, and it is not your face they’re looking at this time. You have no idea how many surreptitious second (and third and fourth…) looks are being stolen. You also have no idea how many of your brothers in Christ are fighting hard not to take those second looks and are feeling really beaten up by how aware they are of your body.
Our brothers’ fight deserves much more than a yawn. Be modest yourself. Share the truth with your sisters. Let’s wake up and help each other out.

Peter Koenig #conspiracy globalresearch.ca

During last night’s celebration of the French National Holiday, around 11 PM, a speeding truck plowed into a crowd of thousands who were watching the fireworks along the Mediterranean Boulevard Anglais. The driver of the truck, was simultaneously and indiscriminately shooting into the crowd. He was able to run for 2 kilometers before being stopped by police, which instantly shot and killed him.

A horrendous terror attack, killing hordes of people, spreading pain, misery, fear and outrage in France, Europe – the world over.All indications signal the Big Script of yet another false flag; yet again in France.

The young truck-driver was identified as a 31-year-old Frenchman, resident of Nizza, with Tunisian origins. As in previous cases, ‘coincidence’ has it that his identity papers were found in the truck.

...

Why France? – Naturally, Hollande follows Washington’s orders. He is the most spineless puppet in Europe, making France the foremost EU vassal of America. And that in a post-Brexit ambiance, where according to several polls 70% – 80% of the French people are anti-EU and would vote for a Frexit, if they were given the chance to vote. This is a considerable increase since the Brexit referendum.

Washington needs a militarized Europe to be controlled by force, to impose its corporate financial rule, to push the TTIP down the throat of the Europeans, to make Europe the new and effective low-cost high-tech colony of the empire, and an unfailing buffer zone to Russia;

Cold War all over again. This time not so cold any more. WWIII is an imminent possibility, thanks to the EU vassals in Brussels giving NATO free reign to advance ruthlessly towards Moscow.

Surely, before long some Islamic ‘terror group’ will claim credit for the horror event. The usual. Let there be no doubt, as to who are the enemies of humanity – of ‘Western Humanity’ – the superior people, that is.

In the coming weeks it will be a piece of cake to slide this ‘law’ through the French Parliament as a permanent fixture in the French Constitution. That’s what Washington wants. That’s what Washington will get, thereby not only inciting but forcing other European nations to do likewise, putting their citizenry under military power.

How long will it take until We, the People, wake up and see the light?

Johnny Sparks #racist alternatehistory.com

Jews, Gypsies, Negroes and their bastard offsprings were the people that were effected by the Nuremberg Laws as non-Aryan, basically anyone who was not Indo-European.

All non-European people were seen as non-Aryan.

Japanese were seen as "honorary Aryan", and so was the Arab Mufti Haj Amin al-Husseini and some Jews.

The hierarchy was simple the Germanic Ubermenschen were the master race and all other Europeans were Aryans beneath the Germanic people.

The Slavic Untermenschen myth was created by the Communists after the war, the Nazis never called Slavs "untermensch" and many fought on the Nazis side against the Jewish Bolsheviks as well as many Nazi documents showing Slavs as "Aryan". Slavs were considered Aryan by the Nazis and sexual relations between Germans and Slavs was not forbid.

Whilst the Nazis did use anti-Slavic propaganda to dehumanize the opponent in the war they were no racial hatred against the Slavs than any other non-Germanic groups such as Balts and Celts neither. Many websites and books repeat that the Nazis considered Slavs to be untermenschen and non-Aryan but this is not true. People often confuse 'Aryan' with 'master race' the Nazis used the term Aryan differently and when used as the master race it was only meant for Germanic people only.

Remember, the Slavs were supporting and being ruled by Communism/Bolshevism which was Jewish according to the Nazis and the Nazis wanted lebensraum "living space" in Eastern Europe so remember you can see why they called them uncultured. Hitler himself never really "hated" Slavs as to speak, he just hated the fact that Austria was being overruled in the Austro-Hungarian empire by the Czechs, Poles and other Slavs and called it the Slavicification of Austria which he did not want as he seen it as the de-Germanisation of Austria.

Hitler was first a German nationalist and was pan-German all the way but he also was a pan-European leader who did not have any racial hatred against Slavs and they were considered Aryan. In fact, before the war Hitler initially wanted Poland as an alliance against the Soviet Union. Also, after the invasion of Poland there was an "Aryan side" which was mostly of Poles and the German minority and others.

Of course one must remember many truths are often ignored about the Nazis since history is written by the victors.

Squatting Slav TV #fundie youtube.com

At present, reports indicate that some 400000 migrants are bottled up in Libya and that the detention centers holding these people have been overrun with robbery, rape and murder. Oddly enough, the mainstream media which insists on our tolerance towards hoards of "peaceful" African migrants pouring into Europe now admits that many of these people are in fact murderers and rapists.

Karl Pomeroy #fundie theatlantic.com

The media attacks on Trump lie beyond the bounds of civility and decency. Destroying or attempting to destroy the reputation of a presidential candidate is not legitimate "vetting", it is uncalled-for vilification that undermines the electoral process.

The Trump University case is a civil case that Trump could settle out of court. It's probable the people just want his money. He chooses to go to court in order to keep people from suing him regularly, which settling out of court would encourage them to do.

Those who attack Trump's business record appear naive and ignorant about how entrepreneurs handle big transactions within the law. Have Trump's critics known any big money people personally? If so, these critics are hypocrites to pretend Trump may have done something fraudulent. I am of modest income, but there have been millionaires among my extended family, and what Trump does is not out of line. Lawsuits and business bankruptcies are common for people who deal at high levels.

If you want to sue a University, sue the University of California at Berkeley. They made students pay tuition for required classes that had no seats available, such that some had to stand in the hallway and miss the lecture. UCB failed to deliver. Indeed, people were jumping off the Campinele Tower---committing suicide right on campus---because they were cheated out of an education by that fraudulent University.

The Trump University prospectus offers inspiring Trump quotes. Probably this really is how Trump succeeded at real estate, and he was passing his techniques on to the students. Trump was, after all, a fan, follower and friend of Norman Vincent Peale, author of "The Power of Positive Thinking." If positive thinking sounds like generic advice, the student has missed the point.

People who criticize Trump unfairly must harbor a hidden desire to destroy humanity.

Karl Pomeroy
Quemado Institute

He Was Right #racist youtube.com

[lyrics to "Prey for Europe"]

They pour in by the fucking millions
Through our borders and the cracks in the walls
They bring with them a vile spirit
A filthy desert cult of death
They sink their rotten teeth deep into our flesh
Their loathsome culture boroughs into our homeland
Their revolting ways of life imposed upon our people
And we sit back and watch them violate us all

Our instincts weakened by the leftist propaganda
Our love for our people given to those who hate us
We sit in the wastelands of our once prosperous nation
Yes, good goyim, wait and lay as the prey of Europe
Pray, good goyim
Pray, good goyim
Just keep praying till its your turn to die
Refugees welcome
I hope they fucking kill you all

Let these Jewish Muslims replace you in your homeland
Dont be Islamaphobic let them rape your wife & children
Not all the migrants are terrorists
Its all just a coincidence
Well just wait a few more hours
Till the next attack

Then well pray for Europe again
Its time to turn these tables show these Jews who the fuck we are
Sink the ships they send our way
No invader gone unslain
We will drown your migrant children
Desecrate your filthy prophet
Take another step onto our soil
You will be the prey of Europe
Prey for Europe
Migrant
Prey for yourself
Traitorous goyim politicians hang from the trees
Face the Mediterranean
Greet the refugees

Its time to turn these tables show these Jews who the fuck we are
Sink the ships they send our way
No invader gone unslain
We will drown your migrant children
Desecrate your filthy prophet
Take another step onto our soil
You will be the prey of Europe

Davidsrocks #fundie forums.christianity.com

From my perspective, the two men are saying 'Look God, we have found a way to enjoy the excitement and pleasure you invented for men and women without the down-side of rug-rats consuming our time and spending our money'. I see the life style as selfish in the extreme in that it consumes for its own enrichment the entire product of its life and passes nothing on to the next generation because there is none... As for the argument that 'What people do in the privacy of their bedroom is not my business' -- this tries to create a see-no-evil zone based on visibility. But aren’t all crimes and sins hidden as much as possible? Thieves come in the dark of night -- not at high noon. In conclusion, I see homosexuality as a selfish escape from human maturity. It is unhealthy and a financial burden on the society in which it exists.

Christian #fundie goodhousekeeping.com

The following quotes are excerpted from an article that appeared in Good Housekeeping on 11 January, 2017:

The homework assignment, titled $5.00 Date, required students, in this case girls, to go on a date with a male classmate. Below the assignment's description was a list of suggestions for girls from the boys, which encouraged girls to "dress appropriately," "be feminine and lady-like" and "if you think you're too fat, keep it to yourself."

The student showed her mother the assignment - all on a pink page and directed at 16/17-year-old girls:

"My 11th grade AP Honors student's homework: 'Go on a date!' with a boy. And follow his suggestions — don't correct his personal habits, don't waste his money and show him respect," she wrote. "Thanks for educating our kids, Utah Department of Education. We really appreciate your evidence-based misogyny."

This isn't completely one-sided, however. There's 6sheet for the boys as well. It icluded such time-tested $5 dinner date advice as this:

"At a restaurant, say what you're going to order so she will have a guide in ordering..."

BardaWolf #racist deviantart.com

I'm laughing hysterically as I post this, because at this very moment London is considering banning mopeds. Why are they doing this you ask? Well I'm glad you asked.

See this isn't down to accident statistics, or anything like that. Its because there has been a recent spate of thefts by men on mopeds. They pull up, steal cell phones and leave.
Now most of these men aren't native Brits. Rather they're first or second generation migrants, largely middle eastern. Nope, not the Chinese pulling off these thefts.
Gotta love that cultural enrichment.
Apparently the same police who have enough time to police mean words online can't be on the streets of London to prevent middle eastern men on mopeds from stealing phones, or heaven forbid prosecute them when they do. That's not a lie about policing online speech btw: https://www.bbc.com/news/uk-37076995

This of course is on the heels of a knife ban, which was written so vaguely a British man with a potato peeler was arrested. I fucking shit you not! Lol: https://dailycaller.com/2018/05/03/british-man-arrested-for-wielding-potato-peeler/
Leading to the "Bin the Knife" campaign: https://www.hillingdon.gov.uk/article/17425/Bin-a-knife Because you know all those knives going out on their own and stabbing people were a huge menace. Again, I need to comment on the vagueness of the wording, which means the law can include things like ordinary tools https://professional-troublemaker.com/2018/04/10/u-k-knife-control-gone-wild-stop-frisk-arrives-in-london-to-confiscate-your-pointy-things/
Of course us Americans know that if you want violence to go down its a good idea to politely ask criminals to surrender their weapons. In fact we had our own version of this program, gun buybacks, which as we all know work very well. Cough Cough....Camden NJ.....Cough Cough......Chicago IL. Not like people with a broken or damaged firearm would ever take advantage of a program like this in order to buy a new gun. Oh wait...

Guns of course have been mostly illegal in Britain for decades. Trust me though, its always the tool that should be banned. We should lengthen the list. I mean, why would you need a shovel or a bat, for instance? You planning on killing somebody you sick twisted fuck? What's wrong with you? And what about pipes. Stores shouldn't be allowed to sell those. They could hurt somebody. Close down Home Depot. Too many dangerous weapons that could fall into the hands of criminals

Oh God! I almost forgot about U-Haul! We don't want anymore trucks of peace! Can we ban them too!?

Aaron Sleazy #sexist blog.aaronsleazy.com

Imagine for a second that you’re an entitled fat bitch who has been told so often that she’s a little princess that she ended up believing it. Even if you’re not fat, your personality is very likely to be toxic. Now look around and you’ll find that there are a lot of Western women like that: entitled, unpleasant personality, and barely able to take care of their own life.

Alek Novy speaks of the “pussy cartel” if I recall correctly. Similarly to how OPEC controls a large part of the world’s oil supply, the pussy cartel controls how often men get laid. It’s an amusing metaphor, and there is some justification behind it. Women in the pussy cartel seem to think that because they are providing (selling?) access to a very desirable resource (sex), they can do whatever they want. (Just look at Saudi Arabia for a real-life comparison.) Since too many men only think with their little head, women believe they will get what they want anyway.

Your typical Western whore may very well think that she is a special snowflake and go on to bang a dozen dudes in her 20s. She thinks she can easily get a quality guy to marry her, should she ever decide to do so. More and more women realize that things seem to have changed, however. Some even speak of a “marriage strike”. It seems that word got out that Western whores aren’t really worth it. Many men don’t even want to date them anymore.

Here’s something to think about: go to a larger Western city, and count how many White male/Asian female (WMAF) pairings you see. Chances are that it’s not an insignificant number. Now, only the more desirable men are candidates for relationships to begin with, so for every white guy who entered a relationship with an Asian woman, some Western woman lost out on getting a stable and desirable partner. More and more white women will learn that they can no longer compete for white guys, so their prospects will be rather dismal.

It may just be my perception, but I certainly have the impression that WMAF pairings are getting more and more common. This now leads me to wonder how white women perceive this. Calling it an “Asia Shock” seems appropriate, in my opinion. Imagine this: Western women get raised to be spoilt brats and everything is fine and dandy because guys are seemingly willing to take their crap — until suddenly competition shows up that completely blows them out of the water. It’s not a pretty sight, and it’s not surprising that they are losing out as the women who “steal” their men are more attractive, smarter, and have infinitely more pleasant personalities. Seriously, why wouldn’t you trade a Western harpy for an Asian bombshell with brains who is a joy to have around?

It’s hilarious how Western women try to deal with their competition. Shaming guys is an old favorite. Then there is the old “patriarchy” canard, according to which Asian women are only nice because they are “oppressed” and if you date one, it not only means that you’re an oppressor, it also means that you are not “man enough” to date a Western whore. Dear Western women, if the choice is between a berating bitch and a woman who shows genuine appreciation for her partner, what do you think any guy with half a brain will do? Heck, plenty of guys who are immune to yellow fever rather abstain from sex and relationships altogether instead of getting involved with Western women. Whatever you think you are doing, Western women, I don’t think it’s working anymore.

Anonymous male, age 16 #fundie therebelution.com

Please don’t take modesty lightly. As your brother in Christ I value the relationship that I will have with my wife someday. When I am tempted because of you I lose a part of myself that I am trying to save for her. When I’m tempted because of you I become that much more accepting of the perversions in the world. When you remain pure and modest, my life is made so much easier. Instead of watching to ensure that I don’t sin I can focus on you as a person and fellow follower of Christ. I appreciate modesty more than you’ll ever know. Please, show respect of yourself and of me and be modest.

Dave Armstrong #fundie patheos.com

Truly obscene, crude, sexually-oriented language is beneath the standards of the Bible and the Catholic Church. The way some (many!) talk today was confined to locker rooms, bars, and bachelor parties when I was in college 35 years ago (and mostly just to men). And I think that was a good thing.
Oh, for sure we had Woodstock and George Carlin and R-rated movies and punk rock. But it wasn’t everywhere; in-your-face, mainstream, on TV, inane, and obscene hip hop songs blaring from the next car over at the gas station . . . People instinctively knew that it was to be confined and strictly limited. It was “behind closed doors.” It wasn’t the stuff of public articles and Thanksgiving dinners. People were scandalized in 1972 when they learned (through the notorious Watergate tapes) that President Nixon said “GD.” They really were! It wasn’t just prudes and 70-year-old ladies in purple tennis shoes who taught Sunday School. I’m old enough (58) to personally remember all that.

Society has regressed, as it has in so many other ways. Now women can swear like sailors or pimps (even publicly, even in Catholic circles!). “You’ve come a long way, baby.” People not only see nothing wrong with that, but wonder how anyone possibly could, as if objection to it were the strangest thing in the world and confined to the most ridiculous, antiquated, almost self-parodied “fundamentalists.” Thank God for Netflix, used DVDs, and many cable channels, so parents can still get good quality TV and movies for the family, amidst the nearly universal cultural decline of language.

I think it’s pathetic and disgraceful. Men have so looked up to women and admired them, traditionally, precisely because we feel they are on such a higher level (morally) than we are: the finer creatures. It’s why there is such a huge fuss made about Mother’s Day, while I always joke that Father’s Day is about on the level of Groundhog Day. “Mom, baseball, and apple pie”, etc. I have always sincerely believed this. If that’s now considered old-fashioned and quaint, so be it. Count me in. It used to be called “chivalry” till the radical feminists (not feminism per se) did all they could to mock and destroy it as a cultural norm. My wife and all the women I admire are up on the pedestal.

St. Paul stated that “there is neither male nor female; for you are all one in Christ Jesus” (Gal 3:28; RSV). It’s not an unequal scenario at all. We’re equals under God. I’m not advocating at all that there should be a double standard: with women held to a higher level. Let’s get that straight. A few people on Facebook, reading an early version of this post mistakenly thought that.

I’m not against women having freedom to act as they please, as men do. I’m disappointed when they become coarse and crude like so many men are. What a shame. Why in the world would women seek to emulate men’s worst characteristics? Even the Catholic / Christian / cultural notion that one doesn’t speak a certain way “in mixed company” is now lost. That was out of respect for women, in deference to them as finer creatures: not as crude and vulgar as men are. Now women join right in, and talk the same way themselves!

We all fall short in many ways. I’m not talking about the occasional slip, use of strong language in an outburst of passion, or in tragic situations, exclamations when we hit our head, etc., not even the relatively minor “swear words” (though obviously those should be tempered in any sort of professional or church setting), but rather, about brazen, consistent use, vulgarity, obscenity, sexual gutter language, and (above all) trying to rationalize it away as a non-issue, as if it is perfectly fine, and unfathomable that a Catholic organization would ever consider dismissing a writer on the grounds of persistent bad and insulting language.

My friend Patti Sheffield, on my Facebook page, outlined some of the biblical data regarding proper language:

"Ephesians 5:1-5 is pretty explicit on the conduct expected of Christians, and verse 4 specifically condemns “obscenity or silly or suggestive talk”, not just taking God’s name in vain. Ephesians 4:29 [“Let no evil talk come out of your mouths, but only such as is good for edifying, as fits the occasion, that it may impart grace to those who hear”], included in the list of rules for new Christians, explicitly forbade foul language. James also warned in his writing that we must learn to bridle our tongues. That means, simply put, have a filter. If someone is going to proclaim the Gospel (by being an apologist or a writer), then at least, have a filter."

"If we can’t be bothered to do that, we’re just conforming ourselves to the world instead of transforming it in Christ. And as Christ warns us in Matthew 12:36-37, we will be called to account for every careless word we make, and that will be a big factor in our final judgment. Why risk it for the sake of what some call humor?"

And let’s not forget the sage, stinging advice in the book of James:

"James 3:3-11 If we put bits into the mouths of horses that they may obey us, we guide their whole bodies. [4] Look at the ships also; though they are so great and are driven by strong winds, they are guided by a very small rudder wherever the will of the pilot directs. [5] So the tongue is a little member and boasts of great things. How great a forest is set ablaze by a small fire! [6] And the tongue is a fire. The tongue is an unrighteous world among our members, staining the whole body, setting on fire the cycle of nature, and set on fire by hell. [7] For every kind of beast and bird, of reptile and sea creature, can be tamed and has been tamed by humankind, [8] but no human being can tame the tongue — a restless evil, full of deadly poison. [9] With it we bless the Lord and Father, and with it we curse men, who are made in the likeness of God. [10] From the same mouth come blessing and cursing. My brethren, this ought not to be so. [11] Does a spring pour forth from the same opening fresh water and brackish?"

Again, I’m not saying that women are held to one ethical standard and men to another: the old ridiculous double standard. No! It is us admiring women because they voluntarily chose to be more moral than we knew ourselves to be. It has to do also with men and women being fundamentally different in the first place. Ideally, we look up to each other, because of the complementarity that God designed.

The Catholic tradition is what taught the beauty and necessity of waiting till marriage, while the sexual revolution has brought us wonderful things like ubiquitous pornography. That really raises women’s stature in the eyes of men, doesn’t it? We need to understand what chivalry is in the first place and what has gotten our society into the sad, pathetic state it is now, after 50 years of wonderful sexual liberation. Everyone’s ecstatically happy, aren’t they? Families and marriages are better than they have ever been. Not! How’s the culture doing on marriage and treatment of women, post sexual revolution? How well has that pitiful social experiment / wholesale rebellion against sane, sensible tradition worked out?

As long as women continue to give out the “benefits” without demanding the commitment, we’ll be in the mess we’re in. That’s just about the root of it: caving into mens’ sinful sexual desires and emotional manipulations. It’s what has caused illegitimacy rates in the inner cities to rise to an astounding 80%. That and the broken home that usually results are some of the leading sociological indicators (my major) of poverty and a life of misery.

In practice, traditionally, women have been more moral sexually than men have been. Whether that was due to the double standard or the fear of pregnancy or the social stigma, or actually understanding the goodness of waiting till marriage, or various combinations of the above, it is a demonstrable fact. That has now mostly broken down.

And in practice, traditionally, women controlled their language much better than men did. All I’m saying was that men admired that. You admire what someone does better than yourself. I’m not in any way, shape, or form saying that men get a bigger pass and have less responsibility to follow Scripture and the Church. I’m simply describing the usual sinful reality of it. It’s the distinction between prescription (the should and ought) and description (the actual fact).

I still think women have the edge in sanctity: in practice. But radical feminism and unisexism are working very hard to make sure that women are equally as sinful as men in all areas. For the most radical feminists, their working philosophy has been to “hate men and to simultaneously do everything possible to be exactly like them in every way.” Sort of the “identifying with the oppressor” routine.

Language is one of these areas. Premarital sex is another. This is my point. There used to be a pronounced difference [no pun intended!] in how women talked. So we men admired them for that. Now that distinction is rapidly diminishing, and I think it’s a shame, because it means that women are relatively more sinful (as a generalization) in this area than they used to be, and that’s a very sad thing and a loss of yet another element of Catholic tradition and the traditional relationship between the sexes.

Feminism (mainstream, not radical) actually gives credence to my argument here, by its own rhetoric and self-understanding. If women are not higher creatures than men in some sense, how is it that feminists are (and indeed the thrust of the secular culture also is) always urging men to be more like women: more sensitive, nurturing, and communicative in particular? This presupposes that women have these traits that men desperately need to learn and emulate. Now how could that be if women were not indeed “higher” than men, for whatever reason, in those respects? And that leads back to my point. We look up to y’all because you really do have characteristics that we lack.

It can work both ways, though. My wife often complains about groups of women going right into gossip and complaining about their husbands. This is a major fault in women, and one where they can learn from the generally better example of men. Men almost never run down their wives in public; hardly even in private, one-to-one. They instinctively regard that as low-class, cheap, utterly inappropriate, and a bad reflection on them (since they chose to marry this woman). It’s just not done. So this is an instance where women could be raised up a bit by imitating what men almost always do. Both genders have their characteristic besetting sins. I would say that the biggest ones are lust for men and nagging / complaining for women.

But this is another instance of women themselves thinking they are superior to men. If they didn’t, the many women who do this wouldn’t sit there for hours gossiping about their husbands and assuming they are dolts who “don’t get it” and who don’t grasp the simplest things, like being able to openly, honestly express their feelings (like most women do), and often assume at the same time naively, foolishly assume that they are perfectly innocent as to the origin and continuance of various marital difficulties: as if it doesn’t take two.

Of course, historically, there was indeed the dreadful double standard, with the “good girls” and the “bad girls.” That was because men demanded immoral sex (this being our leading fault). It was very wrong, and it was primarily men’s fault. There will always be women willing to take advantage of men’s weakness and leading sin, for profit. Hence, prostitution.

Likewise, the Victorians went too far in terms of being anti-sex (though this is often exaggerated). The devil exploits everything to his ends. If a culture adopts a fairly Christian outlook that premarital sex is wrong, then there will be the tendency, because of sin, to go too far and get to the place where sex is regarded as “dirty” and “evil”: even marital sex.

That was what started ancient gnosticism. But this isn’t the Catholic position. The Church Fathers strongly tended towards this error, too. I’ve read them. I compiled three books of their quotes. They were opposing the rampantly sexual pagan Romans, and so they sometimes went too far in the other direction. This is the human tendency, and the devil exploits it to the max. The true biblical view is found in the Song of Solomon: unashamed sexuality within the bounds that God set for us, for our own good and pleasure.

David J. Stewart #fundie jesus-is-savior.com

Are You Hateful Enough?

The unsaved world discourages hatred in all forms, but the Bible teaches that there is a good form of hatred—hatred against evil. In fact, God commands it in Psalm 97:10, "Ye that love the LORD, hate evil." Sadly, most professed Christians today don't hate evil like they should. Hatred is a strong word and every Christian should have a strong feeling of dislike against evil that makes us want to do something about it.

...

Our love for Jesus Christ is easily measured by the intensity of our hatred for sin and evil. Most people take sin lightly nowadays. It means nothing for a professed Christian woman these days to put on a miniskirt or wear a low-cut blouse. These are the sinful clothing styles of the world. 1st Timothy 2:9 and other Scriptures teach that a Christian lady ought to dress modestly as an expression of her chastity and virtuous behavior.

Hollywood female celebrities dress like sleazy-trash, whores and bimbos. I'm not trying to be unkind, I'm being moral. It is a shameful disgrace the sinful way in which American women dress immodestly nowadays, wearing tight blouses, exposing their thighs, causing men to lust in adulterous thoughts, which is adultery (Matthew 5:28). To such whorish women, it's game, a thrill a tease. They will answer to God. God tells women to dress in "modest apparel." Christian ladies ought to hate immodest clothing. Dressing seductively in public is sinful. Women and girls ought to dress in modest clothing. This is what God says in the Bible. It's rare nowadays to find women who adhere to strict Christian dress codes. Ladies ought to wear dresses. We live in a sicko society that is trying to turn teenage girls into whores. Walt Disney makes teenage girls look like whores by moral standards 50-years ago. America has lost it's respect for God, morality, the marriage, decency and Christianity. Now we've got a Muslim U.S. President who despises Christianity and won't even salute the U.S. flag during the national anthem. Sad.

Everybody hates something. A lot of people hate the Bible. A lot of people hate Christianity. A lot of people hate a righteous person. What we ought to hate is evil. Hatred against sin is good. The unsaved world will always demonize Bible-believing Christians who hate sin. The Devil has successfully built a false religion today, that encompasses many denominations who have been taught that any form of hatred is bad. This is simply not true. God commands us as His children to HATE EVIL. That means we should hate drunkenness, fornication, whorish clothing, homosexuality, government theft and violations of the U.S. Constitution. We ought to hate lying and false advertising and cruelty to animals. We ought to hate the heathen public school system, CPS who thinks they own our children and the evil sin of divorce. We ought to hate indifference and false religion. We ought to hate movies that curse in God's name, songs and books that diminish, attack and belittle the Bible. It's seems that every movie made today has to have someone cursing in God's name. Someone told me that they like the Sylvester Stallone movie, First Blood; yet God's name is taken in vain no less than 10 times throughout the movie. The movie is evil, of the Devil and dishonors God. I hate any movie that takes God's name in vain. God created us, feeds us, gives us the health and life we enjoy, and then people go around making movies that insult God, curse in his name in anger and show utter disrespect for the Lord. No wonder America is going to Hell in a wheelbarrow. We ought to hate when anyone takes God's precious and holy name in vain.

The Jews have some crazy little thing they do, spelling God as G_d, claiming that is their way of respecting God. Yet, in total hypocrisy, they opening reject Jesus Christ as their Messiah. They are effectively atheists, because they reject Jesus as God in the flesh (John 1:1-3.14; John 10:33; I Timothy 3:16; Colossians 2:9; Revelation 1:8; John 14:1-6). We should hate the false religion of Judaism, which denies Jesus Christ as the Savior, and teaches in their Talmud that it's ok for priests to molest 3-year old girls. Why doesn't Jack Chick ever expose the Jew's false religion instead of attacking the Muslims for everything. The Muslims weren't the masterminds behind 911. We ought to hate the New World Order, which aims to destroy Christianity, eliminate true American freedom (i.e., out Bill of Rights) and bring to fruition a Communist Police State to smash resistance from Christians, patriots and those who defend the U.S. Constitution. It's frightening how insane many people get when you hand them a badge, a gun and give them authority over the common man. Then stuff like this happens. There's a million punks running around America nowadays, called police, including she-men women who belong at home baking cookies, who don't care about your Bill of Rights. They just want to smash you, take your kids and force you to comply with the New World Order's Communist agendas. You're now guilty until proven innocent. You don't have to be proven guilty to go to prison nowadays, the jury simply needs to "think" you're guilty and you're a goner. And they call that justice.

I could write a book on all the evils and sins which born-again Christians should hate, but that is not necessary. You have a Bible and I hope you read it.

David J. Stewart #fundie jesus-is-savior.com

Are You Hateful Enough?

By David J. Stewart

Psalm 97:10a, “Ye that love the LORD, hate evil.”

[RIGHT]image[/RIGHT] The unsaved world discourages hatred in all forms, but the Bible teaches that there is a good form of hatred—hatred against evil. In fact, God commands it in Psalm 97:10, "Ye that love the LORD, hate evil." Sadly, most professed Christians today don't hate evil like they should. Hatred is a strong word and every Christian should have a strong feeling of dislike against evil that makes us want to do something about it.

Abortion

Every born-again believer ought to hate evil in every form; such as the evil of abortion (i.e., murdering little living and growing babies). Abortion is brutal and demonic. When one stops to realize that America silently passed the 50,000,000 abortion mark in January of 2008, it's hard to fathom that 25% of our U.S. population has been holocausted. The official U.S. population for 1970 was 203,211,926.1 Since 1970, Americans have killed one-fourth of their own children. Tearfully consider that in 2004, there were 74 abortions for every 100 births in New York City. Can you imagine?

We ought not hate the people getting abortions, nor the people performing abortions; but we must hate the evil of abortion itself. To deliberately kill a child is evil. When you think of the blessings in your life, you should praise God that your parents didn't believe in abortion. Sadly, a mother's womb is the most dangerous place to be in the world today. This is a sad fact. There's not enough hatred today against abortion. God tells us to hate abortion, because abortion is very evil. If you don't hate the sin of abortion, then you DON'T love the Lord Jesus Christ.

Hateful Heathens

Ironically, it appears that some of the strongest hatred today is against Bible-believing, Christ-honoring, Christians who do hate evil as the Bible teaches. Flaming homosexual, Ellen DeGeneres, criticizes Bible-believers who “use the Bible to justify their hate.” Uh, Ellen, Psalm 97:10 does teach believers to hate, to hate evil. Hatred for sin and evil can be justified with the Bible. Ellen calls such faithful Christians, “idiotic” ...

"I don't see full-page ads saying `Stop the Hate, Stop the Violence." said DeGeneres. "These same evil, idiotic, so-called God-loving people who use the Bible to justify their hate, I'm sure still feel deep down that blacks aren't equal to whites because the Bible was also used to justify slavery."

SOURCE: http://findarticles.com/p/articles/mi_qa3827/is_199810/ai_n8815714

It seems that Ellen DeGeneres has quite a bit of hatred herself toward Christians who hate evil, which brings a Bible verse to mind... Proverb 29:27, “An unjust man is an abomination to the just: and he that is upright in the way is abomination to the wicked.” An “abomination” is hatred coupled with disgust. To the righteous man, he not only views “Sin City” Las Vegas as evil, but as repulsive and disgusting. I think Hollywood (or Hollyweird) is an abomination. It's not just saturated with sin and evil, it's a disgusting place of sick-minded perverts and demented God-haters. Walt Disney employs some of the most sick-minded, perverted, immoral, sin-loving, Bible-hating, Christ-hating, blasphemous, people in the world. That's why their shows and movies are so abominable. Most of the movies and programs Walt Disney produces nowadays are utterly offensive to any decent person. There's no garbage pail that wreaks with the stench of rot and maggots anymore than Walt Disney, Hollywood and all the other heathen movies producers of this sinful generation. Even so, come, Lord Jesus! Pay Day is Coming!

Before the Apostle Paul became a Christian, he hated the Church and persecuted and tried to destroy it (Galatians 1:13). The Word of God brings out the best and the worst in people. You either love God or you are his enemy. People either love the Bible or hate it. Jesus said that the same world that hated Him, and crucified Him, would hate us and treat us the same horrible way. Increasingly, American society and nations abroad are becoming hostile towards Christianity. People who live contrary to the Word of God know it, and therefore hate the Bible intensely. Romans 1:18, "For the wrath of God is revealed from heaven against all ungodliness and unrighteousness of men, who hold the truth in unrighteousness." The Bible says that the wicked "hold the truth in unrighteousness." In other words, they are sinning in full knowledge of what they are doing. Ellen DeGeneres KNOWS lesbianism is a sin, and is against nature, and is abnormal and will eventually bring the judgment of God. I do not hate anyone, please know that. I only hate sin. I love sinners, because they are people whom Jesus Christ died for to pay for their sins. God loves humanity, which includes sinners too. God hates sin and evil, but he is waiting for men and women to repent (2nd Peter 3:9).

Immodesty and and Lewd Behavior

Our love for Jesus Christ is easily measured by the intensity of our hatred for sin and evil. Most people take sin lightly nowadays. It means nothing for a professed Christian woman these days to put on a miniskirt or wear a low-cut blouse. These are the sinful clothing styles of the world. 1st Timothy 2:9 and other Scriptures teach that a Christian lady ought to dress modestly as an expression of her chastity and virtuous behavior.

Hollywood female celebrities dress like sleazy-trash, whores and bimbos. I'm not trying to be unkind, I'm being moral. It is a shameful disgrace the sinful way in which American women dress immodestly nowadays, wearing tight blouses, exposing their thighs, causing men to lust in adulterous thoughts, which is adultery (Matthew 5:28). To such whorish women, it's game, a thrill a tease. They will answer to God. God tells women to dress in "modest apparel." Christian ladies ought to hate immodest clothing. Dressing seductively in public is sinful. Women and girls ought to dress in modest clothing. This is what God says in the Bible. It's rare nowadays to find women who adhere to strict Christian dress codes. Ladies ought to wear dresses. We live in a sicko society that is trying to turn teenage girls into whores. Walt Disney makes teenage girls look like whores by moral standards 50-years ago. America has lost it's respect for God, morality, the marriage, decency and Christianity. Now we've got a Muslim U.S. President who despises Christianity and won't even salute the U.S. flag during the national anthem. Sad.

What Do You Hate?

Everybody hates something. A lot of people hate the Bible. A lot of people hate Christianity. A lot of people hate a righteous person. What we ought to hate is evil. Hatred against sin is good. The unsaved world will always demonize Bible-believing Christians who hate sin. The Devil has successfully built a false religion today, that encompasses many denominations who have been taught that any form of hatred is bad. This is simply not true. God commands us as His children to HATE EVIL. That means we should hate drunkenness, fornication, whorish clothing, homosexuality, government theft and violations of the U.S. Constitution. We ought to hate lying and false advertising and cruelty to animals. We ought to hate the heathen public school system, CPS who thinks they own our children and the evil sin of divorce. We ought to hate indifference and false religion. We ought to hate movies that curse in God's name, songs and books that diminish, attack and belittle the Bible. It's seems that every movie made today has to have someone cursing in God's name. Someone told me that they like the Sylvester Stallone movie, First Blood; yet God's name is taken in vain no less than 10 times throughout the movie. The movie is evil, of the Devil and dishonors God. I hate any movie that takes God's name in vain. God created us, feeds us, gives us the health and life we enjoy, and then people go around making movies that insult God, curse in his name in anger and show utter disrespect for the Lord. No wonder America is going to Hell in a wheelbarrow. We ought to hate when anyone takes God's precious and holy name in vain.

The Jews have some crazy little thing they do, spelling God as G_d, claiming that is their way of respecting God. Yet, in total hypocrisy, they opening reject Jesus Christ as their Messiah. They are effectively atheists, because they reject Jesus as God in the flesh (John 1:1-3.14; John 10:33; I Timothy 3:16; Colossians 2:9; Revelation 1:8; John 14:1-6). We should hate the false religion of Judaism, which denies Jesus Christ as the Savior, and teaches in their Talmud that it's ok for priests to molest 3-year old girls. Why doesn't Jack Chick ever expose the Jew's false religion instead of attacking the Muslims for everything. The Muslims weren't the masterminds behind 911. We ought to hate the New World Order, which aims to destroy Christianity, eliminate true American freedom (i.e., out Bill of Rights) and bring to fruition a Communist Police State to smash resistance from Christians, patriots and those who defend the U.S. Constitution. It's frightening how insane many people get when you hand them a badge, a gun and give them authority over the common man. Then stuff like this happens. There's a million punks running around America nowadays, called police, including she-men women who belong at home baking cookies, who don't care about your Bill of Rights. They just want to smash you, take your kids and force you to comply with the New World Order's Communist agendas. You're now guilty until proven innocent. You don't have to be proven guilty to go to prison nowadays, the jury simply needs to "think" you're guilty and you're a goner. And they call that justice.

Conclusion

I could write a book on all the evils and sins which born-again Christians should hate, but that is not necessary. You have a Bible and I hope you read it. Most Christians neglect their Bible and don't read it enough (if at all). Hearing the Bible increases our faith (Romans 10:17). In discouraging times, we need to read the Bible to boost our faith. In times of loss, when our friends hurt us, family betrays us and the Devil comes after us to kill, steal and destroy (John 10:10), we ought to spend more time in the Scriptures and rest upon the promises of God. God will keep His Word, His name is at stake. You can rest assure on the promises of God.

Let us hate evil and expose it wherever it is found. You don't have to be unkind to people, but you don't have to go along with the evil either. Professed Christians all across America go to Walt Disney, Las Vegas casinos, Jack Daniel's brewery, Elvis Presley's mansion, et cetera. There are all shameful places. The need of this hour is for Christians to act like Christians and get angry over sin, because the Devil's crowd doesn't care.

Matteo Salvini #racist rt.com

‘They hate Italians and must resign’: Salvini attacks mayors resisting harsh immigration rules

The times when mayors of Palermo, Florence and Naples could cash in on illegal immigrants are over, Italy's Interior Minister Matteo Salvini said, vowing that those resisting the new policies will answer before law and history.

“Those who help the illegal immigrants, hate Italians,” Salvini said, blasting his opponents on Facebook and Twitter.

The minister from the conservative Lega Nord Party promised that the rebelling city heads will “answer before law and history.” And it's no idle threat, as the former mayor of the Calabrian town of Riace is currently under house arrest on charges of aiding and abetting illegal immigration.

“Certain mayors look back fondly on the good old times of immigration, but for them the party is over!” Salvini said.

By “certain mayors” he meant the heads of Palermo, Florence and Naples, who he gave the choice of resigning from their posts.

The three mayors insisted that some parts of Salvini's security decree aimed at curbing illegal migration to the country were unconstitutional and that they would refuse to follow them.

According to the new decree, migrants can no longer apply for full residency after a two-year asylum stay – but Palermo mayor Leoluca Orlando wants his city to continue this practice. Denying migrants access to health care and other essential municipal services would have an opposite effect and put them on the path of crime instead, he argued in the interview to the newspaper La Repubblica.

His resistance to the decree was “not an act of civil disobedience or conscientious objection, but the simple application of the constitutional rights that are guaranteed to all those, who live in our country,” Orlando said.

He also announced plans to take the anti-migrant rules to the Constitutional Court for the judges to rule on how they comply with Italy's principal law.

The mayor of Palermo was backed by his counterpart from Florence, Dario Nardella, who insisted that his city wouldn't cave in to the law that “expels asylum-seekers and, without repatriating them, throws them out onto the street.”

Naples Mayor Luigi de Magistris said on Thursday that he was going to open the city's port to Sea Watch, a NGO ship that had been involved in rescuing migrants trying to cross the into Italy on rafts and rickety boats. The vessel has been stuck in the stormy Mediterranean for more than two weeks now, with 32 asylum-seekers onboard.

“I hope this boat comes to Naples because, despite what the government says, we will let it into the port,” de Magistris said, adding that he “will be first to lead the rescue effort.”

Following his comments, Salvini reiterated that that all the ports in Italy were closed to migrant-rescuing ships.

Salvini’s fellow deputy PM and leader of the Five Star Movement, Luigi Di Maio, dismissed the rebellion of the mayors as “electioneering” and an attempt to achieve publicity by exploiting the migrant issue.

Salvini got his post after the euroskeptic coalition government came to power last year, with the migrant issue playing a key role in the success of Lega Nord and Five Star Movement at the polls. The new government pledged to deport 500,000 migrants that were in the country. Italy has become one of the prime destinations for asylum-seekers from Middle East and North Africa after the Arab Spring shattered many countries in the region.

Amba Azaad #sexist thenewinquiry.com

It is imperative to resist the disproportionate foregrounding of cishet male loneliness because the structurally oppressed manifest their benign loneliness symptoms differently from those who suffer from the malignant disease of thwarted entitlement. Buried inside the lonely-men essays is the threat disguised as suggestion that we feel concern for Lonely Men because Lonely Men can turn violent. This is a red herring in much the same way that alcoholism is used as an excuse for male violence; the problem isn’t alcohol or loneliness but patriarchal masculinity. Meanwhile no surgeon general is declaring racism or misogyny to be an epidemic despite the increasing number of people literally being killed by men “suffering” from these states of mind. It takes a special kind of self-centeredness to be able to cite stats that show that marriage hurts women’s life expectancy and continue to advocate it as a solution to save lonely men instead of trying to fix the toxic husband syndrome that is killing women. Men who demand that women concern themselves with the problem of lonely men in order to ensure their own safety are issuing the same hackneyed threats that patriarchy entrenches—a disguised demand that women invest their energy in socializing boys, in dating men, in doing even more care work than we already do.

Looking at some of the funded programs tackling the “epidemic” it becomes clear that creating spaces where men can feel free to be misogynists is one of the effects of how men warp community responses to loneliness. The first Men’s Shed—a community space where mostly older men could get together to work with their hands and socialize—was set up in Australia in 1998 and by 2010 was receiving funding from the Australian government under its National Male Health Policy. (There are no Men’s Sheds for any of the men trapped in Australia’s detention centers for the crime of being refugees on a boat.) According to the U.K. Men’s Shed Association the rate of growth of Men’s Sheds is between six and nine new sheds a month. (The U.K. government is planning to remove domestic-abuse shelters from housing benefits. On average in England men kill two women a week.) Public policy approves of self-segregating spaces with “old-fashioned mateship and . . . no pressure” (a liability-free way to say “No Homo No Feminist Cooties”) where men can be cajoled and lured into being cared for. Meanwhile sex workers, drug users, and transgender people are more likely to be harassed and jailed by police than be provided with spaces where they can be gently encouraged to talk about their loneliness.

Even though there’s scientific evidence that older people’s brains benefit from learning “something that is unfamiliar, and which requires prolonged and active mental engagement as you cultivate a new set of behaviors,” none of the men saving men seem to think of teaching men feminism. Or noncompetitive dancing instead of walking football. Or even just how to talk face to face. (Women’s magazines have been filled with helpful tips on how to attract a man for decades; perhaps the forlorn gentlemen looking for companionship might start with those?) In spite of all the studies pointing out how aged women have better coping skills—and, therefore, health—than aged men, toxic masculinity has conspired to misrepresent the happy ending of crones, hags, and witches as a scary fairytale. No lonely men talk about parenting, or about helping their male parent friends socialize their male kids in a less toxic fashion. All of them turn for advice to psychologists and sociologist experts, none suggest taking relationship advice from the demographic they keep citing as doing it better—women.

Individual loneliness is a fickle, nebulous sensation. Like other emotions, it is deeply situational—it makes a difference whether you feel lonely because every time you walk down the street a slur is shouted at you or you feel lonely because the spouse you beat every third night has finally left you. As individuals we are not owed freedom from loneliness any more than we can demand love from those we want it from. But collectively we can recognize patterns of loneliness as symptoms of awful structural injustices. And we can use our loneliness as impetus to work toward systems that ethically meet our social and emotional needs. The way to help alleviate the loneliness of the oppressed is to continue to destroy oppressive structures and support organizing and resistance. The only way to ethically survive loneliness is to look at labor: to ask who performs care work for me, who I perform it for, what systems are viable and where I transmute being abandoned to resistance.

Men who demand empathy for their gendered fear of dying un-cared-for, unwanted, and unmourned without referencing feminism are acting in bad faith—they would like us to pretend there is no distinction between the solitary deaths of an abuser and an abused person. They would like gendered consoling while remaining indifferent to the deaths they, as a gender, are responsible for. They would like cosmetic cultural change while believing that emasculation is bad, as though it is horrible to change out of being a toxic oppressor. They would like us to care about men as men, when there are people—disabled, old, sick, poor, queer, migrant, discriminated-against PEOPLE—who are dying and are lonely. Those are the ones we should be focused on. If some of them happen to be men, well, let us try to not hold it against them.

Hans-Georg Maasen #wingnut dw.com

German ex-spy chief pushes Angela Merkel's CDU further right
The former head of Germany's domestic intelligence agency has been accused of courting the far right. Hans-Georg Maassen is the noisiest member of the conservative wing of Angela Merkel's CDU.

Hans-Georg Maassen, the man once in charge of tracking political extremists in Germany, has developed a brash second career on social media since his sacking last year.

Largely delivered on Twitter, Maassen's provocative pronouncements have created another headache for Angela Merkel's Christian Democratic Union (CDU), which is facing an uncertain era after the chancellor's retirement.

Maassen's tweets have also raised questions about how his political opinions may have influenced the direction investigations took during his six years as head of the Federal Office for the Protection of the Constitution (BfV).

Maassen's office, from which he was fired last year by Interior Minister Horst Seehofer, is in charge of keeping tabs on the activities of Islamists, neo-Nazis and antifa groups inside Germany.

Anti-immigration and climate science

The most controversial of these social media posts came last Monday, when Maassen shared an article by right-wing blog Journalistenwatch claiming that the rescue of migrants by the ship Sea-Watch 3 was effectively a hoax orchestrated by German public broadcaster ARD.

Several media outlets subsequently pointed out that Journalistenwatch was run by the founders of a now-defunct minor right-wing party called Die Freiheit (The Freedom), which itself was under observation by the BfV. It also frequently signals support for the pan-European Identitarian Movement, another far-right group that has caught the attention of the office Maassen once ran.

But while that tweet was subsequently deleted, Maassen seems to have developed a taste for the notoriety his social media presence has triggered.

In the past week, the ex-intelligence chief's tweets have included posting an article denying the climate crisis in Cologne-based tabloid Express, comparisons between the German public broadcasters and the dictatorship-led media of communist East Germany and a cartoon implying that media outlet Der Spiegel mainly contains fairy tales. He also had more criticism of the rescue missions in the Mediterranean:

"Don't let yourself be persuaded that this is about rescuing people at sea," he tweeted on Friday. "These migrants aren't shipwrecked people, and not refugees. They have boarded trafficker boats as would-be foreign immigrants to get brought to Europe by a shuttle service."

Pushing the conservative CDU

There have been many clues to Maassen's political leanings since his departure from the BfV last year, which came after he cast doubt on videos that showed people of immigrant background being attacked in Chemnitz. Seehofer attempted to find Maassen a job in his ministry, but the outcry proved too great for the government.

Maassen's Twitter profile, which is emblazoned with a slogan "Change. Germany can do better," also includes a link to the Werte Union ("Union of Values"), an organization that represents the conservative wing of the CDU and sees its main purpose in reviving what it believes are values that the CDU leadership has lost.

Maassen has become the Werte Union's most prominent public face in the last few weeks, and it has seen an uptick in membership over the past two years.

Of all the high-profile figures on the right of the CDU (another is erstwhile leadership challenger Friedrich Merz), Maassen has been the most radical in his anti-immigration declarations.

At a Werte Union event in Wernheim, southern Germany, in late June, the 56-year-old sparked another media storm by saying, "I didn't join the CDU 30 years ago so that 1.8 million Arabs could come to Germany." That statement was greeted with cheers from the assembled party members, according to a report in the Rhein-Neckar-Zeitung, and drew plenty of outrage from opposition leaders.

Maassen described his own political position as "not conservative, just realistic," but other signs suggest he is not above political strategy: In mid-June, he gave an interview to public radio station Deutschlandfunk in which he suggested that a coalition with the far-right Alternative for Germany (AfD) was not out of the question in future.

The AfD is currently polling first in some states in eastern Germany, three of which are due to hold elections this fall, putting the CDU under considerable pressure from the right. All the leading figures in the CDU have so far ruled out forming a government with populist AfD, but there are signs that the resolve in the upper echelons of some regional CDU parties is starting to buckle.

Unnamed Neo-Nazi demonstrators in Duisburg #wingnut #racist apnews.com

BERLIN (AP) — Germany’s leading Jewish organization expressed alarm Thursday over footage of flag-waving neo-Nazis in self-styled uniforms marching through an eastern German town on May Day unhindered by police.

Footage of the march Wednesday prompted widespread outrage in Germany and calls for authorities in the state of Saxony, where far-right sentiment is particularly strong, to step in.

“The images of the neo-Nazi march by The Third Way party in Plauen are disturbing and frightening,” said Josef Schuster, the head of Germany’s Central Council of Jews.

Noting that the rally took place on the eve of Yom HaShoah , the day when Jews commemorate the six million Jewish men, women and children murdered in the Holocaust, Schuster added that “right-wing extremists are marching in Saxony in a way that brings back memories of the darkest chapter in German history.”

German security agencies say The Third Way, a relatively small party, has close ties to far-right extremists. The march in Plauen took place to the beat of heavy drums made to look like those used by the Hitler Youth. Participants shouted slogans such as “Criminal foreigners out!” and “National socialism now!”

Saxony police said several hundred people took part in the march. Counter-protesters were kept away.

Police said they are investigating nine people for illegally covering their faces during the event and another for insulting an officer, but described the day as a success from a policing perspective because there was no violence.

diggerfortruth #conspiracy #racism diggerfortruth.wordpress.com

It wasn’t too long ago that I too believed some of these misconceptions. Sooner or later the Truth and reality catches up with all of us.


1/. White European nations became rich off of the backs of the slave trade and plundering other nations
This is inaccurate. It was always the jews and the gentry directly serving the jews who benefited from the slave trade. After all it was mainly blacks enslaving blacks in Africa. The jews just capitalised on this industry. The actual lower classes never benefited from slavery, because they were slaves themselves; and still are.

And to argue that even the lower classes indirectly benefited due to the infrastructure, this too is not accurate. The European mind and energy has always had the ability to produce, create and invent at an incredible capacity. The railroads, hospitals, theatres, educational institutes were all physically produced by the working class on meagre wages. Any financial gains obtained by jewish families were spent internally to help international jewry; certainly not philanthropically distributed amongst society for the benefit of European peoples. The trickle down effect is another myth. We built and financed everything ourselves, through our hard work, ingenuity and creativity. That is the reality.

The myth that European nations are rich because we pilfered and enslaved others is nonsense – just more jewish mind control to guilt Europeans into accepting their white genocide.


2/. White Europeans invaded African culture, enslaved the blacks and had a cruel apartheid system
First the white Europeans who were fleeing jewish enslavement settled in a barren uninhabited South Africa. There was nothing much there other than nature’s elements – rocks and bushes. The hard working, ingenious, mixed Europeans literately created a superpower out of the bushes. Then when they had built a civilised structure – the blacks came to them. They did not build up their culture off the backs of the blacks.

As for the apartheid – what else could they do? It was the most sensible thing to do, to keep the blacks from rampaging their culture. Just look what is happening to the Afrikaners now that the apartheid has been abolished. The apartheid was essentially a border control that’s all.

The myth that the white South Africans used the blacks to create their lifestyle is ridiculous propaganda – just more jewish mind control to guilt Europeans into accepting their white genocide.
[please listen to Karen Smith’s interview below]
t
t
3/. Being racist is the most anti-social thing one can be
Well first of all this word racist was coined by a mass murdering jew called Trotsky. This was created in order to guilt up any Whites who dare to stand up for their European culture. It is a powerful word and meme and this single word alone enables vast amounts of white people to bend over backwards to accommodate non-whites into their culture, just in order not be labeled a racist. Whites will give up their heritage, jobs, culture, lineage, identity and lifestyle so long as they are not called this silly little name. It is truly incredible the power of trigger words through mind control – just more jewish mind control to guilt Europeans into accepting their white genocide.
t
t
4/. Diversity enriches European societies
On the surface, one could argue that having multiple choices of restaurants from many different cultures is a positive thing for society. One could indeed say that these cultures are contributing to European culture by providing alternatives. But at what price? How much of a payoff do we have for this enrichment? It is obvious by now to anyone who is prepared to use an ounce of logic that behind the surface of this colourful enrichment; the indigenous European peoples are paying a hefty price. In fact we are suffocating. Multiculturalism is the death spell of European culture and civilisation. Had Europeans just had a policy that only small amounts of people can stay providing they provide a unique contribution: a Chinese martial art, a Korean healing system, an Indian meditation technique, etc; then this really would be enrichment. The reality is most people coming to Europe have only one interest – to serve themselves. None of them give a damn about the preservation of our European culture. Every single migrant cares only about their self interests and their culture. None of them actively help to preserve European culture. Diversity = white genocide. Diversity is enrichment – just more jewish mind control to guilt Europeans into accepting their white genocide.
t
t
5/. Colour is just skin deep – we’re all equal
This is simply not true! One only has to objectively look at each race and look at each races’ achievements. One can use all the excuses in the world as to why certain cultures have not been able to develop; but we all have been on this planet for the same time. It’s too much of a coincidence that in every single part of the globe that White European cultures have lived – civilised cultures have blossomed. Europeans built the pyramids. It is only because of jewish interference that white Europeans have not been able to fully develop. Just look what Germany achieved in just six years free of the parasitic jews. The same for England after Edward the 1st (Longshanks) booted the jews out of England ….look how England prospered. It’s been the same in every European culture, if Europeans are left to flourish on their own without the parasitic jew. The ‘we’re all equal’ narrative is just more jewish mind control to guilt Europeans into accepting their white genocide.
t
t
6/. The only reason a high percentage of blacks are violent is because they have been socially suppressed by whites and all they are doing is venting their righteous anger – it’s justified
Righteous anger – about what exactly? Having been afforded 100 fold opportunities in a European culture than in their own culture? Just look at the opportunities they have been given. Companies and local councils are bending over backwards with ‘affirmative action’/equal opportunities for non-whites. In fact it is easier now for a non-white to get a job in a Government/local council job. Not to mention the handouts. And how can the unprovoked attacks on whites be explained in South Africa? These were not oppressed people’s, they were outsiders coming in to destroy White civilisation. The notion that all blacks (as a collective) need is education and they will blend into any civilised European society has now been proven a myth. How far do we have to stretch things to continually come up with excuses for black on white crimes – just more jewish mind control to guilt Europeans into accepting their white genocide. [please see video channel below]
t
t
7/. White people and white cultures are innately racist
What could be further than the Truth. White people (as a collective) are THE least racist people on the planet. And I struggle with this term racist anyway; as it is another trigger word created by the jews. But as far as being accommodating – there is no race on the planet more accommodating than the white European race. We have given and given and given and given throughout our whole existence. And we continue to give in endless charitable and philanthropic projects. Yet somehow as the providers, we always seem to end up with the racist label and the ones feeling guilty for not having done enough and somehow being the suppressors of non-whites. Had it not been for the white peoples’ inventiveness, with sanitation, electricity, medical resources, etc; the population of non-whites would be far less. Whites are evil racists – just more jewish mind control to guilt Europeans into accepting their white genocide.
t
t
8/. All races can pull together to fight the common evil
At one point I truly did believe this nonsense. I really did think that if all races and cultures woke up to the JCN, then we’ld live a more peaceful existence – ha. Oh dear, how embarrassing. The concept that if we all pull together to fight our common foe, we would live in peace. Utter nonsense. Just look at each race and how they only look after themselves. You can see it within the Truth movement – the blacks are all about their black issues, the Muslims are only pro-Islam, even the gays only care about their gay issues. None of these secular groups want to join forces to fight the jewish agenda, because secretly they know who is funding their particular agenda. They’re all ultimately about bringing down the European race.
t
t
9/. Just like mongrel dogs, mixed race people are healthier and less susceptible to inbred diseases
And there are people out there who propagate this garbage. As with all these modern memes, it couldn’t be further from the Truth and as always just more inverted Truth. The healthiest of races are the purest of races. This is a given. Mixed race children apparently are not able to receive organ donations. Why all of a sudden would genetics suddenly change in cultures? If races have bred amongst their own for thousands of years; why now is this seemed unhealthy? A jewish propagandised narrative perhaps – just more jewish mind control to guilt Europeans into accepting their white genocide.
t
t
10/. Black men are more virile than white men
I know this may seem like scraping the barrel, but this topic often crops ups. I’ve had to listen to this crap all my life. It’s so obvious who is behind this myth and why they would propagate it. It is just another method to knock the white man’s confidence. To make him feel inferior to other races. Whilst at the same time programme (propagandise) white women, (along with the music industry) into believing that dating black men is a better option and somehow black men are more masculine. Hence to encourage race-mixing – just more jewish mind control to guilt Europeans into accepting their white genocide.

Yaldabaoth #fundie yandere.org

And ultimately in 99% of rapes there are plenty of things the “victim” could have done to prevent them. If you really wanted to save yourself for senpai, then you would have dressed modestly, preferably left your house only with a related male escort by your side (admittedly this is not always possible depending on your circumstances/family situation), not sexually tempted men, and avoided other guys as much as possible, especially situations where you would be vulnerable in their presence. If you couldn’t even do that much, then you cannot be a proper yandere. How many girls who follow all of these rules to avoid the consequences of male lust end up getting raped? The answer is so few that one will never register here. So get off your high horse and quit defending reckless behavior.

Plus even if you’re legitimately, 100% forcibly raped then you always have the option of becoming a true yandere for your rapist. If you don’t take that opportunity then so be it but don’t act like you should get a pass. Proper anime girls fall in love with their rapists all the time. If you want to idolize anime tropes, then you can’t exclude this one just because you don’t like it. You had the chance and you chose not to take it. That’s life. Sometimes you make lemonade out of lemons and sometimes you don’t.

David J. Stewart #fundie google.com.au

JC's Girls' Website Promotes Immodesty and Mocks God's Holiness

The article at www.BustedHalo.com, Stripper Salvation, goes on to state...

Veitch and her cohorts play up their sex appeal on their website and in their personal appearances because it adds to their credibility in an industry obsessed with physical beauty. "I understand the culture of these girls" says Veitch. "They respect that.

Play up their sex appeal? How does this statement compare to 1st Timothy 2:9 from the Word of God, "In like manner also, that women adorn themselves in modest apparel, with shamefacedness and sobriety; not with broided hair, or gold, or pearls, or costly array." These three women dare to call themselves "Christian", while simultaneously promoting immodesty and lasciviousness? Blasphemy!!! Heather Veitch even promotes immodest "Holy Hottie" pants and tank-tops for women, which you can buy through her website. The words "Holy Hottie" are deliberately written across a women's private area to attract men's attention to that part of her body. This is so evil. These women are NO Christians. They are selling whorish clothing in the name of Christ.

The JC's Girls' website also features Pimp-My-Profile.com in several places. So much for the 700 Club! Only an apostate ministry would support what these girls are doing. They're not getting anybody saved, they're exploiting Christianity to make money, and stupid people are sending it to them. These girls are still celebrities in SIN CITY!

It is evil and wrong for JC's Girls to "play up their sex appeal" in order to draw people to Christ. How crazy is the world going to get before the Lord returns to clean up this mess? What next, Christian Rock-n-Roll?

Lorin Scicluna and Francesco Fenech #racist #psycho stripes.com

VALLETTA, Malta — Two Maltese soldiers have pleaded not guilty to charges they participated in a racially-motivated, fatal drive-by shooting of a migrant from Ivory Coast.

The two men, Lorin Scicluna and Francesco Fenech, were also charged Sunday with the April 6 attempted murder of two other men from Guinea and Gambia, who were seriously injured in the attack. The death of Ivorian Lassana Cisse was believed to be Malta's first-ever racially motivated attack.

The charges, which include racial hatred and committing a racially motivated crime, carry a maximum of life in prison.

Migration is a key political issue for the Mediterranean island nation, particularly ahead of European Parliament elections this week. Maltese political leaders and Catholic Church officials have been speaking out against growing hate speech against migrants, particularly on social media.

foolishmortal #fundie forums.catholic.com

I believe it's the rhythms that do it. Rock originates from black areas of America, which originated from tribal beats used in guess what? The stuff of Psalms 95: witchcraft.
We can't blame the black people for those sounds, but that's what they were used for, originally. It got lost in time.
Art moves people. Some move people in very immodest ways. The way the Africans and African-Americans dance is, sorry to say, immodest, but no more immodest than pagan-style dancing of the West or any pre-Christian civilization. Being moved to move as such are the fruits of demonic entertainment. Gregorian chant is the most modest. Classical music is beautiful, but still too immodest for worship as it inspires the wrong sentiments, for lack of a better word, in people.

There's a psychology of music that Satan, and those oppressed understand and the Christian world, and those misguided by the world, has forgotten. Rock stirs up the passions and it's not for the passion of Christ.

Like I said, though, I can't get it out of my system. It does not inspire godly thoughts and movements of the soul and is thus, disruptive to it. That makes it unhealthy. It's nice if young people are fired up for the Pope and the Church but is it because it was made hip? Is it the lite version of rock? Is it yet another compromise with the way of the world? If the glitz was taken away and Catholics were put into camps, will there be any real substance in their souls when it's not fun to be Catholic? I wonder.

There is no beauty in rock itself. God is the creator of beauty; not ugliness, and thus...well, you can guess. Sometimes Alice Cooper can feel like a good stress reducer, but I only feel comforted by beautiful, innocent-sounding sounds like JMT's light stuff, Gregorian chant and Enya.
Well, I guess, being that she has some songs that would seem to be pagan like "Pax Deorum (I think the song is called, which is like "peace of the gods")", beauty can be deceptive, as used also by Satan (as he was beautiful as an angel and can fake it to deceive), but the point is that God creates beauty and not ugliness and so ugly sounds that move the base passions come from guess who?
It must be faced. This is why the stripping of beauty from our churches and from the designs for new ones was far more serious that should not be overlooked as being not a disaster in that it's still tradition with a small "t" and not a heresy. The devil is smarter than us and finds loopholes. I think he found it with rock bands playing Mass music but Christian rock may, in itself, be a Satanic device and confusion for the soul at even papal visits.

Yeah, you guys can leave here if you don't want to be challenged. You could think objectively, though.

CommunistFighter #racist reddit.com

(Title: "It's important for this community to realize the Holocaust was a hoax.")

What an arch-fabrication it is, what degree of absolute treachery, one that exceeds all limits of human deceit and corruption, that is this claim that there was an actual Holocaust against European Jews. It was a Holocaust which supposedly occurred during World War II, where Jews were not only targeted, for instance, for displacement and deportation but also gassed and burned to death, ‘because of their faith.’ It’s all a fake. Who can prove otherwise? See the real nature of WWII-era European Jewry. They were never oppressed. Rather, they were the great oppressors of the land in every way conceivable:

In his interview with Ernst Zundell, the scholarly R. Dommergue, Jewish professor, said it was a total fake. He proved prophetic and died a man of absolute truth.The Professor had sound reason for his position. According to official Red Cross records the numbers of people, all people, who died in German concentration, actually, work or holding camps, was some 270,000. That’s throughout the entire war, including those who died of communicable diseases such as typhus (rampant towards the end of the war) and cholera. What happened to the six million? Where were they killed? If they didn’t die, as is obvious, in the holding camps, then, what happened to them? Moreover, since there weren’t even six million Jews in all of Europe at that time, then, how did the extras die? Did they import them from Khazaria? Yet, wait a minute. It can’t be. Really, the Germans didn’t target the Jews after all? Weren’t those Nazi’s exceedingly brutal? Sure they were, right. In times of war the Germans were the barbarians. Despite this claim history vindicates them. Instead, it was the arch-cruel and terminally corrupt Khazars who proved to be the true barbarians and who were responsible for the mass slaughter of the innocent, including mass killings in Germany, Russia, Poland, and more. The Zionist criminals used the war as the leveraging point to drive their plot home, which was the near complete imperialistic conquest of Palestine. The social strife they created led to the basis for mass emigration of European Jewry from their homes to Middle Eastern land. Without the war, an occupied Palestine would have never occurred. It was also the means by which well-placed Zionists and also low-level operatives could enrich themselves through theft, not only of the land of the Palestinian people but also through the usurpation of the assets and wealth of European nations. So, Hollywood-style Jewry imposed the fake: upon the whole, unsuspecting world.

“Boo-hoo, poor Jews. See what happened to them. Just because they were Jews they were tormented, tortured, killed, even gassed alive.” Sure they were, right. Plenty of evidence for it, too.

There is no need to revise anything. The facts are already there. It is merely a matter of republishing the information or uncovering it, then disseminating it. Facts are facts. Equally, fakes are fakes. The fact is there was no Holocaust against European, even Russian, Jewry. That was a hoax. What is fact is that it was both European and Russian Jewry who committed the Holocaust: against the gullible, vulnerable goy and the equally gullible, vulnerable Islamic people. It was they who paid the price in blood and far, being subjected to great tyranny in the land – the real victims of any ‘holocaust,’ not the Zionists. How much control has been exerted, how much money stolen, how many funds/assets purged, all because of a treacherous, arch-Zionist lie. It’s the lie of the Holocaust, and it is a “fake,” just as Professor Dommergue had made so abundantly clear. Zundel, among others, is not the anti-Semite. The anti-Semites are the Zionists, proven by their treachery, their plots, their schemes, and their actions.

Power Point Paradise #fundie powerpointparadise.com

Yes, my dear fellow human beings, it was SCIENTIFICALLY proven long ago that our ancient forebears experienced a catastrophic disaster that tilted the Earth just before 2345 B.C. The globe got such a blow that it wobbled on for over 2000 years until 1880 AD.

Our Earth got hit so bad by that Global Deluge that all our smart ancient patriarchs AND THEIR 500 ethnic descendant tribes still talked about it for MILLENNIA, no matter which branch of the Table of Nations they belong to.

Either the Earth got tilted by the heavy weight of the Northern ice-packs, or by the terrible “thruster-rocket” power of the many instant ‘fountains of the Earth’ of sub-crustal super-critical water (still extant under the crust today) spouting out from below through the crack-lines which opened up in the crust of Pangaea, as so pitifully portrayed in the upcoming movie ‘NOAH’, obviously also designed to obfuscate or “debunk” true history once more. Where did the water come from? Listen for once to the Guardian who knows where the water is, but not where it went 2400 BC. But being dim cultural Marxists, who can blame them? :)

image

Certainly Aaronofski’s poor excuse for “Noah’s Ark” looks like a very un-seaworthy leaky crate! It would shatter and sink before it’d ever start to float! Yet another big wopper in Hellywood’s long line of Weapons of Mass Deceptions! WMD!

I’ve actually been wishing for a long time that Mel Gibson would have tackled a Noah movie, in his own inimitable way! I was actually gonna try to contact him, but didn’t know how to. I should have tried harder, but sad to say…I didn’t. After all, now Aaronofski is massacring true Ancient History. Ah! He might as well, so all the liars condemn themselves.

But perhaps it is not too late for Mel to do a real version with 2015 CG effects! Does anyone know how to contact Mel? Are you reading this Mel? I’d love to be one of your advisers! I actually started a screen-play once. Leave a comment with some email. You are not too old yet, to move the world once more big time!

The real historical super-critical water-fountains were so powerful and jetting up so high that some water-propelled rock-debris even escaped Earth’s gravity causing mares (lava-seas) and craters in the Moon, oh, and not to forget our comets and asteroids that are slowly beginning to return en masse?

Actually scientists just recently discovered that the water on the Moon is the same kind of water as on Earth! Oh really? Wow! Who could have expected such a thing! Amazing those ‘scientists’, no? Some actually have a clue! Or two? :) This time in the Mail!

image

Either the water-jets from the cracks were initially more powerful or numerous on one side of the Earth that caused it to tilt, otherwise the tilt may have been caused by the eventually developing Northern Ice pack resulting from the Flood. We personally do not believe it was caused by an impact of some huge asteroid, as no impact zone exists for it.

The cracks in the crust, caused by very hot pressurized super-critical water of volcanic nature, heated up the ocean so much, that it resulted in a huge REAL Climate Change around that time. The warming ocean vaporised up into a thick cover of rain-clouds coming down as lots of snow in the North and South turning into the icecap in the North, and as rain eroding the Sphinx in Egypt!

The snow soon turned into huge kilometers thick ice packs bringing down the ocean levels by 125 Meters. Whereas there was land in the Northern hemisphere able to catch the snow, down South Antarctica had not yet descended into a polar position by continental drift, like the Piri Reis Map testifies, obviously drawn before the Ice Age.

That copy of an ancient source map, and the Oronteus Finaeus map inserted below, shows Antarctica without ice, and in a more Northern position just below Africa at the end of the upturned tail of South America, before the continental drift really got going, during the days of Peleg, “when the Earth was divided!”

image

That means that then the snow in the South mostly fell into the ocean and melted, whereas in the North it could continually build up in Alaska, North America, Europe, and Siberia, causing a great weight shift to the North.

That weight may have precipitated that 26.5 degree tilt around 2345 B.C., but I am not a physicist so I’m not sure if it could have had the tilting effect.

Perhaps it is more likely that the main force of the “Fountains of the Earth” was more powerful at one side of the Earth, functioning like a Vernier thruster rocket on a space vehicle. I personally lean towards that interpretation.

But whatever mechanism precipitated that tilt, the direct unique cause was the Global Flooding of the Earth, documented around that same time in the Book of Genesis. There is no record of any other great disaster around 2345 BC than only the Global Deluge, as proven by Dodwell, which is the massive MAMMOTH in the Historical & Geological Livingroom!

What All This Means For Us?

It means that a Total Global Destruction of everything in the entire antediluvian civilisation that existed before, did really happen! But what that also means, is that the following terms, names, concepts, labels and paradigms that we have been bombarded with since we were old enough to “watch TV”, are bogus, false, non-existent, total fiction, and globalist weirdness, myths and fabrications!

“Pre-History, Stone Age, Paleolithic, Neolithic, Cavemen, Hunter Gatherers, Neanderthalers, Lucy, Peking Man, Macro Evolution, etc! And Darwin, Lyell, Hutton, Huxley, Dawkins, Gould, and many others, are all liars, crooks, deceivers, and supplanters, chosen, selected and promoted to confuse and alienate us all from the Life that is within our spirits, our conscience from our loving Creator.

It was all designed to make you believe that you are nothing else but a happenstance of chance and a spermatozoan coincidence without any greater destiny, rhyme or reason, so that you might as well commit suicide because there is no Father Creator who loves and cares for you, and you are just a meaningless blip on the temporary evolutionary screen of Time.

It proves again how we have been severely brainwashed by the Bankers’ Rhodes scholars into believing the fairytale that we descended from “primate-monkeys” and “Lucy” in Africa, and that we are “getting smarter” via Paleolithic cavemen and “Neanderthalers” into hunter-gathererers, who finally learned agriculture and how to built huts and domesticate cows, etc. Whereas we are actually getting dumbed down into deceived media dupes at the bottom of the gene-pool!

It is a very astute 150 years old conspiracy by International Globalists who control the media and education, to use the dislike of God of some among us who were cramped in their style having to “love their neighbour”, and could use a good cop-out.

The Globalists were more than willing to oblige with a false narrative based on the “terrible lizard” (dinosaur) theory, as “early T-Fords of Evolution”, that started “65 million years ago”, whereas we “Homo Sapiens” (meaning “wise man” as compared to “cavemen!” Ha!) only started “3-4 million years ago.”

It is a gross lie, my dears. The Emperor has no clothes on whatsoever, and you have been taken for such a grandiose ride, that they are continually laughing all the way to their banks about our stupidity, with your money!

I know, it is hard to change your world-view plus to suddenly get the wise cracks from the uninformed who still believe the tailors of the Emperor, although they see nothing. It’s just that they don’t want people to think they are stupid. Poor guys!

That is how the tailors work, see. They manufactured global peer pressure through the damned mainstream media to make everyone stupid although they tell them that they are very smart to believe that they originated from an explosion in space, and rain on the rocks for millions of years, and through non-existent positive mutations that even Dawkins can’t remember or quote.

So now it is up to you. You continue on being dumb in their eyes and “smart” in your own, or you take the unpopular red pill and we will show you how deep the rabbit hole really goes.

I told you, from the beginning of this article, that most of the masses wouldn’t believe in this conspiracy, and ridicule us as aluminum foil heads. It’s OK. They will find out one day anyway, but sadly, then it will be too late for quite a long time…. But don’t say we didn’t tell or warn them…

David J. Stewart #fundie jesus-is-savior.com

One of the most evil sins in America is the use of sexual suggestiveness in advertising. What prompted me to write this article was doing some research on the evils of Contemporary Christian Music (CCM). I noticed that the female CCM group “Point Of Grace,” on their album cover titled “A Thousand Little Things,” are pictured suggestively. For obvious reasons I can't show you the album cover, because it's inappropriate. They're all wearing skirts above the knees. This is wickedness.

Although modest by today's immodest standards, it is immoral by God's standards. The woman in the middle is sitting suggestively, subtly invitingly. The album cover is sexually suggestive, period. They know exactly what they are doing. All men who are normal and healthy have to battle continually against sexually impure thoughts. An honest homosexual told me that all men are sex pigs. Every man is either carnally minded and doesn't care, or he's a Christian who's trying to please God by bringing every thought into captivity unto obedience to Christ (2nd Corinthians 10:5).

Immodesty is a dangerous sin. Many men who have denied this truth have lived to reap what they have sown, proving my point. It's not uncommon to hear a pastor berating a relative or church member for committing sexual sins, and then one day they are guilty them self, on the other side of the fence now bearing the reproach of their sins. If that's you, know that the blood of Jesus cleanses all sins away. You'll never understand the grace of God until you mess up and people point their hypocritical finger in condemnation against you. Then the blood of Jesus will become sweeter than you have ever known.

But my teaching still stands, that is, women ought to cover their bodies thoroughly, dressing modestly and behaving ladylike. Modern female singers have impudent (a look of casual disrespect) faces, and they speak with authority like men, and they wear blue-jeans or miniskirts, shaming themselves and dishonoring the Lord they claim to serve. Immodesty is destroying our nation. Shame on any co-called Christian woman who wears her skirt above her knee, exposing her thighs for men to lust upon. Showing any part of the thighs invites a man's mind to think about her female reproductive organ. Why is that so hard to figure out? God judge this wicked generation!

Matt Walsh #fundie dailywire.com

Bishop Morlino of Madison displayed courage rare among American bishops when he published a letter this weekend which gets right to the heart of the matter of the abuse of children within the Catholic Church. Here is what he said, in part:
It is time to admit that there is a homosexual subculture within the hierarchy of the Catholic Church that is wreaking great devastation in the vineyard of the Lord. The Church’s teaching is clear that the homosexual inclination is not in itself sinful, but it is intrinsically disordered in a way that renders any man stably afflicted by it unfit to be a priest. And the decision to act upon this disordered inclination is a sin so grave that it cries out to heaven for vengeance, especially when it involves preying upon the young or the vulnerable. Such wickedness should be hated with a perfect hatred. Christian charity itself demands that we should hate wickedness just as we love goodness. But while hating the sin, we must never hate the sinner, who is called to conversion, penance, and renewed communion with Christ and His Church, through His inexhaustible mercy.

At the same time, however, the love and mercy which we are called to have even for the worst of sinners does not exclude holding them accountable for their actions through a punishment proportionate to the gravity of their offense. In fact, a just punishment is an important work of love and mercy, because, while it serves primarily as retribution for the offense committed, it also offers the guilty party an opportunity to make expiation for his sin in this life (if he willingly accepts his punishment), thus sparing him worse punishment in the life to come. Motivated, therefore, by love and concern for souls, I stand with those calling for justice to be done upon the guilty.

There is plenty to be said about his appropriate and necessary call to hatred of sin — a call you rarely hear from leaders of the Catholic Church, or any other church — but the first sentence of that paragraph is most notable. Here is a high ranking official in the Church admitting, finally, that there is a "homosexual subculture within the hierarchy" which is directly linked to the sex abuse scandals.

It is important to emphasize that this is not a matter of a bunch of individual gay priests who just so happened to wind up in the Church. There is an actual gay culture, as the Bishop notes — or a "homosexual undergound," as another report puts it — and it is "wreaking devastation." Last week I mentioned the priest in Tampa who revealed just how this organized network of homosexuals operates and what sort of tactics they use to intimidate and blackmail other priests into silence. Do those who wish to deny the link between homosexuality and the abuse crisis believe that this priest is making up stories? Why would he make up stories? What does he gain from it?

And is this report from Catholic News Agency made up? It exposes a rampant gay culture in the Archdiocese of Newark, where the homosexual predator Cardinal McCarrick was archbishop for a number of years:
Seminarians and priests from ordination classes spanning 30 years, during the terms of McCarrick and Myers, reported to CNA that they had observed an active homosexual subculture of priest and seminarians within Newark’s Immaculate Conception Seminary.

One priest ordained in the early years of McCarrick’s term in Newark said that “a lot of people lost their innocence in the seminary.”

He told CNA that there were two distinct groups of students. “You had the men who were there because they had a deep love of the Lord and a vocation to serve his Church,” he said, adding that those men were the majority of seminarians.

“But there was a subculture, with its own group of men, that was openly homosexual and petty and vindictive with everyone else,” he explained.

The same priest said that before he entered the seminary he was warned he would “see things that weren’t right.” He said he was counseled by an older priest to “just remember who you are and why you are there.”

Several Newark priests told CNA that the same atmosphere existed under Archbishop John Myers, who led the archdiocese from 2001-2016.

One priest who studied during that period recalled being told, as a newly arrived seminarian, to lock his bedroom door at night to avoid “visitors.”

“I thought they were kidding – they really weren’t,” he said.

Another priest told CNA that, as a senior seminarian and transitional deacon, young seminarians would come to him in tears.

“They were just so scandalized by what they saw, these upperclassmen flagrantly carrying on with each other in gay relationships.”

A third priest says that these seminarians were frequently visited by other priests of the diocese, some of whom he later saw at the rectory cocktail parties.

“There was definitely a group of, well I guess we’re calling them ‘uncles’ now. They would come by to visit with the effeminate crowd, bring them stuff and take them out,” he said.

If you're wondering what those "rectory cocktail parties" consisted of, here are a few details:
One recalled that he attended a cocktail party, thinking he had been invited to a simple priests’ dinner.

“I was led into the room to a chorus of wolf-whistles,” he said. “It was clear right away I was ‘on display.’”

Another priest told CNA that he was also invited to a party hosted by the priest. “They were all carrying big mixed drinks, pink ones, it was like something out of Sex in City.”

He recalled that after asking for a beer, he was told by his host, “you need to try something more girly tonight.”

All recounted overtly sexual conversation at the cocktail parties. “I was fresh meat and they were trying me out,” one priest said.

All three said they left quickly upon realizing what was going on.

“Everyone was getting loaded and getting closer on the couches, I wanted out of there,” a priest told CNA.

“Everyone kept calling me a ‘looker’ and saying they had to ‘keep me around’ from now on,” a third Newark priest told CNA.

The current Archbishop of Newark, Cardinal Tobin, released a letter denying the existence of a gay culture in the archdiocese. But before you decide whether to take him seriously, keep in mind that this is the same liberal Cardinal who endorsed an "LGBT pilgrimage and Mass" in Newark. And it is the same Cardinal who recently and mysteriously tweeted and then deleted, "Nighty, night baby. I love you." He claimed it was supposed to be a private message to his sister. I suppose it is possible that the liberal, gay-apologist Cardinal of an archdiocese where priests attend gay cocktail parties meant to send a private message like that to his 65-year-old sister, but a reasonable person may have his suspicions.

We must evaluate the sort of bishops and priests who are crying out about the problem of homosexuality within the priesthood, and the sort of bishops and priests who are denying that such a problem exists, and decide which group is more credible. Personally, I have a much easier time trusting Bishop Molino than Cardinal Nighty Night and his ilk.
And once we have accepted the fact that homosexuality represents a serious challenge within the priesthood, it begins to make sense that the great majority of abuse victims have been males. If homosexuality within the Church were not a problem, why wouldn't the great majority of abuse victims have been female, as per the distribution of sexual orientation within the population at large? To ignore a problem that contributes to the abuse of male children in the priesthood is politically correct at best, and dangerous at worst.

Jennifer Leclaire #fundie barbwire.com

If you type “is Obama a Muslim” into Google, you get over 126 million results. If you type “proof Obama is a Muslim” into Google, you get 45.7 million results—that’s a lot of “proof.” There is plenty to cause one to question his profession of Christ. I don’t have room to recount them all here, but here are a few:

[...]

Obama in prepared remarks said, “The United States has been enriched by Muslim Americans. Many other Americans have Muslims in their families or have lived in a Muslim-majority country—I know, because I am one of them.”

In prepared remarks in April 2012, Obama referred to Christ as “a” Son of God rather than as “the” only begotten Son of God: “And for me, and I’m sure for some of you, it’s also a chance to remember the tremendous sacrifice that led up to that day, and all that Christ endured—not just as a Son of God, but as a human being.”

The list of these types of statements—not to mention bowing to a Saudi king, the fact that his wife does not travel with him to Muslim nations because Sharia law demands Muslim women cover their heads, his love for the Muslim call to prayer and so on—seems to contradict the Christian faith. And that’s putting it mildly.

[...]

So is President Obama a Christian or not? I cannot judge someone’s heart but I can judge fruit. There is no fruit of a life surrendered to Christ and far more evidence that he subscribes to the Prophet Mohammed’s teachings. But even then, there are contradictions.

Think about it for a minute. Good Muslims don’t smoke and drink, like Obama does. And Islam not only stands against homosexuality—Sharia law calls for gays to be stoned—yet Obama celebrated the Supreme Court’s gay marriage ruling by shining a rainbow on the White House.

So is Obama the antichrist? Is our Commander-in-Chief a Christian? Is he the first Muslim president? The debate continues.

grazemasque #dunning-kruger deviantart.com

Good morning, climate shysters.
Yes, you. The actively uninformed.
Hey! Beyond Delusion. Wake up.
Have you you reached Peak eXtinction yet?
"You mean eXtinctum Ridiculum, Sir?"
Haha. Yeah. Bonus marks on your next assignment.

Watch your two degree tipping point, Climate Crassus.
It was plucked out of thin air, you know.
Phil Jones admitted that in a Climategate email, didn't he?
Been known for over ten years, to anyone who can read, that is!
You know there's a crisis, don't you?
A crisis of critical thinking! An intellectual crisis, you morons!

Has your paper been Pere reviewed, Fireball?
By Papa Francis and Darth Soros, I mean? (The rewl scoientusts.)
Yes, I thought as much! The "approved viewpoint" served you well, didn't it?
Cow carbon comes from the atmosphere. Did you know that? What do cows eat?
But you decided we should close down meat and dairy? Just , , Brilliant!
Let's take another look at "carbon pollution by beef" bollocks then, shall we.

Now, who hasn't handed in their "magic cows" assignment yet?
Dahh! OK then, show of hands who did? None of you? I see.
Look guys, I don't want to see any of you lazy chumps back here next semester.
So get off your paragraphs and write at least one backside, OK!
And mind your grammar too, if you want a passing grade.
Aye, dun backwuds I did. Glad to see you're still awake, Scorcher.

Now, you remember where to find it? It's part of last week's deviation.
So it's in the gallery, with all the other junk. Just look in the gallery.
Ye-e-es, the one with the cro-o-ows. That's the one.
Look, it's not difficult. It's just the carbon cycle, all right.
Standard photosynthesis. Then eat, munch, swallow. Got it?
Yeah Hotspot, I left out fart. Knew I could rely on you for that.

25-Nov-2019

Old Man Montgomery #fundie oldmanmontgomery.wordpress.com

[=Authors Note: For the sake of trimming, some of the Bible verses in the original page have been removed=]

From the website of ‘johnshore.com’

These were published and dated December 16, 2010. I have only recently become aware of this ‘movement’ via Facebook. (One never knows what one will find there.) These are referred to as the “Sixteen Tenets of ‘unfundamentalist Christians’ , known also or previously known as ‘ThruWay Christians’. Being the old-fashioned, hard-nosed Bible thumper that I am, I disagree with some facets of this and the conclusions of the entirety.

Of course I have reasons and those reasons are published below. Just for convenience, I numbered the statements, replacing what appeared in my copy as a paragraph ‘dot’.

Just for the record, as the article was dated December 16, 2010, it is entirely possible Mr. Shore has completely changed his mind and recanted this whole document. On the other hand, I just checked Mr. Shore’s last blog entry and he’s still pitching the “UnFund” theme.

Caution: If the reader is not a Christian believer, much of this discussion will seem pointless. Feel free to read on, but if you’re confused, don’t worry, it happens to lots of folks.

Here beings the tenets:

1. Jesus Christ was God incarnate. He performed miracles; as a means of providing for the irrevocable reconciliation of humankind to God he sacrificed himself on the cross; he rose from the dead; he left behind for the benefit of all people the totality of himself in the form of the indwelling Holy Spirit.

So far, I’m in agreement. Jesus is God incarnate; the ‘Son’ who is God Himself. Jesus was executed and killed (no alternatives) on a Roman cross under Roman law. Jesus’ death was the final sacrifice needed to atone for the sin of all people who appeal to Him for forgiveness. Jesus rose from the dead on the third day showing Himself to be God and giving a promise to all of an Eternal life in Heaven with Him. He sent the Third Person of the Godhead, the ‘Holy Spirit’ to believers after His ascension.

2. Christ and Christianity are meant to be understood, appreciated, and experienced as galvanizing inspirations for living a life of love, compassion, fairness, peace, and humility. Period.

Now we’re disagreeing. The primary purpose and function of Christianity is to repair the breach between God and mankind due to mankind’s rebellion and disobedience. Being forgiven by Jesus and redeemed by His sacrifice, mankind can have a direct and proper relationship with God. The qualities of love, compassion, fairness, peace and humility are by-products of that proper relationship, not the primary aim.

Am I splitting hairs here? Not as much as one might think; the matter becomes clearer as we proceed.

3. The Bible is a collection of a great many separate documents written by different people in different languages over thousands of years. Properly understanding both the letter and spirit of the Bible necessarily entails taking into account the historical and cultural contexts that so greatly inform so much of its text. The size, density, history and complexity of the Bible render unfeasible the idea that not one of its words reflects more man’s will than God’s. The spirit of God is inerrant; people—even those impassioned by the conviction that God is speaking directly to or through them—are not.

The one starts out well and descends into heresy. The Bible was written over a period of approximately 1500 years. The Books of Moses, the Torah – sometimes Pentateuch, was written in the period between the Exodus from Egypt, around 1400 B. C. to the time of the Babylonian Captivity, around 600 to 530 B. C. (give or take a decade or so.) The book of Revelation, written by John the Apostle was written around 90 A. D. The rest was written somewhere in between, with the possible exception of Job. Job was one of the earliest sections written and may predate Moses. The Bible was assuredly written by at least forty different authors. (For instance, the books of Judges, Kings and Chronicles were written over periods of time and one author could not have written them all; they require accounts from events several hundred years apart. The Torah was more than likely written by a number of scribes with Moses or a later, Babylonian scholar as ‘editor’ and having final input. Genesis is obviously based on oral traditions of the Israelite nation.) The books reflect social conventions and cultural coloring of the times involved.

However, it is the message of Almighty God to humanity. No matter how much a human can foul up, the integrity of the message is based on God’s ability to ensure His message is properly passed on. No human can foul up or outright lie good enough to defeat God’s purpose. So as much as mankind wrote the words on paper (papyrus or whatever), the ‘Word’ (Greek ‘logos’, meaning idea, identity or concept) is that of God. As such, it is inerrant in message.

The idea of the Bible being ‘written by man and therefore possibly distorted’ is an old heresy. It was argued about in the earliest councils trying to settle on the ‘Bible’ and is the basis for several cults who claim to be Christian, but rely on teachings of extra Biblical origin. The heresy also finds much favor among those who wish to discredit any one particular facet of Christian doctrine. Under any version, the idea the Bible isn’t correct means either God really doesn’t care about the message or God is incapable of protecting His own plan. Christians cannot in good faith (no pun intended) accept either alternative.

4. Anyone seeking to mix church and state has failed to understand the nature and proper role of either. Belief that all people are created equal and are deserving of equal protection under the law is foundational to all modern democratic nations. To incorporate the inherently exclusionary imperatives of a particular religion into the determinedly inclusive system of democracy would be to undermine the very spirit of democracy by pushing it toward a theocracy.

This is a pretty silly statement and is highly ignorant of history. The ‘foundational’ belief of people being created equal and deserving equal protection under law is uniquely derived from the Judeo-Christian tradition. It is not found in Islam, Confucianism, Buddhism, Hinduism or any of the other ‘religions’ of the world. It is Christianity that fostered Democracy, not Democracy that fostered Christianity.

Additionally, it was Christian believers and supporters who founded the United States as a nation with no state religion. The United States was not founded as a ‘Christian nation’, but was indeed begun as a ‘nation of Christians’. To pretend otherwise is to ignore history and to invite serious question as to the point of the discussion. One must also note that all movements to ‘remove’ the influence of Christianity from the United States and civil laws result in the promotion of either Secular Humanism or Islam.

There are no moral vacuums.

5. It’s not possible to read Paul’s New Testament writings and remain unmoved by his open heart, intellectual prowess, and staggering bravery. And yet Paul (who, after all, spent years zealously persecuting and having executed untold numbers of Christians) must remain to us a mortal man. More than reasonable, it is incumbent upon those who claim to seek the deepest knowledge of Christ to subject the words of Paul to the same kinds of objective analysis we would the words of any man daring to describe the qualities, purposes, and desires of God.

This is a gentle, lofty and seemingly reasonable attempt to undermine the message presented by God through Paul the Apostle. What this statement does is deny the Divine inspiration and authorship of the Bible as a whole. It returns to the fore in a moment with more of the ‘villify Paul’ agenda.

6. With regards to the written identity of God, the pronoun “he” is a necessity of the English language, not an actual anatomical designation. God is neither male nor female; God contains all of both.

Again, agreement. In Hebrew, just as in English, the male pronoun unless specifically intended refers to both male and female. Jesus says (John 4:23 and 24)“But a time is coming – and now is here – when the true worshipers will worship the Father in spirit and truth, for the Father seeks such people to be his worshipers. God is spirit, and the people who worship him must worship in spirit and truth.” Also one notes in Genesis (chapter one, verses 26 and 27)
“Then God said, “Let us make humankind in our image, after our likeness, so they may rule over the fish of the sea and the birds of the air, over the cattle, and over all the earth, and over all the creatures that move on the earth.”
God created humankind in his own image,
in the image of God he created them,
male and female he created them.

So, both male and female were (still are, more or less, being distorted from the original model by mankind’s disobedience) created in God’s image; which manifestly means not a physical image, but a mental and spiritual image.

7. The Biblical scholarship supporting the idea that Paul never wrote a word proscribing natural homosexuality is at least as credible and persuasive as the scholarship (if not typical Bible translations) claiming that he did. Any person who uses the words of Paul in the New Testament to “prove” that homosexuality is a sin against God has either never themselves researched the matter, or has simply chosen to believe one set of equal proofs over another. Though laziness is easily enough understood, we remain mystified as to why anyone who purports to follow Jesus would choose to condemn an entire population over choosing to obey Jesus’ self-proclaimed Greatest Commandment to love one’s neighbor as one loves oneself.

Here’s the follow up to point 5. Once Paul is ‘questionable’, the condemnation of homosexuality can be dismissed as a personal quirk, or possibly an outright error on the part of Christianity (on the whole).

Here’s the premise of the tenet: Paul either really didn’t mean what he wrote about the practice of homosexuality despite what is clearly written in the original Greek manuscripts and all subsequent translations of the Bible, or Paul was mistaken and therefore not inspired by God. What an amazing statement.

Either God inspired and authored the Bible or not. If one chooses to deny God’s inspiration in part, then the whole becomes suspect. If God was lax in allowing Paul to write and publish errors, then what of the rest of the Bible is trustworthy? Conversely, if God did in fact inspire and author the Bible, then Paul’s writing is equally trustworthy.

Leviticus 18
This entire section (several chapters) deals with sexual sins and prohibitions. In part (I have inserted whole paragraphs to present an in context view):
19 You must not approach a woman in her menstrual impurity to have sexual intercourse with her. 20 You must not have sexual intercourse with the wife of your fellow citizen to become unclean with her. 21 You must not give any of your children as an offering to Molech, so that you do not profane the name of your God. I am the Lord! 22 You must not have sexual intercourse with a male as one has sexual intercourse with a woman; it is a detestable act. 23 You must not have sexual intercourse with any animal to become defiled with it, and a woman must not stand before an animal to have sexual intercourse with it; it is a perversion.
Leviticus 20
9 “‘If anyone curses his father and mother he must be put to death. He has cursed his
father and mother; his blood guilt is on himself. 10 If a man commits adultery with his neighbor’s wife, both the adulterer and the adulteress must be put to death. 11 If a man has sexual intercourse with his father’s wife, he has exposed his father’s nakedness. Both of them must be put to death; their blood guilt is on themselves. 12 If a man has sexual intercourse with his daughter-in-law, both of them must be put to death. They have committed perversion; their blood guilt is on themselves. 13 If a man has sexual intercourse with a male as one has sexual intercourse with a woman, the two of them have committed an abomination. They must be put to death; their blood guilt is on themselves. 14 If a man has sexual intercourse with both a woman and her mother, it is lewdness. Both he and they must be burned to death, so there is no lewdness in your midst. 15 If a man has sexual intercourse with any animal, he must be put to death, and you must kill the animal. 16 If a woman approaches any animal to have sexual intercourse with it, you must kill the woman, and the animal must be put to death; their blood guilt is on themselves.

These two passages are from the Torah, the first five books of the Old Testament. One can argue these are part of the Jewish or Mosaic Law and are therefore obsolete; in that case, general adultery, incest and bestiality are also permitted along with homosexual conduct. Or is that the point?

First Timothy 1 (written by that suspect Paul fellow)

8 But we know that the law is good if someone uses it legitimately, 9 realizing that law is not intended for a righteous person, but for lawless and rebellious people, for the ungodly and sinners, for the unholy and profane, for those who kill their fathers or mothers, for murderers, 10 sexually immoral people, practicing homosexuals, kidnappers, liars, perjurers – in fact, for any who live contrary to sound teaching. 11 This accords with the glorious gospel of the blessed God that was entrusted to me.

There is a note on the phrase ‘practicing homosexuals’ in verse 10 from the NET Bible: “…this term… ??se?????t?? states, “a male who engages in sexual activity w. a pers. of his own sex, pederast 1 Cor 6:9…of one who assumes the dominant role in same-sex activity, opp. µa?a???…1 Ti 1:10; Pol 5:3. Cp. Ro 1:27.” L&N 88.280 states, “a male partner in homosexual intercourse – ‘homosexual.’…It is possible that ??se?????t?? in certain contexts refers to the active male partner in homosexual intercourse in contrast with µa?a???, the passive male partner” (cf. 1 Cor 6:9). Since there is a distinction in contemporary usage between sexual orientation and actual behavior, the qualification “practicing” was supplied in the translation…”

First Corinthians 6 (also written by that questionable Paul)
9 Do you not know that the unrighteous will not inherit the kingdom of God? Do not be deceived! The sexually immoral, idolaters, adulterers, passive homosexual partners, practicing homosexuals, 10 thieves, the greedy, drunkards, the verbally abusive, and swindlers will not inherit the kingdom of God. 11 Some of you once lived this way. But you were washed, you were sanctified, you were justified in the name of the Lord Jesus Christ and by the Spirit of our God.

This last passage strikes me an illuminating. Homosexuals are included in a list of sin categories which include heterosexual sexual sinners, idolaters, adulterers (distinct from ‘sexually immoral heterosexuals), thieves, greedy, drunkards, verbally abusive and swindlers. The phrase ‘verbally abusive’ is rather interesting. The NIV translates it as ‘slanderers’; I think ‘gossips’ might easily fit into the meaning. At any rate, people who say nasty things about others are lumped in with murderers, thieves and the sexually immoral (of any type).

The last verse in the paragraph implies a change of life in those reading the letter. “Some of you … lived… But you were washed… sanctified… justified…” So they were not just forgiven and allowed to continue; they changed their values and life-styles. The same implication applies to the sexually impure; they don’t do that sort of thing anymore; they avoid that sort of thing; they are ashamed of and denounce their own past behavior.

Therefore, the Old Testament writings prohibited homosexual conduct as does the writings of Paul, therefore the New Testament. The words used really do mean homosexual conduct and not just the generic ‘sexual misconduct’.

I’m really curious about the ‘equal scholarship’ which demonstrates what the Bible says isn’t what it means. I’d like to examine the line of thought and arguments.

The statement “…Jesus’ self-proclaimed Greatest Commandment to love one’s neighbor as one loves oneself” is incorrect and sloppy scholarship.

Matthew 22:
35 And one of them, an expert in religious law, asked him a question to test him: 36 “Teacher, which commandment in the law is the greatest?” 37 Jesus 44 said to him, “‘Love the Lord your God with all your heart, with all your soul, and with all your mind.’ 38 This is the first and greatest commandment.

This tenet goes past ‘unfundamentalism’ and is squarely non-Christian.

8. It is much more reasonable—and certainly more compassionate—to hold that throughout history God chose to introduce himself in different ways into different cultural streams than it is to believe that there is only one correct way to understand and worship God, and that the punishment for anyone who chooses any but that way is to spend all of eternity having the living flesh seared off of his or her bones.

More reasonable? By who’s standard? As a Christian, the only viewpoint that counts is God’s viewpoint. That ‘viewpoint’ is expressed in the Bible, which is – as noted prior – God’s message to humanity.

More compassionate? To whom? Not to mention under what definition of ‘compassion’? I find no compassion in patting someone in error on the head and say comforting words while allowing them to remain in error at the risk of Eternal Death.

So let’s go along with the idea of God introducing Himself into different cultural streams in different ways. Why would introduce Himself in a totally different manner if He’s the same, Eternal God? For instance, in the sub-continent which is now India, why would God decide not to be the Eternal God of Creation of the Jewish people, but instead be represented by a pantheon of conflicting gods which change over time? Why would Almighty God manifest Himself as the volcano god, demanding virgin sacrifices? Would God happily change Himself into the Great Green Arkleseizure of Viltvodle VI?

Is He still God? Is He bored and just experimenting? Can He not remember who He is, from epoch to epoch?

The idea appeals to the ‘open-minded’ who have no ideas about who God is, or what He should be or do. The concept flies in the face of the ultimate creator of the Universe and all things that exist, who is Eternal and changeless, who is omniscient, omnipotent and omnipresent. In other words, God.

Again, not just ‘unfundamentalist’, but not very good thinking and doctrinally non Christian.

9. “No one comes to the Father except through me” does not mean that in the afterlife only Christians can get into heaven. It means that Jesus/God decides who does and doesn’t make it in.

From this one is forced to believe Jesus will not judge between those who accept Him and those who don’t, but instead will judge by ad hoc rules of ‘good behavior’. I say ‘ad hoc’ because no such rules are outlined in the Bible.

All that stuff about believing in the Son and relying on Him in tenet 1 are out the window, then? It is good deeds that really make the difference?

This heresy is remarkably old as well. It predates Christianity, in fact.

Jesus mentioned this concept in Matthew Seven, starting with verse 15:
15 “Watch out for false prophets, who come to you in sheep’s clothing but inwardly are voracious wolves. 16 You will recognize them by their fruit. Grapes are not gathered from thorns or figs from thistles, are they? 17 In the same way, every good tree bears good fruit, but the bad tree bears bad fruit. 18 A good tree is not able to bear bad fruit, nor a bad tree to bear good fruit. 19 Every tree that does not bear good fruit is cut down and thrown into the fire. 20 So then, you will recognize them by their fruit.
21 “Not everyone who says to me, ‘Lord, Lord,’ will enter into the kingdom of heaven – only the one who does the will of my Father in heaven. 22 On that day, many will say to me, ‘Lord, Lord, didn’t we prophesy in your name, and in your name cast out demons and do many powerful deeds?’ 23 Then I will declare to them, ‘I never knew you. Go away from me, you lawbreakers!’
24 “Everyone who hears these words of mine and does them is like a wise man who built his house on rock. 25 The rain fell, the flood came, and the winds beat against that house, but it did not collapse because it had been founded on rock. 26 Everyone who hears these words of mine and does not do them is like a foolish man who built his house on sand. 27 The rain fell, the flood came, and the winds beat against that house, and it collapsed; it was utterly destroyed!”
So then, what about “… the one who does the will of my Father in heaven…”? John 15, starting with verse nine makes it clear:
9 “Just as the Father has loved me, I have also loved you; remain in my love. 10 If you obey my commandments, you will remain in my love, just as I have obeyed my Father’s commandments and remain in his love. 11 I have told you these things so that my joy may be in you, and your joy may be complete.”

Nowhere in the Bible, nowhere in the quotations of Jesus, nowhere in the letters of the various apostles and elders in Jerusalem is any such doctrine mentioned or taught. In one setting (John 10:14-18), Jesus says,
14 “I am the good shepherd. I know my own and my own know me – 15 just as the Father knows me and I know the Father – and I lay down my life for the sheep. 16 I have other sheep that do not come from this sheepfold. I must bring them too, and they will listen to my voice, so that there will be one flock and one shepherd. 17 This is why the Father loves me – because I lay down my life, so that I may take it back again. 18 No one takes it away from me, but I lay it down of my own free will. I have the authority to lay it down, and I have the authority to take it back again. This commandment I received from my Father.”

Verse 16 is often used to ‘prove’ the heresy of various versions of God and or Jesus running about in human history, showing up in various forms and guises. One fellow seriously suggested it could indicate the existence of extra-terrestrial life. Actually, the statement simply indicates non-Jewish people were included. That’s all.

I personally don’t have any problem with extra-terrestrial life, or any of them being in Heaven. But it will be on the basis of an individual relationship with Jesus Christ.

I am also firmly convinced all the inhabitants of planet Earth will have adequate notice of the person and Deity of Jesus Christ. God is not the sort of being who looks for tiny excuses and ‘foot-faults’ to disqualify anyone from Heaven.

10. The question of whether or not hell is real is properly subsumed by the truth that a moment spent worrying if you’ll be with God in the afterlife is an opportunity missed to be with God in this life.

I agree. There is no point of wondering, let alone worrying, if Hell is real. Jesus talks about it too much to be in doubt. It isn’t pleasant, but it’s there. One is obliged to take note and do something to avoid residence.

11. God’s will and intention is to forgive and teach us, not to judge and punish us.

That is true, but only to a qualified extent. Jesus came to Earth as a mortal man to tell us what to do to avoid Eternal punishment and die in our place to pay the price for our sin. Obviously, God the Father was in on this plan as was the Holy Spirit.

God really does not want anyone to spend Eternity in Hell. However, since all mankind is in the default position of being in rebellion against God, mankind is by default condemned to Eternal Hell.

The words of Jesus in John, chapter three:
16 For this is the way God loved the world: He gave his one and only Son, so that everyone who believes in him will not perish but have eternal life. 17 For God did not send his Son into the world to condemn the world, but that the world should be saved through him. 18 The one who believes in him is not condemned. The one who does not believe has been condemned already, because he has not believed in the name of the one and only Son of God. 19 Now this is the basis for judging: that the light has come into the world and people loved the darkness rather than the light, because their deeds were evil. 20 For everyone who does evil deeds hates the light and does not come to the light, so that their deeds will not be exposed. 21 But the one who practices the truth comes to the light, so that it may be plainly evident that his deeds have been done in God.
God is loving and concerned. God is simultaneously honest and just. God is God and that means – in a long list of other things – He will always conduct Himself as God and be true to His own nature.

There are also a number of references warning that when Jesus returns – ‘The Second Coming’ – He will in fact judge all people according to their alliances.

12. The only person who should be actively endeavoring to convert non-Christians into Christians is God. Jesus does not need our help drawing people towards him. He does need, or could certainly use, our help in making sure that people know that they are, just as they are, loved.

This statement directly contradicts the command of Jesus.

Matthew 28:16-20
16 So the eleven disciples went to Galilee to the mountain Jesus had designated. 17 When they saw him, they worshiped him, but some doubted. 18 Then Jesus came up and said to them, “All authority in heaven and on earth has been given to me. 19 Therefore go and make disciples of all nations, baptizing them in the name of the Father and the Son and the Holy Spirit, 20 teaching them to obey everything I have commanded you. And remember, I am with you always, to the end of the age

Acts 1
6 So when they had gathered together, they began to ask him, “Lord, is this the time when you are restoring the kingdom to Israel?” 7 He told them, “You are not permitted to know the times or periods that the Father has set by his own authority. 8 But you will receive power when the Holy Spirit has come upon you, and you will be my witnesses in Jerusalem, and in all Judea and Samaria, and to the farthest parts of the earth.” 9 After he had said this, while they were watching, he was lifted up and a cloud hid him from their sight.

First Peter 3
15 But set Christ apart as Lord in your hearts and always be ready to give an answer to anyone who asks about the hope you possess. (“Hope” here meaning the expectation of Eternal life with God.)

So in this statement again, the concept is not ‘un-fundamentalist’ but ‘un-Christian’.

13. Getting a divorce is painful, and if at all possible should certainly be avoided. But ultimately the act in and of itself is not immoral.

This statement flatly contradicts Jesus’ teaching on the subject.

Matthew 5
31 “It was said, ‘Whoever divorces his wife must give her a legal document.’ 32 But I say to you that everyone who divorces his wife, except for immorality, makes her commit adultery, and whoever marries a divorced woman commits adultery.

Matthew 19
3 Then some Pharisees came to him in order to test him. They asked, “Is it lawful to divorce a wife for any cause?” 4 He answered, “Have you not read that from the beginning the Creator made them male and female, 5 and said, ‘For this reason a man will leave his father and mother and will be united with his wife, and the two will become one flesh’? 6 So they are no longer two, but one flesh. Therefore what God has joined together, let no one separate.” 7 They said to him, “Why then did Moses command us to give a certificate of dismissal and to divorce her?” 8 Jesus said to them, “Moses permitted you to divorce your wives because of your hard hearts, but from the beginning it was not this way. 9 Now I say to you that whoever divorces his wife, except for immorality, and marries another commits adultery.” 10 The disciples said to him, “If this is the case of a husband with a wife, it is better not to marry!”11 He said to them, “Not everyone can accept this statement, except those to whom it has been given. 12 For there are some eunuchs who were that way from birth, and some who were made eunuchs by others, and some who became eunuchs for the sake of the kingdom of heaven. The one who is able to accept this should accept it.”

So yes, Jesus said divorce is an immoral act, save for the cause of adultery. Even then, the divorced man or woman is limited in options.

14. God does not want any woman “submitting” to anyone.

Another direct contradiction of Biblical teaching.

Ephesians 5
22 Wives, submit to your husbands as to the Lord, 23 because the husband is the head of the wife as also Christ is the head of the church – he himself being the savior of the body. 24 But as the church submits to Christ, so also wives should submit to their husbands in everything. 25 Husbands, love your wives just as Christ loved the church and gave himself for her 26 to sanctify her by cleansing her with the washing of the water by the word, 27 so that he may present the church to himself as glorious – not having a stain or wrinkle, or any such blemish, but holy and blameless. 28 In the same way husbands ought to love their wives as their own bodies. He who loves his wife loves himself.

Colossians 3
18 Wives, submit to your husbands, as is fitting in the Lord. 19 Husbands, love your wives and do not be embittered against them.

Oh, wait! That’s that questionable Paul again! Since Paul is so very questionable, we can ignore much of his writings – especially the parts about moral conduct, sexual misconduct and general carryings-on.

First Peter 3
1 In the same way, wives, be subject to your own husbands. Then, even if some are disobedient to the word, they will be won over without a word by the way you live, 2 when they see your pure and reverent conduct… like Sarah who obeyed Abraham, calling him lord. You become her children when you do what is good and have no fear in doing so. 7 Husbands, in the same way, treat your wives with consideration as the weaker partners and show them honor as fellow heirs of the grace of life. In this way nothing will hinder your prayers.

That’s the summation of Peter the Apostle. He agrees with Paul the suspect.

15. There were no dinosaurs on Noah’s ark; Jesus didn’t have a pet stegosaurus. An all-powerful God and the theory of evolution are not incompatible.

Whooop! Whooop! Whooop! Strawman Alert!
So, just where do we find claims of dinosaurs on Noah’s Ark? Which gospel contains the story of Jesus and His pet stegosaurus? What kind of hairball ploy is this?

Okay, “An all-powerful God and the theory of evolution are not incompatible.” That part is reasonable enough. However, this isn’t a matter of doctrinal distinction; it’s a matter of textual examination.

Dinosaurs on the Ark? Sheesh.

16. The single most telling indicator of a person’s moral character has nothing to do with how they define or worship God, and everything to do with how they treat others.

So, a relationship with God isn’t important; what is important is ‘good deeds’.

Actually, this is a deceptive argument; somewhat strawman in nature. I’ll agree one’s ‘moral character’ is not always dependent on how one defines or worships God. However, one’s moral character has nothing to do with one’s Eternal estate, being in a proper relationship with God and spending Eternity with God in Heaven.

One can be a rotten skunk and be bound for Heaven, or a very decent, clean, honest and honorable person going to Hell.

I know for a fact that my moral character was – for that matter ‘is’ – not always as good and shining as it ought to be. After becoming a Christian, I have sinned grievously, often and cheerfully. But my eternal destination is already secure and in Jesus’ care. As far as God is concerned in Judgment, I am as pure as Jesus.

Which is not to say I’m content in my life that way, or at peace with God. I found I was a jittery, angry, depressed, unsettled maniac; at least some combination of two or three of those. I can hide it well, but it’s there and I am very aware of it.

What happens is this: God works on me to make me into who – the type of person – He wants me to be, fit for Heaven in Eternity.

To conclude:

“Un-fundamentalists” accept the Deity, Sacrifice, Resurrection and Redemptive nature and power of Jesus Christ. However, they also believe God has appeared in other forms and guises, seemingly revealing other versions of Himself. So Jesus really isn’t uniquely God at all.

“Un-fundamentalists” deny the Divinely Inspired nature of the Bible, strip Paul’s writing of authority and accept homosexual misconduct – and by inference, heterosexual misconduct – as both normal and moral.

“Un-fundamentalists” claim the goal of Christianity is to live a good life; ‘good’ being defined by not offending anyone, getting along with all and ignoring Biblical principles if adherence would cause a row.

“Un-fundamentalists” believe Christians should not vote in accordance with Biblical principles. Nor should laws follow the long held traditions of either Judaism or Christianity.

“Un-fundamentalists” do not assume responsibility for evangelism; in fact, evangelism is discouraged.

“Un-fundamentalists” believe God never criticizes or judges human conduct. They believe there is no Hell. After all, God isn’t going to punish anyone for anything anyway.

All things considered, “Un-fundamentalist Christian” is not a properly descriptive phrase. Citing the serious theological and doctrinal differences between this cult and mainstream Christianity, I would suggest perhaps “Nearly Christian” would be a better description. Since the first tenet does recognize Jesus as God, perhaps “Barely Christian” would do.

Now, I know some bright soul is going to jump on me with the Biblical injunction of “Judge not, lest ye be judged”. The statement comes in Matthew 7, starting with the beginning of the chapter. The whole paragraph reads as follows:

1 “Do not judge so that you will not be judged. 2 For by the standard you judge you will be judged, and the measure you use will be the measure you receive. 3 Why do you see the speck in your brother’s eye, but fail to see the beam of wood in your own? 4 Or how can you say to your brother, ‘Let me remove the speck from your eye,’ while there is a beam in your own? 5 You hypocrite! First remove the beam from your own eye, and then you can see clearly to remove the speck from your brother’s eye. 6 Do not give what is holy to dogs or throw your pearls before pigs; otherwise they will trample them under their feet and turn around and tear you to pieces.

This whole speech is addressed at being judgmental of other people in regard to their fitness or standing before God. I am not ‘judging’ any person, but a set of beliefs and how they measure up to Christianity, I am not violating any injunction. Indeed, I am following a warning given by John the Revelator in First John 4:

1 Dear friends, do not believe every spirit, but test the spirits to determine if they are from God, because many false prophets have gone out into the world. 2 By this you know the Spirit of God: Every spirit that confesses Jesus as the Christ who has come in the flesh is from God, 3 but every spirit that does not confess Jesus is not from God, and this is the spirit of the antichrist, which you have heard is coming, and now is already in the world.

So I am testing this ‘spirit’, this claim of revelation of God. I find interesting that tenet 1 claims to recognize Jesus as the Son of God in the Flesh, and then denies Jesus’ Deity in most of the subsequent tenets.

Bay Area Guy #racist occidentinvicta.com

For years, I have extensively discussed race, diversity, and immigration. However, this is my first time writing about whites in South Africa (or any part of Africa), who are increasingly beleaguered. On account of government proposals to confiscate white-owned land and redistribute the seized land to black South Africans, various white nationalists have rallied behind their white African brothers. Many even assert that white South Africans face an impending genocide.

To be blunt, while I remain a reasonably tribal white person who’s concerned about my people, I don’t really care too much about white South Africans. For starters, I’m primarily focused on the well-being of white people in North America (where I reside) and Europe (my ancestral homelands). Also, given what I’ve written about immigration, landlordism, and economic rent, it’s hard to feel an abundance of sympathy for Afrikaners. While I can relate to white South Africans under siege, I also empathize with blacks who claim that whites are living off of ill-gotten land rent.

Of course, many would point out that white Americans also settled and conquered their way to prosperity. Afrikaners might even claim that the only difference between them and white Americans is that the former didn’t exterminate or ethnically cleanse the native populations, which is why they remain a minority. So who are we to judge?

Just to clarify, I’m not judging; I’m only being consistent. If we refuse to shed tears over the struggles of non-whites who choose to reside in white countries, then we can’t hypocritically champion white South Africans who carved out territory in black Africa. Likewise, if whites in the US, Canada, and Australia foolishly allow themselves to become politically powerless and hated minorities, then they won’t deserve much sympathy either. The world is a mean and tribal place, and if groups relinquish power in lands they previously settled and conquered, nobody will save them from themselves.

Fortunately, I think there’s a pragmatic and humane solution that could benefit everyone. If white South Africans’ situation is indeed as dire as white nationalists contend, then they might be rendered refugees. In that case, they should flee to their ancestral homelands in Europe, or perhaps other majority white countries These nations would receive a demographic boost, along with relatively educated and skilled workers. In turn, African refugees who’ve flocked to Europe can take the Afrikaners’ place down south. Since conventional wisdom dictates that immigration is an unalloyed good, South Africa would benefit from more workers and cultural enrichment – along with ridding themselves of the white problem. Never mind that there’s already been immigration from Zimbabwe and other African countries, and that this influx has engendered friction and violence. Black South Africans just need to appreciate diversity’s wonders!

Okay, sarcasm aside, I recognize that this is an unrealistic scenario. I also realize that the process would be painful and messy. Nevertheless, should the day come when white South Africans are compelled to flee, this proposal will remain on the table.

Jesse Powell #fundie donotlink.com

Immediately after my conversion to patriarchy around 1995 I became aware that feminists, meaning the culture at large and almost all women in general, would resist my effort to recreate the 1950s ideal of family life for myself as an individual. This filled me with a great rage against feminists. The feminists were bent on destroying me completely; first they messed up my parents so that they would be selfishly oriented and not focused on my developmental needs as a child and as a future man. This is why I was particularly weak in my social skills and why I didn’t see what my positive purpose in relation to women was. Then the feminist culture in general tried to suppress my strength as a man telling me I was an “oppressor” if I showed strength in relation to women. So my particular weakness due to my parents neglecting my social needs combined with the globally imposed feminist culture telling me I should be weak as a man and I was obligated to make myself weak as a man in order to avoid “oppressing” women led to my strength level being so low that it was pretty much impossible for me to get women to be romantically interested in me. This was entirely feminism’s fault because feminism is what led my parents to be selfishly oriented and to neglect my needs as a child and a future man and feminism was responsible for the general cultural message that men were the oppressors of women and so men should weaken themselves in order to avoid oppressing women.

Finally as a young adult I figured out a way to escape from the universal rejection by women feminism imposed upon me; that being 1950s style male breadwinner patriarchy. The problem however was that me embracing 1950s style patriarchy I knew would lead to hostility and push back and that the whole culture and legal system was designed to make traditional family life fail and be unworkable for the purpose of promoting and elevating the feminist version of family life; the feminist version of family life and its associated cultural messages being what plunged me into my failure with women in the first place. So before my conversion to patriarchy I was too weak for women to be interested in me; after my conversion to patriarchy my goal was to be stronger than what the feminists wanted me to be with all sorts of roadblocks and danger and discrimination against me as a man being set up by the feminists for the purpose of weakening me and undermining me because the feminists deemed me to be “too strong” and therefore an oppressor of women with me not going along with their “gender equality” script; “gender equality” being simply female supremacy in practice.

So immediately after my conversion to patriarchy a great rage in me developed against feminists because I could see feminists were bent on destroying me as a newly emerging patriarchal man just like they had already dedicated themselves to destroying me as a child and a young adult by making me too weak to appeal to women before hand. There was no escape from feminist tyranny and feminism’s goal was to destroy my capacity to form relationships with women no matter what I did. So the first 2 years after my conversion to patriarchy I focused my energies on figuring out all the different ways feminism messed up society and developing a general plan in my mind about how patriarchy could be reintroduced and how feminism could be eventually destroyed and overcome.

One might ask themselves; after seeing that patriarchy would get a lot of resistance from the culture and that it might prove unworkable and impractical for myself as an individual why didn’t I try to pursue the middle level of strength feminists and the women around me wanted from me and that would produce a reasonable level of success with women consistent with the average level of success with women among men in general? Why did I start out being too weak as a man and then go to the opposite extreme of being “too strong” trying to be like a man from the 1950s and then refuse to “go to the middle” like the society and the women around me wanted me to do?

The answer to this question is that once I saw that patriarchy would work as a way of attracting women and would be good for children I saw the 1950s man as being a good man, a morally good man, and that the 1990s man others wanted me to become was a bad man by comparison because he did not care for women like the 1950s man did and he did not provide to his children a mother to look after their needs full time like the 1950s man did. The 1950s man was objectively better than the 1990s man so of course I was going to choose to be like the 1950s man regardless of the fact that the culture around me and the women around me wanted me to be a 1990s man rather than a 1950s man at that time. Since the 1950s man was objectively superior to the 1990s man if the women around me wanted me to be a 1990s man that meant the women around me were bad, that they wanted me to be a bad man because they were bad themselves. If the culture around me wanted me to be a 1990s man and not a 1950s man that meant the culture around me was bad. Of course it was already clearly established that the culture around me was bad because the culture is what made my parents what they were and the culture is what told me to weaken myself as a man so that no woman would ever want me.

Jon Rappoport #quack #wingnut #conspiracy lewrockwell.com

COVID Trauma-Based Mind Control

“Can we get control of an individual to the point where he will do our bidding against his will and even against fundamental laws of nature, such as self preservation?” (CIA interdepartmental memo, Project ARTICHOKE, January 1952)

The covert operation called COVID, which has been planned for years, is all about trauma-based mind control.

The trauma combines fear of a germ with the sudden psychic shock of the lockdowns, the masks, the social distancing, the economic destruction.

For many people, this trauma is paralyzing on a subconscious level.

The government and media messaging about the “pandemic” was immediate, and it was launched as a wall-to-wall campaign. News reports, ads, public service announcements, talk shows, newspaper articles, press conferences, etc. No room was permitted for counter-opinion and evidence or intelligent discussion and debate. The messaging flood plays a major role in the trauma effect.

In a state of subconscious paralysis, people obey. They follow orders. They sleep-walk. They even, on top of the layer of paralysis, actively defend the powers-that-be.

A nation asleep. A world asleep.

—This would be the time for a political leader to step forward and address the people, in order to wake them up—first, by directing them to look around and see the unconscionable economic and, therefore, human wreckage.

This leader, this president, would describe in sufficient detail the horrendous situation: job loss, business closures, bankruptcies, suicides, murders, broken families. The national engine of production, shut down. The “cure worse than the disease.” Far worse.

Then the leader would rally the nation with a plan for recovery. This would be a further wake-up call. For example, for a start, the creation of a million jobs, to repair the crumbling national infrastructure. Roads, highways, bridges, canals.

Trauma and paralysis need “a reverse vector.” Supplied with great energy and conviction.

We see none of that. Political leaders are mainly timid and brainless—when they aren’t forcing more restrictive measures on the people.

Perhaps the political leader with the most swagger and counter-consensus attitude—in the still most powerful nation in the world—is Donald Trump. Is he waking up the country? Is he stepping to the podium and laying bare the economic devastation that has been leveled at the people? Is he voicing a plan for recovery?

No.

WHAT IS WRONG WITH THAT PICTURE?

Most people see, in his maddening and conspicuous lack of real leadership, nothing unusual, because they are still in the middle of the trauma and the shock.

But there is “plenty of unusual.” A leader who doesn’t lead. A leader who, in a time of crisis, when leadership means so much, doesn’t step up.

THAT is unusual. That is madness.

Now, add this: the Stockholm Syndrome. People under rule by edict and force will often develop an attachment to their oppressors. Loyalty. Even a perverse love.

Why? Because they see no other option.

And because, on a subconscious level, the whole surreal world they are now living in makes no sense at all unless their rulers are doing the right thing.
Therefore, their leaders must be right. They have to be right.

The governors and mayors have to be right. Even the president, in doing nothing substantial, is right.

Of course, the loss of job and business and money is also paralyzing in the extreme. The government prescription seems to be: WAIT. Keep living on Welfare and bailout until the money runs out or until the crisis is declared over.

All in all, many people are subconsciously asking this question: would I rather wake up and therefore see the mass insanity all around me, or would I prefer to stay asleep and follow orders and pretend that is the best course of action? They choose the second option.

Waking up means the individual is living life at a new and different level. It means seeing the truth. It’s the first step to coming up with a strategy for dealing with the reality that has been imposed.

Not waking up means living in a state of conformity, accepting official statements and orders, following those orders, fitting in, acting normal, adjusting, behaving according to stimulus-response.

Re quarantine, isolation, social distancing, wearing masks: “We did not know what the Russian [brainwashing] procedures were, but it seemed that they were producing some peculiar changes of attitude. How? One possible factor was perceptual isolation and we concentrated on that.” (Donald Hebb, Sensory Deprivation: A Symposium Held at Harvard Medical School. Cambridge, MA, Harvard University Press, 1961)

John Q Citizen would say: “But I have to believe the quarantines, the isolation, the lockdowns, the distancing, the masks…they’re all happening so we can contain the virus. If I stop believing that, things would look very different. And I don’t want thing to look very different.”

Re the use of fake official science as mind control: “Brainwashing is a system of befogging the brain so a person can be seduced into acceptance of what otherwise would be abhorrent to him. He loses touch with reality…However, in order to prevent people from recognizing the inherent evils in brainwashing, the Reds [Communists] pretend that it is only another name for something already very familiar and of unquestioned respect, such as education or reform.” (Edward Hunter, Brainwashing. New York: Pyramid Books. 1956)

Re the recruitment of citizens to operate as contact tracers in a wide-ranging program: “Brainwashing is defined as an observable set of transactions between a charismatically-structured collectivity and an isolated agent of the collectivity with the goal of transforming the agent into a deployable agent.” (Thomas Robbins, ‎Benjamin David Zablocki, Misunderstanding Cults, 2001)

COVID IS A MASS MIND CONTROL PROGRAM.

Jon Rappoport #quack #wingnut #conspiracy lewrockwell.com

Perhaps the political leader with the most swagger and counter-consensus attitude—in the still most powerful nation in the world—is Donald Trump. Is he waking up the country? Is he stepping to the podium and laying bare the economic devastation that has been leveled at the people? Is he voicing a plan for recovery?

No.

WHAT IS WRONG WITH THAT PICTURE?

Most people see, in his maddening and conspicuous lack of real leadership, nothing unusual, because they are still in the middle of the trauma and the shock.

But there is “plenty of unusual.” A leader who doesn’t lead. A leader who, in a time of crisis, when leadership means so much, doesn’t step up.

THAT is unusual. That is madness.

Now, add this: the Stockholm Syndrome. People under rule by edict and force will often develop an attachment to their oppressors. Loyalty. Even a perverse love.

Why? Because they see no other option.

And because, on a subconscious level, the whole surreal world they are now living in makes no sense at all unless their rulers are doing the right thing.

Therefore, their leaders must be right. They have to be right.

The governors and mayors have to be right. Even the president, in doing nothing substantial, is right.

Of course, the loss of job and business and money is also paralyzing in the extreme. The government prescription seems to be: WAIT. Keep living on Welfare and bailout until the money runs out or until the crisis is declared over.

a-virgin-nigger-2 #sexist reddit.com

Asexual femoids do not exist. They are all degenerate whores waiting for Chad to prance along and fuck them. Femshits only claim to be asexual when they're in an environment full of subhumans. I remember one of my classmates who was your typical Stacy back in High School who claimed to be asexual. Our class was full of balding, skinny frame, subhuman faced ethnics (it was an AP class), me being the most subhuman of them all. The incels would all ask her out, whiteknight her, beta orbit her, trying to do anything to quench their thirsty asses. They were low inhib as fuck.

This femshit was obviously disgusted by our presence and would use all the cuckcels for homework, assignments and shit. Anyway, the next year she went to the US for college and I heard rumours that she was the biggest slut in the school. I mean fucking every guy she can at parties, sucking off strangers, getting pissed drunk and giving handjobs for free drinks and other degenerate activities. The once asexual moved to an environment full of Chad and Tyrone athletes and became the biggest slut known to man. Asexual femshits are the most degenerate of them all.

[various commenters] #conspiracy goodmath.org

[Submitters note: The following quotes are from the comment section on the linked blog post. More examples of crackpottery are quoted in the article itself. I've also done some serious snipping of quotes because they're pretty long, and any text in square brackets is added by me.]


Liddz: Traditional Pi = 3.141592653589793 is also false because infinite polygons cannot exist. A Polygon by definition is a plane figure that can fit into a circle with a limited amount of sides. Fractal geometry with the help of computer software has proven that it does not matter how many times we divide the circumference of a circle into different sections gaps will always exist upon the circumference when the curve of the circle is magnified and we zoom in to look as close as we can

[...]

Traditional Pi is good and okay if you are not worried about accuracy, but if you really want to get scientific then you will have to use the Kepler right triangle method for getting Pi and that method is simple and can be done in just 5 minutes or even less than 5 minutes and does not require a super computer with spread sheets

[...]

Traditional Pi is both irrational and transcendental so we cannot use traditional Pi to square the circle but Golden Pi 3.144605511029693 is irrational but Golden Pi 3.144605511029693 is not transcendental:

4th dimensional equation/polynomial for Golden Pi = 3.144605511029693 (x4 + 16×2 – 256 = 0).

[...]

Please read the following article from a web link to confirm that 3.144 allow us to create perfect circles: The Great Pi conspiracy part 1: http://www.veteranstoday.com/2015/02/05/pi/
The Great Pi conspiracy part 2: http://www.veteranstoday.com/2015/10/06/pi2/


Yo Soy: What is the mean interest in hiding the true value of Pi?

There are BIG interests that oppose to a corrected value of Pi.

1. Khazar academic mafia does not want the freedom for humanity.
2. A corrected Pi collides with the interests of the oil industry and the Khazarian control of petrodollar.

When PI be corrected humanity will discover an endless source of energy that will liberate humanity from slavery and the dependence to other energy sources.

The number Pi have be maliciously obfuscated to prevent the close of a cycle to some energetic resonance phenomenon which will take humanity to an ENERGETIC GOLDEN AGE and the conquest of deep space.

TRUE VALUE OF PI:

Pi = 3.14460551102969... [cut for length]

REMEMBER THIS PURSUED NUMBER ABOVE.


[the next quote is the reply by the blog's author to Yo Soy]
markcc: In recent years, every mathematical crackpot seems to make random claims like yours, about how their better math will solve all of the worlds problems and give us the key to free energy.

So please, explain how, if the value of p is off by less than 1%, correcting that will somehow produce free energy.

Further, explain to me how, exactly, every company in the world that produces round products hasn’t noticed that they’re using *more* material than their calculations say they should?

Answer those two, and maybe, just maybe, I’ll spend a couple more minutes looking at your rubbish.

Until then, stop wasting my time.


[and a reply to markcc's comment]
Kurt: It would bring humanity into a new computing era where we could algebraically determine the value of key trigonometric functions. Essentially if you have ever used MatLab you would know the program takes a while to compute things and needs a lot of computing power because it has to run intense calculus and trigonometric functions to arrive at values. By making Pi algebraic as Phi it would simplify all of math.


unknown: you are absolutely right on this , understanding of the circle would lead humanity to understanding of the universe … you are right that , this brainwash is work of the cabal … i just add and vatican to … but this ratio is wrong …. circle has a finite circumference , that’s why it is wrong … this guy who wrote this article is missing one thing to .. our decimal math has nothing to do with nature and geometry .. and for example he has not knowledge that the most important formulas like C=2pi*r and A=pi*r^ have not proofs in geometry , he is just another brainwashed zombie and doesn’t understand that calculus is based on Pi , not Pi on calculus …. our Pi is wrong,no doubt about that ..but Jain Pi is wrong to … i recommend to watch this ..


Barba truco (@barba_truco): Why does a helpless book (the book of jain pi) makes to tremble your archaic mathematics foundation in such a way!?

Even you wrote rivers of paragraph trying to circularize the book of jain-pi.

That means that this book is true.


Kaliman: I can see fear and rage on words against Jain… why ? there is no need… you may not agree… but in a friendly way… that anger just demonstrates fear, or even envy. I really appreciate Jain’s works. And finally.. if he’s wrong…that’s it… he is wrong.. what’s the big deal ? but if he is right …. then I can bet this rage will multiply itself… for some period of time… then it will disappear… ignorance and rage have natural and implicit limits.

Chris Roberts #racist amren.com

Black Stranglehold on Democrat Party Dooms Bernie Sanders

Pat Buchanan put it bluntly in one of his recent columns: “Consider the most loyal of Democrat constituents in presidential elections: African Americans. They are 13 percent of the electorate but a fourth of the national Democrat vote.” That share may not seem like much, but in a crowded field for the presidential nomination, blacks are can play kingmaker, especially because more than any other group, they vote as a bloc. In general elections, blacks vote Democrat at rates never lower than 80 percent, and sometimes much higher, and during the party’s nomination process, blacks still vote together. In the 2016 race for the nomination, 75.9 percent of blacks voted for Hillary Clinton. The white vote was split almost exactly down the middle: 48.9 percent for Mrs. Clinton and 49.1 percent for Mr. Bernie Sanders.

In 2008, unsurprisingly, Barack Obama beat Hillary Clinton among blacks by eight — and sometimes nine — to one. Vox noted that “Obama won every primary in the eight states where more than 20 percent of the population is black.” This included the very important early state of South Carolina. The nomination fight was very close; Mr. Obama beat Mrs. Clinton by less than half a million out of over 35 million votes. Hispanics supported Mrs. Clinton over Mr. Obama almost two to one.

This means that in 2008, black voters – all by themselves – kept Mrs. Clinton from winning the nomination, and eight years later they guaranteed her victory. To win the Democrat nomination, a candidate has to carry the black vote.

This makes the race hard for political outsiders, or even ordinary politicians who aren’t very well known by blacks. Mayor Pete Buttigieg is an example. He is a young, moderate who was in the military, and has earned plenty of support and attention from important media. But he was almost unheard of on a national level before 2019, and despite campaigning hard for months, blacks do not care for him. Politico put it bluntly in a recent article: “‘On life support’: Buttigieg’s struggles with black voters threaten his candidacy.” Its opening paragraphs explain:

Over the past month and a half, he has invested more money advertising in South Carolina, where a majority of Democrats are African American, than any of the non-billionaire Democrats running for president. . . . But the more than $2 million Buttigieg poured into TV and radio ads, some featuring black supporters touting the former South Bend (Ind.) mayor, hasn’t budged his stubbornly low poll numbers in the state — 2 percent among African American Democrats in a recent Fox News poll.

Last November, Michael Harriot, a black writer at The Root, wrote an article called, “Pete Buttigieg Is a Lying MF” — MF stands for “Mother Fucker.” Mr. Harriot wrote about how hard it is to be black and poor in the United States, and suggested that Mr. Buttigieg knows this, but lies about it. In response, the white presidential candidate called the author on the phone in hopes of mollifying him. Mr. Harriot then wrote a column about the conversation, saying he still couldn’t be sure how honest Mr. Buttigieg was, concluding, “The only thing I actually know about Pete Buttigieg is that he is a white man.”

Two months later, “Mayor Pete” has spent about one million dollars for each percentage-point gain in black support in South Carolina. Ethnomasochism rarely impresses non-whites — especially blacks — but Mr. Buttigieg doesn’t have a choice if he wants the nomination. For whatever reason, blacks do not like Mr. Buttigieg, who desperately needs them; all he can do is grovel and buy ads.

Mr. Sanders, whose consistent democratic socialist principles have inspired millions, faces the same problem. His support among blacks has never been high, and South Carolina polls suggest he has not made much progress. Vice President Joe Biden has a commanding lead, at 36.5 percent, with Mr. Sanders a distant second, at 16.2 percent. Meanwhile, in Iowa Mr. Sanders trails Mr. Biden by just 3.3 percent, and in New Hampshire Mr. Sanders is ahead of Mr. Biden by nearly 5 percent. Needless to say, the population of South Carolina is very different from that of New Hampshire and Iowa.

All the same, Mr. Sanders’s popularity has frightened many within the Democrat Party who think he’s a dangerous radical. But the anti-Sanders wing needn’t worry; there is one thing they can, and very well may, do that will certainly torpedo him: have Barack Obama endorse Joe Biden.

If this happens, whatever support Sen. Sanders has among blacks will evaporate and keep it well below 10 percent. As shown earlier, monolithic black support for Mr. Obama in 2008 won him the nomination, and in the general election, 95 percent voted for him. In 2012, 93 percent of blacks voted for Mr. Obama. Throughout his presidency, black approval always stayed above 80 percent — and was sometimes double that of Americans as a whole. Most blacks will do what Mr. Obama tells them.

By all accounts, Mr. Obama is not a fan of Mr. Sanders, and rumors have been swirling for months that he may step in to ensure that the Vermont Senator does not get the nomination. As CNBC reported in November:

Former President Barack Obama on Friday warned Democratic primary candidates to avoid leaning too far left in their campaigns, and raised concerns that certain liberal policy proposals on health care and immigration might have gone further than public opinion. In an unusual address to a room of wealthy Democratic donors, Obama urged Democratic candidates to be pragmatic in their messages to voters. While he didn’t mention any specific presidential primary candidate or proposal, Obama warned that the average American voter does not align with views from ‘certain left-leaning Twitter feeds or the activist wing of our party.’

He was obviously talking about Bernie Sanders.

So although Mr. Sanders inspires millions of whites to get involved in politics, he has a fatal weakness. If he wins Iowa and New Hampshire, Mr. Obama will almost certainly endorse Mr. Biden, and the Sanders campaign will almost immediately lose any chance of victory.

Mr. Obama’s power will not fade any time soon. He is young for a former President: only 58. Assuming he lives to be 80, he has another 22 years to play kingmaker within the Democrat Party, and there is no countervailing force. Former Presidents Jimmy Carter and Bill Clinton are older, white, and less popular. Flouting the wishes of blacks within the party would require a candidate that brings together most whites and most Hispanics. It’s not impossible, but not likely.

Today, many white progressives are full of hope that Mr. Sanders can fight the media elites and the Davos class within their party and win. But for all their hatred of big business, the military-industrial complex, and special interest groups, what most stands in their way is the fact that blacks, unlike whites, vote as a group. To fix that problem they’ll need more than socialism.

DancingWithDarkness #fundie reddit.com

Of all the races, Native Americans are the most poorly adapted to modernity. Despite reasonably high intelligence, complex social structures, and having a unique, thriving culture, they never built any kind of civilization. In fact, their entire bloodline up until the arrival of whites, was about impermanence, not leaving any kind of permanent mark on the land. We need attitude now, and its entirely feasible to draw up laws that place large amount of land under reservation control, so that it isn't eaten up by corporations. In an ethnostate, you would have to simultaneously increase their sovereignty, as well as dependence on the US. For example, they need to have a solid, federal education system on the reservation in order to be able to move between and function in the two entities. The Red's love of and dependence on alcohol is even greater than that of the Celt, so increased federal DEA presence is a necessity. Likewise, you'd have to modify or complete get rid of certain laws that allow corporations to take advantage of things like imminent domain and tax evasion.

Steven R. #fundie simplychristian.referata.com

Sermon 9: Modest Dressing

By Bro. Steven R.

1 Timothy 2:9 “In like manner also, that women adorn themselves in modest apparel, with shamefacedness and sobriety; not with broided hair, or gold, or pearls, or costly array”

Deuteronomy 22:5 “The woman shall not wear that which pertaineth unto a man, neither shall a man put on a woman's garment: for all that do so are abomination unto the Lord thy God.”

Let’s talk about an important issue. I witnessed a “Christian conference” at a nearby college campus where women were wearing daisy dukes and crop tops that exposed their bellies or low cut shirts that exposed their breasts! I also saw a man in a dress!! This was some Episcopalian or ELCA thing so I shouldn’t be surprised but they claim that they are doing this in the name of Christ! Have these liberal Hillary lovers ever even picked up their bibles? Do their pastors approve of this sultry dressing and cross dressing? If they do, these pastors will be judged even more severely in Hell if they are actively promoting this nonsense in the name of our Lord Jesus Christ and leading these young adults to Hell!!!!!!!

What on earth are these people thinking? These men were wearing shorts as well and tank tops even though God hath commanded His people to dress modestly! No $500 watches, no $750 iPhone XR, no $300 Nintendo Switch, no $2,000 necklace, give your money to your local church instead of these multinational companies that exploit laborers in China because China is an atheist godless nation that has zero concern for their fellow man due to following the secular religion of Marxism! Hypocrites!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

If you ever see this mockery of Christ in a Baptist church, leave! Never go back! They don’t have the saltiness that Christ wants and saith in Matthew!!!! No more lukewarm “Christianity” that accepts sodomites and transsexuals and whores and drunkards and thieves and liars! It ends now! Don’t tolerate it any further! “Mainline Protestantism” and the “non-denominational” movement are shams meant to trick unwitting people to Hell! Get yourself into a good IFB today if you truly are a saved person believing upon the Lord Jesus Christ!!!!

David G. Brown #fundie returnofkings.com

Hillary Clinton Pulls Out The Lie Book To Try And Stump The Trump At The First Presidential Debate

Monday night’s first Presidential debate, held at Hofstra University in New York, lacked some of the rhetorical fireworks between Donald Trump and Hillary Clinton that many had anticipated. Still, the performances of both candidates confirmed earlier assessments made by Return Of Kings. Republican nominee Trump highlighted how America is continuing to lose out economically, socially, and in terms of its national security to other states and organized groups, including ISIS. By contrast, Clinton deployed a series of diversions and straight-out lies to bait again those perennial victims brainwashed by Democrats over decades: millions of blacks, Hispanics, young people, and non-SJW women.

The First Presidential Debate: Hillary Clinton And Donald Trump (Full Debate) | NBC News

(starts at 26:00)

The problem with Clinton’s performance is that she relied on “zingers,” as the mainstream media calls them, which are considered factual and superb just because she says them. They are either inaccurate or, just as bad, banal platitudes about “justice,” “fairness,” and “equality.” These feel-good lines are devoid of either context or proof. Compare this to Trump, who zoomed in perfectly on the cancers afflicting the US: deference to rivals and enemies, failing to ask allies for proper support, and a basic refusal to act in the ways that are best for America.

Here are three key areas in which the Trump-Clinton divide was most prominent during last night’s debate:

Hillary can’t shake off her globalist past—and future

Trump astutely homed in on Hillary Clinton’s previous “gold standard” description of the toxic Trans-Pacific Partnership (TPP) “free trade” proposal, support which the Democratic nominee claimed to have backtracked on only months ago. He linked this praise to her fawning endorsement of NAFTA in the 1990s. NAFTA, as Trump pointed out, has led to the erosion of American manufacturing and the strange situation where Mexico is allowed to export its goods into America with much smaller financial barriers than the reverse. The TPP promises to do the same and, when it comes to US based-interests, will only benefit transnational corporations.

Clinton was unwilling to categorically rule out backing the TPP again if elected President and avoided criticizing Barack Obama for wanting it implemented. She also said nothing of substance in relation to combating China’s extremely anti-free trade behavior, most notably the constant devaluation of its currency. In the context of a $20 trillion US national debt and trade deficits that balloon ever more, the likely Democratic inaction on this front is alarming and only surrenders national, rather than corporate interests. What she did do was to try to placate those wanting a welfare state, promising things like “debt-free college” and a minimum wage rise. But how can those she will get the money from, “the wealthy,” pay for both these shopping items and simultaneously pay down the debt?

When the topic switched to terrorism, the Democratic nominee refrained from discussing how ISIS began its rise when she was Secretary of State, an inconvenient truth she was quickly reminded about. Expanding on this bad judgment point, Trump alluded to a related national security failure of the “experienced” Secretary Clinton: the United States’ persistent bankrolling of other states’ safety at the direct expense of its own. The whole point of NATO is that it is an alliance, but America always seems to foot the bill, just as it does in its relationship with Japan. In response, Hillary Clinton was unable—or simply refused—to articulate how this is either a desirable or affordable state of affairs. This is telling as nationalist vs. globalist arguments grow more salient within the current American political discourse.

Gender pay gap madness

Hillary Clinton unsurprisingly brought up the gender pay gap, a long-discredited myth that ignores how women, even those employed full-time, work on average less hours than men. This political fiction, one perpetually drawing in millions of self-victimized female voters and emasculated white knights, fails to acknowledge the greater presence of men in higher-skilled and therefore higher-paying industries as well.

Despite the certainty that this kind of argument would be raised, Clinton took it to a new, far more delusional level by suggesting that women deserve the same pay for inferior work. She claimed that Donald Trump “said women don’t deserve equal pay unless they do as good a job as men.” He actually did not say this, as a fact check used in a [i]USA Today[/i] article illustrated months ago.

Yet even if he had made the statement, this is perhaps the least controversial soundbite, real or imagined, that anyone has ever used to try and discredit Trump. The falsely attributed words are one hundred percent in line with the idea of “equal pay for equal work.” If your work is not of the same quality as your peer, you should not get equal pay. How, for example, is a junior female lawyer who brings in less clients and billable hours than her male counterpart deserving of equal pay? What Trump did say is that he favors paying employees based on performance.

Necessary corrections aside, Hillary Clinton’s line is merely a prelude to the affirmative action she will unleash upon the American economy if elected. Having already implied that women deserve equal pay even if their work and performance cannot be described as equal, expect concrete legislation that will force employers to hire women over men, irrespective of their credentials, socioeconomic backgrounds (preferential treatment allows many Middle American men to be leapfrogged by women from privileged families), and the real requirements of the job.

Race-baiting… again

Hillary Clinton reverted to re-peddling the tired old fantasy that 2016 is the new Jim Crow laws era. Forgetting that countless non-blacks are in jail for non-violent offences, too, she falsely portrayed African-Americans as the victims of police harassment and racist hysteria over crimes that are not murder, rape or serious assault. To boot, she pushed aside the higher involvement of blacks in violent felonies. Clinton further outlined how outright (white) racism, not certain cultural values and black-on-black brutality, purportedly explains almost every conceivable problem confronting African-Americans today. Plus, she did not ever call out the truly deplorable rioters in Charlotte, nor condemn overall the opportunistic troublemakers that comprise Black Lives Matter.

Trump absolutely schooled his opponent, however, when it came to the astounding rate of violence in Chicago, Clinton’s city of birth. In a metropolitan area where gun laws are amongst the most restrictive in the nation, black-on-black crime especially has decimated African-American communities. Clinton’s crude racial politics quickly became stuck and the candidate herself appeared to be flustered. After all, Chicago, which Trump was using as an example of the general malaise of crime found across the country, is controlled locally by Democrats, like most major cities.

The desperation of Hillary Clinton, a representative of a party which has failed America’s minorities and made them poorer, became evident when she mentioned a racial discrimination lawsuit, not a finding of guilt, brought against Trump forty years ago. With nothing to offer blacks and Hispanics, other than the same old dud policies on a national and municipal level, she had to invent a boogeyman to distract people.

But the media still lauded Clinton

Regardless of her cheap antics at the debate, almost every mainstream media editorial from CNN’s to the LA Times‘ waxed lyrical about Clinton’s supposedly epic performance on Monday night. That sycophancy will only grow from now until election day. But if takes so much concerted, stooge-like media support to help her win, what does that say about her as a candidate?

Right now, though, we should be both proud of and amazed at where Trump is at the moment. Only six months ago, people were bellowing that he would still lose the Republican nomination. He could never ever win, the experts said. Moreover, just a year ago, his candidacy was considered a laughing stock by elites and nearly all supporters of the Democrats.

So who’s laughing at Donald Trump now? Not many people, and certainly not a very concerned Hillary Clinton.

Dave Truesdale #racist #wingnut web.archive.org

(Basically, SF is for white, cis hetro males, by white, cis, hetero males. Anyone else is culturally appropriating it.)
The SF field has always been open to everyone at every level, so the basic anti-diversity claim from the Woke crowd is an outright lie. This has been pointed out to them on numerous occasions over the years, yet they persist in the lie, repeat it often and ever louder, thus revealing their own disingenuous nature, and all the while labeling anyone who disagrees with their viewpoint a racist, sexist, homophobe, because these are the tried and true strawmen guaranteed to shut down any argument.

They scream and holler about cultural appropriation when it comes to the white oppressors in SF, yet use smears and intimidation3 to aid in their attempts to appropriate (and thus balkanize–divide and conquer) the SF field in service to the lie born of the double helix comprised of their social/political agenda of non-diversity in the field.

Andrea Widburg #racist #sexist #wingnut americanthinker.com

Black Lives Matter reveals a generation of damaged straight, white women

The Black Lives Matter movement and the subsequent riots by Antifa, the Democrat party's domestic terrorist arm, have shown Americans what leftism is — an ugly combination of social and government coercion, racism, violence, and anti-Americanism. It's also revealed that the American left has been using American blacks as a vehicle for political power without any regard for actually improving black people's lives. Instead, the left destroys their communities and doubles down on damaging policies.

What few have pointed out, though, is the way BLM protests have revealed the damage that decades of leftist messaging have visited on straight, young, white women. To set the stage, here are some videos of the hysterical young white women who keep showing up in the front row of the Black Lives Matter movement, whether screaming at police, arguing with black people, rioting, or groveling:

White woman yelling at black officers

Those videos are just a fraction of the footage showing frenzied white women taking the lead in BLM. They are deeply involved in this movement and in the ugliest way possible — and therein lies a sad tale of the leftist takeover of straight, white women.

The root problem is that these women are receiving mixed messages that would make even the strongest person go crazy. Beginning in high school, or even earlier, they're told endlessly that they're both victim and oppressor.

These mixed messages make straight white girls distinct from other students. White boys are told they're evil, toxic oppressors of both women and minorities. It's an ugly message, but a consistent one. Boys lucky enough to have countervailing influences shake it off and become the men they should be. The boys who don't have better influences, interestingly enough, become feminized, even if they're not gay, as if trying to escape that awful toxic masculinity.

Meanwhile, everyone who is non-white and/or non-straight, whether male or female, or something else, is told that he, she, or it is a victim. White privilege, racism, homophobia, transgenderism, misogyny — all of them define how non-white and/or non-straight people suffer endlessly at the hands of straight whites.

And then there are the straight, white girls. On the one hand, they're...well, white and straight. That means they are evil oppressors who have benefited unfairly from white privilege. In the morality play that is leftism, they owe the world big-time. On the other hand, they're women, which means men have victimized them from time immemorial to the present.

That relationship with men is made more toxic by the fact that the young women are told simultaneously (a) that, as liberated women, they should be part of the hook-up culture and (b) that, as biological women, they're the victims of all men's rapacious, rapey sexuality. Given these mixed messages, it's no wonder that these confused young women willingly sleep with the guy at night and then accuse him of rape in the morning. Others avoid this confusion by embracing a trendy lesbianism.

These same women are also betrayed by the leftist culture's refusal to accept that motherhood is (a) biological destiny and (b) worthy insofar as creating and raising a human being does give meaning to life.

Once upon a time, women had no life choice other than motherhood. In a pre–free market, pre-industrial world, if one ignores the infinitesimally small number of wealthy women, any search for meaning in life was overwhelmed by the endless struggle to survive. Women didn't have time to compare their lives to men, especially because the men were also fighting for survival against the untamed forces of nature and other men.

With the industrial era and the development of free-market capitalism, things changed. In the West, ordinary people had time for leisure, contemplation, and the search for meaning.

That fundamental change led to the post-industrial, pre-modern cult of motherhood. Cornelia, Mother of the Gracchi, who lived in Rome in the Second Century B.C., leaped into prominence. People in the 18th and 19th centuries loved that, when catty friends asked why Cornelia wasn't wearing jewels, she pointed to her sons and said, "These are my jewels."

Today's young women are told to focus on a career. In college, though, they take liberal arts classes that don't prepare them for anything useful but do reinforce their status as both victims and oppressors. They leave college, uneducated and unskilled, which leads them to unfulfilling jobs. At those jobs, they work hard while dating frantically. When they find the right man, they get pregnant, drop out of the job market, and resent their husbands' careers. They take all the energy that was meant for their professional success and pour it into hyper-motherhood and activism. (See those raging Portland moms above.)

None of this is healthy; it is, instead, tragic. Straight white women hate themselves for being white; hate their men for being oppressors; hate their meaningless careers; and, even though they love their children, they hate the seeming meaninglessness of motherhood. This profound cognitive dissonance has finally found its most disturbing outlet in their shrill, existential screams on the streets of the Black Lives Matter protests.

Carmen #fundie wehuntedthemammoth.com

Oh man, the internet. Shit like “Teal Dear” and “kink shaming.” I am so done.

I was trying to respond to everyone’s comments. I specifically said to scroll down for your answer. Don’t read if you think it’s an off-colored fawn.

For the attention deficit generation: it is tough–and perhaps nigh impossible–to be a(llowed to be) a fully liberated, empowered sexual woman under patriarchy.

And yes, YES! Absolute kink-shaming of the kind of people who go into BDSM in order to abuse others. I never said that is everyone–at all–but that is what under discussion here (which I didn’t even bring up, btw, just responded to, agreeing with what another poster said).

Any of you oh-so-progressives who have bought the left-wing Kool-aid ever think you can shame the shamers? Hmmm? Like, I am not even allowed to give a criticism of the practice of BDSM, including all the rapists in it (and how they like to hide out in it, considering how murky consent issues can become), or the fact that excuse-making for hideously abusive practices makes it difficult to prosecute (mostly men) for domestic violence (’cause, like, someone women are into that)? You know the Supreme Court of the USA (which maybe you don’t live in, but I don’t really care) does not uphold “consent” as a justification for serious bodily injury?

I am not against ritualistic sexual practices that bring communities together, blow off some steam, and otherwise don’t harm anyone. And far from convinced that’s what the BSDM scene is.

We need more kink-shaming. And with that, I am out. This is why I am done with liberalism (not only the paralysis, but the reframing–of the oldest, most conservative stances, such as violence against women–i.e., “sex work” and “BDSM”–as liberal and progressive). It requires us to take something which should be intuitive and subject it to such scrutiny in order to please our liberal masters (yes, the fact that the vast majority of women in prostitution the world over report that they don’t like it should have NOTHING to do with the “sex work” empowerment movement, nor statistics surrounding violence and sex trafficking actually rising in prostitution with the impunity afforded by legalization…which legalizes pimps, madams, and people who are essentially traffickers too, as well as clients, not just the workers themselves…essentially the whole friggin’ industry…but nooooo, can’t start “shaming!” Then I am a SWERF! How long till I become a TERF? Can we somehow work the already painful acronym of BDSM into some-kind of critical-thought-shaming clever newfangled one?).

The left is so corrupt, as evidenced by this shit…it’s painful not only how it’s been so co-opted by those who would seek to uphold the oppression of patriarchal mores (and women’s place as sexual objects and objects of violence), but that it’s happened in the name of “feminism” and right under our noses. But then again, most leftists are the biggest hypocrites (well, along with neocons, right? Pretending to believe in stuff to sucker a voting base)? Man…I am so done with this kind of stuff. “Kink-shaming!” (You mean rapist-shaming? I think you’ll see that’s what I was doing, if you do a careful, high-school level re-read of that paragraph). Blargh.

No one has critical thinking skills anymore, and no one knows how to think outside the paradigm. It’s amazing…

Teal Deer! Teal Deer: It’s okay to criticize sacred leftist institutions like BDSM and the sex industry without being shamed for being a shamer (ha ha ha!). It’s impossible to make strides when the left is so intellectually bankrupt! And, it’s hard to be a sexually liberated woman in society, as much as we might wish it weren’t. We haven’t achieved the fantasy world where it’s possible yet for a woman (or possibly anyone) to be truly sexually liberated and not run into considerable trouble.

Goodbye, all!!! I am still super-sick, with no AC and no fridge and none of your lovely first-world amenities, so I am literally flaming…out.

Donald Trump #fundie theguardian.com

US refugee ban: Trump decried for 'stomping on' American values

Donald Trump is facing strong criticism from aid organisations after ending his first week as president with a ban on all Syrian refugees entering the US and a halt on arrivals from a string of predominantly Muslim countries.

The president signed an executive order to stop all refugee arrivals for four months – and Syrian arrivals indefinitely – on Friday, hours after meeting the British prime minister, Theresa May, and reportedly reaffirming his commitment to Nato.

The move, which he described as “extreme vetting” intended to “keep terrorists out”, was more severe than expected. It will amount to a de facto ban on Muslims traveling to the US from parts of the Middle East and north Africa by prioritising refugee claims “on the basis of religious-based persecution”.

The order has already reportedly blocked people from flying into US airports or clearing customs after arriving in the country. The Arab-American Anti-Discrimination Committee said people who had landed after the order was enacted at 4.30pm had been blocked and told they had to return to their point of origin.

Named the Protection of the Nation from Foreign Terrorist Entry into the United States, the order places a 90-day block on entry to the US from citizens from Iran, Iraq, Syria, Yemen, Sudan, Libya and Somalia. It is unclear whether the measure would apply to citizens of those countries on trips abroad who already have permission to live and work in the US.

The order also caps the total number of refugees entering the US in 2017 to 50,000, less than half the previous year’s figure of 117,000.

The United Nations refugee agency (UNHCR) and International Organization for Migration (IOM) called on the Trump administration to continue offering asylum to people fleeing war and persecution, saying its resettlement programme was vital.

“The needs of refugees and migrants worldwide have never been greater and the US resettlement programme is one of the most important in the world,” the Geneva-based agencies said in a joint statement.

They said the US’s acceptance of refugees had offered a double benefit, “first by rescuing some of the most vulnerable people in the world and second by enabling them to enrich their new societies”.

Chuck Schumer, Democratic leader in the Senate, said: “Tears are running down the cheeks of the Statue of Liberty tonight as a grand tradition of America, welcoming immigrants, that has existed since America was founded, has been stomped upon.

“Taking in immigrants and refugees is not only humanitarian but has also boosted our economy and created jobs decade after decade. This is one of the most backward and nasty executive orders that the president has issued.”

The Council on American-Islamic Relations announced it would be filing a federal lawsuit challenging the constitutionality of the order “because its apparent purpose and underlying motive is to ban people of the Islamic faith from Muslim-majority countries from entering the United States”.

“There is no evidence that refugees – the most thoroughly vetted of all people entering our nation – are a threat to national security,” said Lena F Masri, the council’s litigation director. “This is an order that is based on bigotry, not reality.”

Malala Yousafzai, the Pakistani campaigner for girls’ education who survived an attempted murder by the Taliban when she was 15, said she was “heartbroken” that America was “turning its back on a proud history of welcoming refugees and immigrants – the people who helped build your country, ready to work hard in exchange for a fair chance at a new life”.

She added: “I am heartbroken that Syrian refugee children, who have suffered through six years of war by no fault of their own, are singled out for discrimination.”

Madeline Albright, the former US secretary of state, said: “There is no fine print on the Statue of Liberty. America must remain open to people of all faiths and backgrounds.”

She was referring the inscription of the iconic New York landmark: “Give me your tired, your poor, your huddled masses yearning to breathe free, the wretched refuse of your teeming shore. Send these, the homeless, tempest-tossed to me, I lift my lamp beside the golden door.”

[...]

As well as halting Syrian arrivals indefinitely, the president’s order suspends the admittance of all refugees to the US for 120 days. In Syria alone, the nearly six-year war under Bashar al-Assad’s regime has led to more than 500,000 civilian deaths and displaced an estimated 11 million Syrians.

Although Trump administration officials continue to insist the president’s actions are not targeted at any one faith, the text of the order made explicit that, when the 120-day suspension ended, the US government would prioritize religious minorities in Muslim-majority countries.

It states: “Upon the resumption of USRAP [US Refugee Admissions Program] admissions, the secretary of state, in consultation with the secretary of homeland security, is further directed to make changes, to the extent permitted by law, to prioritize refugee claims made by individuals on the basis of religious-based persecution, provided that the religion of the individual is a minority religion in the individual’s country of nationality.”

xoài phạm #moonbat everydayfeminism.com

3 Reasons It’s Irrational to Demand ‘Rationalism’ in Social Justice Activism

The scenario is always the same: I say we should abolish prisons, police, and the American settler state — someone tells me I’m irrational. I say we need decolonization of the land — someone tells me I’m not being realistic.

Whenever I hear this, I stop and think about the world we’d live in if previous European colonizers were berated with the same rhetoric about rationalism as we abolitionists are today.

Would it have been enough to stop them in their tracks?

What if someone had told them that the creation of the American nation-state of settler-colonizers who displace and murder the Indigenous inhabitants — and the development of the white supremacist, anti-Black, capitalist, cisheteropatriarchy — was a project too hefty to accomplish?

What if those imperialism-driven Europeans, all passionate and roused about Manifest Destiny, were encouraged to stop and reconsider whether their violent plans were rational?

We might possibly have a world that isn’t filled to the brim with oppression.

There may not have been the centuries-long (and still ongoing) ravaging of every continent and the development of anti-Black chattel slavery.

We many never have had the tentacles of the white supremacist patriarchy spanning the entire globe, regulating gender along a binary and fostering rape culture.

We may never have had carceral forms of justice that render certain people disposable.

And the Earth’s lands, skies, and water definitely wouldn’t be irrevocably devastated.

But it makes sense why many of those who are committed to social justice subscribe to the same language of rationalism as their oppressors. Marginalized folks are taught from infancy that they need to behave in a respectable manner to be treated with decency. We face so much violence, to the point where the violence becomes the norm and our resistance is what feels extreme.

We’re painted as aggressors even when we are consistently the victims. The media treats Black victims worse than white killers. People see trans and gender non-conforming people in bathrooms as threats rather than as targets of abuse.

When we are told repeatedly that everything we do is an attack, we internalize the idea that we need to quiet ourselves, to take up less space. And so we begin to limit ourselves to tactics of resistance that are easy to digest — and we create those limits under the guise of being rational.

Not only is this urge to be rational holding us back, it unintentionally validates the logic of white supremacy as natural and positions the desire to fight oppression as excessive and outrageous.

For those of us who are trying to burn the colonial project to the ground and build a new world, we have to stop placing limits on ourselves in a world that is already at our throats.

Abolitionists, those who are invested in abolishing police, prisons, the settler colonial nation-state, cannot afford to be held back by what is deemed rational. In fact, rationalism has no place in abolitionism.

This is not to say that there are many roles to be filled among those who resist, none of which should be placed in a hierarchy of value. People come from different places of knowledge, ability, and history which makes each person equipped to participate (if they so choose) based on their unique position in society.

But when those who are the loudest, the most disruptive — the ones who want to destroy America and all of the oppression it has brought into the world — are being silenced even by others in social justice groups, that is unacceptable.

Pushing the boundaries of how we can shape our resistance beyond what’s rational is urgent and necessary.

And here are three reasons why.

1. Being Rational Has No Inherent Value

When I talk about abolition, whether that be of prisons, immigrant detainment centers, the police, or the government, I am instantly derailed by strangers and even friends. They tell me that it isn’t rational.

They say this as if everyone seeks to be rational, as if prisons, themselves — which have grown more than 400 percent since 1970 and which has predominantly impacted communities of color, especially Black and Indigenous communities — are rational. As if being rational has indisputable value.

At first, I took their reactions to heart. I thought maybe being rational really is necessary if I wanted to achieve my goals of eradicating oppression.

If I’m not rational, then I must not be thinking correctly, which makes me incompetent and unqualified to even have political opinions.

Or so I thought.

The truth is, this constant emphasis on rationalism is a load of toxic garbage (and this is me being gentle with my words). It reeks of the rancid odor that develops when we squeeze our vast imaginations into tiny boxes labeled “pragmatic,” “rational,” and “reasonable.” Being rational can often mean being willing to accept some aspects of oppression and watering down my politics.

In fact, by American standards, my very existence is irrational. For many, I simply do not exist as a queer, Vietnamese femme who is neither a man or a woman. Living in my body, wading through my truths, is not a rational act. And I wouldn’t have it any other way.

Based on my experiences as a marginalized person, being rational just means going easy on my oppressors.

The narrow bit of room that rationalism gave me wasn’t enough for me to envision new possibilities for my gender, to escape the confines of impending manhood. It wasn’t enough for me to understand my personhood as infinitely more complicated than the models of personhood fed to me by white cis people.

From my vantage point, rationalism — or whatever you want to name it — did more harm than good.

Some of us place so much value on being rational that we’re unable to recognize that when someone tells you to be rational, they may just be telling you that their ideas weigh more than yours.

The rhetoric of rationalism can be used as a seemingly benign disguise for social control.

2. Rationalism Is a Tool Made to Hurt Us

In the context of anti-oppression work, limiting ourselves to rational thinking means that we’re choosing to use the tools that make sense to our oppressors, which are usually tools made to hurt us.

Rationalism means we’re working within the framework of a system that was built to harm us in the first place.

And that, for me, is completely irrational — and it’s violent and oppressive to expect that of anyone who suffers from the exploitation and abuse of this system.

But to take it a step further, rationalism is subjective.

For those who are most impacted by the prison industrial complex — Black and Indigenous folks, trans and gender non-conforming folks, people with disabilities, those who are undocumented, and those who sit at the intersection of multiple identities, among others — abolitionist politics are entirely rational.

When your life and the well-being of your family, chosen and otherwise, is under attack by the prison system, for instance, abolition is common sense. Investing in prisons only makes sense for corporations, for governments, for oppressors whose power is fueled by the abuse and deaths of marginalized people.

In a world truly committed to justice, nothing would be more rational than abolitionism.

Yet, social justice liberals who spew negative rhetoric about rationalism tend to be against abolition, instead preferring reformist politics over anything deemed too “radical.” Why are we trying to be steady and gentle with systems of oppression while the systems get to inflict violence among large masses of people?

When we limit ourselves in our dreams and our goals, the oppressor has less work to do.

When we restrict ourselves in the name of being rational, we create barriers for ourselves — we place the world we want to live in farther from reach.

Since what’s rational is subjective, it is thus indefinable. The only reason why rationalism is believed to have inherent value is because it echoes the oppressor’s way of thinking.

When oppressors have the power to decide what’s rational, they get to commit irrational acts and claim them as rational justifications for oppression.

Take colonialism as an example: Colonizers enjoy claiming that those they’ve colonized are less civilized, despite the fact that colonized peoples often come from older and more complex civilizations than those of the colonizer.

And non-binary people are told their whole identities are irrational, even though non-binary people have existed much longer than the American settler state.

When the state gets to decide what’s normal enough to be rational, they get to decide who becomes the reviled Other – the groups that are subjected to targeted abuse.

Moving beyond the logical confines of our oppressors is necessary for us to envision a world free from the systems that kill us.

3. We Are Enough Without Rationalism

As Assata Shakur has said, “No one is going to give you the education you need to overthrow them.”

We should be constantly interrogating why being rational has been presumed to hold inherent value, and we should be asking ourselves where we got that idea in the first place. The institutions that taught us what we know should be placed under suspicion.

For many of us, schools are where many people are conditioned to become either complicit or complacent to systems of oppression. In fact, one could argue that institutions of education are not to make the people more empowered, but to stomp out their autonomy and make them more likely to invest in their downfall.

And before school, we are socialized into being obedient through the ways that oppression influences the way we raise children and build interpersonal relationships.

This is exactly why people believe that police and prisons equal safety, when that is not the case.

People have been conditioned to believe that prisons will keep their communities safe, when carceral state is the very thing hurting them. And more police does not mean more safety, especially when the police get to murder people with impunity. What does it mean when we feel an inclination to trust the institutions that are killing us?

The extent to which we’ve been led to love and trust our oppressors is so deep that we’re entrusting ourselves to our murderers.

The longer we postpone abolition based on “logical” arguments, the longer we’re denied basic autonomy. It’s a fallacy to believe that we’ll be given a more opportune time to abolish prisons and decolonize, because the role of the state is to never provide that opportunity.

When we frame abolition and decolonization as “long-term” goals, we operate under the belief that these goals can only happen in the distant future. We need to instead reframe abolition and decolonization as urgent, immediate goals.

If we look back at history, we would recognize that there are tons of examples of movements that may have been deemed irrational but ended up succeeding, the Montgomery Bus Boycott being one of them.

Many people know the Rosa Parks from learning about the boycott but don’t recognize how radical is was for around 42,000 Black Americans to boycott the public transit system for over a year.

Their goal was to ensure that Black people had the same treatment under the public transit system as whites and they never compromised their goals, even as transportation was denied to them over the course of a year. Without transportation, Black lives were completely disrupted. They had to either walk (for those who had that physical ability), or they had to find other forms of transportation.

As a result, they found a new way of operating — they relied on one another.

Black taxi drivers lowered their prices dramatically, Black people with cars began supplying rides to those without cars, and churches bought cars and station wagons to help those who didn’t have access to a vehicle. They organized carpools and collectively established on pickup and dropoff locations.

That was how Black community members developed their own autonomous, sustained transportation system for thousands upon thousands of people that didn’t involve the American settler colonial government.

How rational do you think that was?

They of course encountered backlash and horrific violence throughout the boycott. Leaders were arrested and laws were created to justify their imprisonment. Homes, churches, and cars were riddled with bombs and bullets from snipers even after the boycott ended.

It’s important to recognize that there are people who face so much violence in their lives that they simply don’t want to subject themselves to the violence that comes along with protesting oppression. It’s important to understand that some people are so marginalized and have so much trauma that they may not have the capacity or desire to engage in ways that may trigger unwanted memories and emotions.

And the conditions of those of us who are farthest in the margins are another reason why these abolitionist goals are so necessary.

The Montgomery Bus Boycott didn’t intend to abolish the nation-state, but it had goals that were unheard of and it created its own system of transportation that allowed Black people to take care of each other without the state. The boycott is a model of possibilities. And there are many others.

There are possibilities that we haven’t dreamed of yet because we are too invested in resisting in a rational way.

Sure, there are ways to hold space for both the smaller policy changes and the large-scale structural changes. But when we choose to tell ourselves that destroying a violent system is too big of a task for right now, we willingly give up both our time and our power.

Every minute under the carceral, colonial project is inconceivable violence. We too often place abolition as something only possible in a far-off future, which means we’re allowing the right-now to be stolen.

The only logical time for abolition and decolonization is now.

Rather than spending time and energy worrying about whether our movements are rational, can we direct that time and energy towards recognizing our brilliance?

***

When we invest in ourselves, in our own power, we have no need for the oppressor and their rational politics. We can be strategic without holding ourselves back. We already have the tools we need in us to win.

We are already lovers, healers, artists, creators, and so much more.

We have the power to think far beyond the education we’ve been given, beyond the carceral state, beyond the gender binary, beyond capitalist relationships, beyond the colonial project.

We are dreaming up ourselves, each other, and the world we want to live in. We can’t let rationalism steal our dreams.

And we have to trust and love ourselves enough to make those dreams a reality.

Joe #racist #conspiracy #fundie boards.christogenea.org

If a test does not measure what it purports to measure, it is invalid. This is psychology 101. So if an IQ test does not measure something called 'intelligence' than it is invalid, and all studies built on that faulty measure, and related premises, are also invalid. Psychologist already acknowledge the limitations of the test, but are unwilling to change it for political reasons.

I have seen White Nationalist claim that asians perform better on IQ tests, jews too. This test has been given such an authority that people put it above reality, above what is actually observable in the real World.

In the real World I see chink families pushing their chink children to study 24/7, for what, 6 IQ points average. They learn by rote, they learn Western mathematics, science & philosophy ...and then apply it in a very limited way, within the realm of a test. They have failed to carry such 'successes' into the real World (the test is more about application than general knowledge, but our children are not even taught how to approach such problems, they are in mixed-race classes devoid of any enrichment, devoid of proper instruction and content, so we cannot expect them to perform at their peak these days). And let us not forget that if you look at china, india, japan ...their infrastructure and scientific advancements are based on Western principals. The IQ test fails to measure intelligence if jews and asians somehow out-perform Whites (don't jump on me yet, read the next paragraph where I suggest some reasons why our people are failing our promise and potential).

We are suppose to forget the achievement of the White race ...and trust in a test that is obviously not valid. We are suppose to forget that our education system has been severely dumbed-down since the 1900's ...most people could not pass a year 10 exam from the period. That our children have been denied every opportunity to grow, and have been given what they want, towards their own destruction. They have no discipline or initiative. We are suppose to forget about the countless Aryan geniuses of the past, who gave us so much and how many of our advancements are hidden and suppressed (LENR, Tesla technology, novel engines and energy).

They bring foreign doctors and scientist into White nations (mostly arabs and indians) while the asians fill our universities, White people are having the opportunities and promise built by their foreFathers stolen from beneath their feat. Many of these doctors, scientist and others under-perform and happily maintain the jewish status quo, while our society stagnates and many White Men rot on the dole; never having an opportunity to reach their full potential (niggaz getz skolaships and shitz). White Women can get jobs and scholarships. especially in Maths and Science ...suddenly free from the oppressive patriarchy and finding good niggers with jobs everywhere, with the media portraying White Men as weak ...they start to engage in bestiality. We built this Nation for Our Women, and they betray us, if they want to live with the beasts, in their lands...it would be mud-huts, rape and sewerage, but try reasoning with a feminist! beast hominids only seem capable while supported by White Men, it is an illusion.
As Bill says, they are pets!

The fraud and pervert, einstein, was not a genius (check trutube), freud (fraud) was not a 'scientist' and sulk's vaccine came after polio had already began to decline (while the vaccine was accused of causing polio). These are some of the best the jews have to offer, they are better at scheming than attaining any knowledge or insight of value. The asians are good at doing what they are told, Western engineers are always leading projects in arab and asian countries ...and even if they don't lead the project, the innovations are always Aryan. Buddha, as a philosopher and not a religious leader, was an Aryan Man, a Scythian ...and there are many passages where the racism of early Buddhism is apparent. They regarded black babies as demons and bred with their own sisters to avoid breeding with the slave girls. The dark-skinned brahmins were considered unworthy to commune with them.

I won't forget my ancestors, I will never believe that the jew can build a civilisation apart from the White race, 'israel' gets more Western/Aryan aid than the damn niggers. I will not forget that my people have the best philosophers, mathematicians and scientists ...even if most of my people are currently in bondage, Truly, we can't compete with the evil beast hominids in babylon, but my people will return to their God and they will remember their nature, and they will be blessed and will conquer.

(no name given) #conspiracy nodisinfo.com

Boston Area Beheading Threat and Shooting Death is an arch-Zionist Hoax

It couldn’t get any more ludicrous, in fact, outright ridiculous than this, which is the so-called “The ISIS-inspired, homegrown” terrorist attack against police, even against a prominent Zionist Jew, Pamela Geller: 100% fake. The story lines are so numerous it is difficult to keep track of it all, another sign of a poorly contrived arch-hoax by the terminally rabid, Islamophobic Zionist cabal.

Plus, the timing is beyond suspect, with the attempts by the criminal Zionist clique to reinstate the Patriot Act taking the forefront. Right away, then, because of this timing what else could this be other than supremely ludicrous, in fact, supercilious hoax?

Yet, how could anyone determine it to be a fake, since the “terrorist…was shot dead,” or at least so says the arch-Zionist New York Daily Post? He “dreamed of beheading…Pamela Geller,” according to those arch-standards of a hoax, anonymous “law-enforcement sources.” Dreaming of it is good enough cause to blow up a man, plugging him with bullets until he is dead.

Honestly, it is actually said that “Usaama Rahim was plotting to kill Geller…” This alone is proof of an arch-Zionist fabricated scam and hoax. Moreover, who in the world believes that, coincidentally, the attacker would actually be named “Usaama?”

Yet, it gets even more inane that this:

But before he could get to Geller, he grew impatient and decided to target police instead.

Who in the world believes such nonsense?

“I’m just going to go after them, those boys in blue. ’Cause it’s the easiest target and the most common is the easiest for me,” Rahim told alleged co-conspirator David Wright in a phone call Tuesday, two hours before he was killed…

It has to be true, since it was, as is, once again, the arch-hoaxing standard, all “according to a criminal complaint against Wright.”

What in the world is a criminal complaint? Who is the complainant, other than the arch-Zionist DHS?

Is this all there is for imagery of a real shooting by drawn guns from both FBI and Police?


image


Here is the purported attacker, Usaama Rahim, supposedly shot dead on the ground. If he is shot dead, if this was a real shooting, why are all these people merely standing around, many of them with their hands in their pockets?

It’s straight out of arch-Zionist Hollywood, a total fake, and no one can prove otherwise. Ah, the drama of it all:


image


He was wielding a knife. Sure, he was, right. There it is, plenty of laminated pictures of the knife for propaganda purposes, with a wide range of media moles holding them up for all to see. Who believes such nonsense?


image

Is this the crime scene, really? What in the world is the purpose of the yellow bag?

image


Boston police officers and detectives at the scene where Usaama Rahim was fatally shot.Photo: AP

NOTE: Where is all the blood? After all, he was shot in the abdomen, among other regions. Moreover, this is precisely where he was shot?

Now, for additional hard proof of the arch-scam there are the Internet postings of government cohort, Ibrahim Rahim:


image

Does Mr. Rahim appear to be a believable cohort?


image

Honest to God, who in the world talks like that? Just who? “Hey, everyone. Can you send out some prayers? My youngest bro. was shot in the back, you know, like what routinely happens to us black people. No FBI, though, just three local cops. Three cops and three shots. How terrible, poor little bro., he was just on the phone talking to daddy, that is “with my dear father during the confrontation,” all because he was “needing a witness.”

“Never forget his last words, which were “I can’t breathe,” all the while dying “while at the hospital.”

Let me make it perfectly clear “Usaama Rahim died!”

Good God, world, cannot it be seen so clearly that this is nothing but a pack of lies?


image


It’s his brother, and he can’t even get it right? Now, the entire rest of the world is saying that, “Wait a minute, the brother is wrong,” that is he “wasn’t shot in the back. Nor was he on a cell phone. Nor was he talking to his daddy.” Nor, of course, did he say “I can’t breathe.”

It’s make-believe, and the hoaxers are going round and round, not even knowing where they will end up:


https://youtu.be/iAAZAkAIVgo


That man who can no longer be questioned, Mr. Rahim, supposedly went so far as to even threaten the most rabid, extremist Zionist of all, Pamela Geller, with her life:

During that call, Rahim allegedly told Wright, 25, about his plan to murder a person in another state who sources said was Geller. Wright “told Rahim something was ‘like thinking with your head on your chest (a reference to the hoax ISIS beheadings).’ Both men then burst out laughing.

Geller gets her hits in, attempting to drive home, as hard as possible, this Islamphobic hoax:

“They targeted me for violating Sharia laws,” she told The Post. “It won’t end for me or the cops. They mean to kill everyone who doesn’t do their bidding.”

Who is “they?”

They paraded about the supposed cohort, Mr. Wright. With the same shirt he is seen in both day and nighttime photos:

image

The entire inter-faith (so-called) community was there, participating in the arch-scam.

image

Despite claims otherwise it is an arch-scam: no other possibility. No one died, and no one was injured.


image

It was a real local emergency, an actual attack against cops and FBI: sure it was, right. If it looks like a drill, acts like a drill, and seems like a drill, it is a drill, unless proven otherwise.


David J. Stewart #fundie jesus-is-savior.com

There's a sicko scene in the movie INDEPENDENCE DAY (1996), where Mary McDonnell (who plays the First Lady Marilyn Whitmore) asks Vivica A. Fox (who plays Jasmine Dubrow in the movie) what she does for a living. Jasmine says, "I'm an exotic dancer (a stripper)". Marilyn says, "I'm sorry" (which is the correct answer any decent person would give). Jasmine responds by defending her stripping by saying, "Don't be, my baby's worth it" (i.e., providing for her son). Leave it to Hollywood to subliminally teach people through their sicko movies that stripping is an acceptable way to make a living. Let me tell you right now, if you're a stripper, you're committing evil against God. You're the cancer that's ruining America. Yes, God loves you, but you're ruining society and are spitting in God's face.

You have no idea how much trouble you are in with God, for the marriages you've ruined, the families you've destroyed and the immorality you've created. You are disobeying the Scriptures to dress modestly (1st Timothy 2:9). Get right with God! Put some clothes on! Stop living for the Devil! The movie INDEPENDENCE DAY was produced by sinful people who couldn't care less about God, decency, Christianity or doing what's moral. They just want to make a buck and brainwash the public at the same time. American society legalizes stripping; while outlawing protesting abortions outside abortion clinics. We're a sicko society of hypocrites. You can legally be be homosexual, fornicate, murder your baby in the womb, worship Satan, gamble, go to nude beaches with your children, walk around Vermont naked, make pornography; but you'll go to jail for preaching the Bible at Liberty Bell.

America has forgotten God. Wickedness abounds everywhere. So many people just don't care anymore. Apathy is everywhere. Most women don't even try to dress modestly any more. Everywhere we go we see whorish advertising and lewd business displays. I wish the Lord would come back now and Rapture the Church out of here, because I'm sick of this sin-cursed world.

Milanka #fundie youtube.com

I think Putin is brilliant. I wish there were more leaders like him. We need Western Putins believe me. He does not pander to minorities. He sets a certain traditional, moral precedent for society to follow that promotes social cohesion. He makes foreign policy decisions in the best interests of Russia first and foremost, not what is best for Israel and international Jewry. He has strengthened Russia and gotten her to a point where he can and does defend Christians worldwide, including in Syria. I don't see any other Western nation seriously defending the Christians of Syria. Putin is the only significant world leader standing up to the "gay rights" lobby and saying a big, fat NO to them. He is by no means perfect, but he is doing a good job at restoring Russia to her former glory. He is a good, no nonsense statesman who puts the interests of his nation and people before the interests of the globalists. He is also immensely popular in Russia and I am getting that from credible sources. There are plenty of strong, anti-Putin media outlets in Russia. Russia has a much freer press than anywhere in the West. Russia is the leader of the free world. Russia's recovery under the leadership of Putin is certainly good news for a Serb like me who cares about the future of my own people as Russia has always been the main historic defender and protector of us south Slavs. For me personally, it is refreshing to see a God fearing, right wing, conservative leader on the world stage who cares about traditional values, nationalism and strengthening the traditional family unit, the backbone of a healthy society.?

BuddyDogeDoge #fundie reddit.com

[Comment under "This "Periodic Table of Dictators, Despots, and the Despised" rates Stalin's "evil" as a "9/10" - more than all 94 others on the table except Hitler"]

@Onlyinmizzou

you can't be simultaneously pro-secret police and pro-democracy. as a socialist, it is unacceptable to be anti-democracy.

nonsense. the point of proletarian dictatorship is that it's dictatorship for the capitalists, democracy for the workers. what you are talking here, is liberalism, is nonsense, is bourgeois equality. i will quote lenin at length to back this up.

https://www.marxists.org/archive/lenin/works/1919/nov/06.htm

The second anniversary of the Soviet power is a fitting occasion for us to review what has, in general, been accomplished during this period, and to probe into the significance and aims of the revolution which we accomplished.

The bourgeoisie and its supporters accuse us of violating democracy. We maintain that the Soviet revolution has given an unprecedented stimulus to the development of democracy both in depth and breadth, of democracy, moreover, distinctly for the toiling masses, who had been oppressed under capitalism; consequently, of democracy for the vast majority of the people, of socialist democracy (for the toilers) as distinguished from bourgeois democracy (for the exploiters, the capitalists, the rich).

Who is right?

To probe deeply into this question and to understand it well will mean studying the experience of these two years and being better prepared to further follow up this experience.

The position of women furnishes a particularly graphic elucidation of the difference between bourgeois and socialist democracy, it furnishes a particularly graphic answer to the question posed.

In no bourgeois republic (i.e., where there is private ownership of the land, factories, works, shares, etc.), be it even the most democratic republic, nowhere in the world, not even in the most advanced country, have women gained a position of complete equality. And this, notwithstanding the fact that more than one and a quarter centuries have elapsed since the Great French (bourgeois-democratic) Revolution.

In words, bourgeois democracy promises equality and liberty. In fact, not a single bourgeois republic, not even the most advanced one, has given the feminine half of the human race either full legal equality with men or freedom from the guardianship and oppression of men.

Bourgeois democracy is democracy of pompous phrases, solemn words, exuberant promises and the high-sounding slogans of freedom and equality. But, in fact, it screens the non-freedom and inferiority of women, the non-freedom and inferiority of the toilers and exploited.

Soviet, or socialist, democracy sweeps aside the pompous, bullying, words, declares ruthless war on the hypocrisy of the "democrats", the landlords, capitalists or well-fed peasants who are making money by selling their surplus bread to hungry workers at profiteering prices.

Down with this contemptible fraud! There cannot be, nor is there nor will there ever be "equality" between the oppressed and the oppressors, between the exploited and the exploiters. There cannot be, nor is there nor will there ever be real "freedom" as long as there is no freedom for women from the privileges which the law grants to men, as long as there is no freedom for the workers from the yoke of capital, and no freedom for the toiling peasants from the yoke of the capitalists, landlords and merchants.

Let the liars and hypocrites, the dull-witted and blind, the bourgeois and their supporters hoodwink the people with talk about freedom in general, about equality in general, about democracy in general.

We say to the workers and peasants: Tear the masks from the faces of these liars, open the eyes of these blind ones. Ask them:

“Equality between what sex and what other sex?

“Between what nation and what other nation?

“Between what class and what other class?

“Freedom from what yoke, or from the yoke of what class? Freedom for what class?”

Whoever speaks of politics, of democracy, of liberty, of equality, of socialism, and does not at the same time ask these questions, does not put them in the foreground, does not fight against concealing, hushing up and glossing over these questions, is one of the worst enemies of the toilers, is a wolf in sheep's clothing, is a bitter opponent of the workers and peasants, is a servant of the landlords, tsars, capitalists.

https://www.marxists.org/archive/lenin/works/1918/dec/23.htm

But why not reach this goal without the dictatorship of one class? Why not switch directly to "pure" democracy? So ask the hypocritical friends of the bourgeoisie for the naive petty-bourgeois and philistines gulled by them.

And we reply: Because in any capitalist society the powerful tell lies to either the bourgeoisie or the proletariat, while the small proprietors, inevitably, remain wavering, helpless, stupid dreamers of "pure", i.e., nonclass or above class, democracy. Because from a society in which one class opposes another there is no way out other than through the dictatorship of the oppressed class. Because the proletariat alone is capable of defeating the bourgeoisie, of overthrowing them, being the sole class which capitalism has united and "schooled", and which is capable of drawing to its side the wavering mass of the working population with a petty-bourgeois way of life, of drawing them to its side or at least "neutralizing" them. Because only mealy-mouthed petty-bourgeois and philistines can dream — deceiving thereby both themselves and the workers — of overthrowing capitalist oppression without a long and difficult process of suppressing the resistance of the exploiters. In Germany and Austria this resistance is not yet very pronounced because expropriation of the expropriators has not yet begun. But once expropriation begins the resistance will be fierce and desperate. In concealing this from themselves and from the workers, the Scheidemanns and Kautskys, the Austerlitzes and Renners betray the interests of the proletariat, switching at the most decisive moment from the class struggle and overthrow of the yoke of the bourgeoisie to getting the proletariat to come to terms with the bourgeoisie, achieving "social peace" or reconciliation of exploited and exploiters.

in fact, you yourself make this point, so i do not understand why you say that you cannot be for secret police and for democracy now!

Every state that has ever existed has forcibly silenced its enemies. It is unavoidable. In the same way the the US silenced labor unions and socialists who sought to subvert the government in the early 20th century, socialist countries silenced western-backed counter-revolutionaries. Others can provide more detail into how specific socialist countries dealt with dissent, but I hope that at least shows you why this argument is dubious at best.

@Onlyinmizzou

but stalin's legacy was, in my opinion and in the opinion of many leftists, mostly counterproductive.

you would call the ending of the NEP and the building of a planned economy, the liberation of europe, unprecedented achievements in healthcare, education, literacy, space, farming, the supression of revisionists, counter revolutionaries, kulaks, etc etc - counterproductive?

it is not "great man theory" - it is looking at history as it actually was! the only liberalism here is to disregard stalin, to deny facts, to refuse to look into the actual situation! the USSR is like a machine - you cannot pick and choose which bits you want to praise, you must take it in it's entirety. you cannot simply call some crucial elements "bad, counterproductive".

infact i will ask directly - what do you think was "counterproductive"? what actions? what specifically

mrbill6ishere #fundie #wingnut deviantart.com

History repeats itself quickly...
Apr 23, 2017

COGOLIN, France — Muslims preoccupy Jennifer Troin.

"I'm worried about my nieces having to wear the veil," said the soft-spoken 29-year-old.

This fear has helped propel the young mother to the far-right of the political spectrum ahead of key presidential elections Sunday — and into the arms of the hard-line National Front party.

Troin sells children's clothes at a store in Cogolin, a town of 11,000 a few miles from the jet-set resorts of the French Riviera. In 2014, Cogolin became one of a handful of communities nationwide to elect mayors from the National Front, which is also known by the acronym FN.

Troin told NBC News that it wasn't just the FN's stance on Islam and immigration that attracted her, but also the party's populist take on the economy.

But most of all, it was the party's charismatic leader, Marine Le Pen, who captured Troin's loyalty.

"She fights for women's rights against Islam," she said. "I vote because of Marine."

Troin is part of a quiet army of female National Front supporters, who could well tip the balance of the election and give the presidency to the hard-right.

An FN victory would rewrite the continent's political playbook, given the party's pledge to take France out of the European Union. Were it to win, it would not have been an easy ride for a movement that peaked in 2002 when founder Jean Mari Le Pen — Marine Le Pen's father — reached the second and final round of the presidential election.

French voters flocked to the polls in the runoff to ensure Le Pen did not win, instead electing former President Jacques Chirac with a resounding 78 percent of the vote. Most pollsters expect a similar outcome in May's second-round vote, predicting moderate voters to rally once again to shut out the FN.

But few doubt that the party's anti-immigrant and anti-establishment platform is resonating.

The Front's anti-Islamic message is especially potent in France, whose 4.7 million Muslims make up around 7.5 percent of the population. Islamist militant attacks have killed more than 230 people over two years and plunged the country into a long-term state of emergency.

PlayMarine Le Pen: Mass Immigration Is a Tragedy for France

Marine Le Pen: Mass Immigration Is a Tragedy for France 1:00
This anxiety deepened on the eve of the election after a gunman ambushed three Parisian police officers on the Champs-Elysees late Thursday, killing one and wounding two others. ISIS claimed responsibility for the shooting and French President Francois Hollande said it was likely a terrorist attack.

Meanwhile, the FN's influence has spread from its heartlands along the Mediterranean coast and in the rust-belt north, into rural "forgotten" France.

'Marine is different'
Polling institute Elabe recently predicted that 22 percent of women would vote for the National Front in the first round Sunday — almost 5 percent more than in 2012.

With just days to go, polls show the race is tightening. Centrist Emmanuel Macron is edging his way ahead on 24 percent and Le Pen is a fraction behind on 22.5 percent, according to Bloomberg polling.

Just below them, hard-left candidate Jean-Luc Melenchon has enjoyed a late surge and scandal-hit conservative Francois Fillon has hung in there despite a slew of allegations that he paid thousands of euros to his British-born wife for assistance she allegedly did not provide. A third of voters remain undecided.

Image: French far-right Front National leader Marine Le Pen is kissed by her father Jean-Marie Le Pen
Front National leader Marine Le Pen is kissed by her father Jean-Marie Le Pen after being re-elected as president of the party on Nov. 30, 2014. Laurent Cipriani / AP, file
The FN's ability to motivate French women could be decisive. Traditionally, it has struggled to attract female voters amid accusations of sexism, racism and anti-Semitism.

In its early years under Jean-Marie Le Pen, the party advocated a traditional image of women, opposed abortion rights and developed a reputation for a macho, strongman culture.

This bias showed. The FN was far less successful at attracting women than men. During Jean-Marie Le Pen' time in charge, around 12 percent of French women supported the party compared with 17 percent of men, according to Sciences Po Cevipof, a political institute based in Paris.

Marine Le Pen changed this.

Since taking over in 2011, she has softened the party's image, steering the FN away from some of its overtly anti-Semitic and racist rhetoric in an effort to broaden its electoral base. In 2015, she expelled her father after he repeated his view that the Holocaust was a "detail of history."

“Women understand Marine Le Pen — she’s divorced, she has three children, she works, she’s a modern woman.”
In the run up to the this year's election, Le Pen dropped her last name from campaign handouts, referring to herself simply as Marine.

More recently, she specifically targeted the female vote. She has published special pamphlets and a campaign video that describes her as a woman and a mother and shows her flicking through family photo albums. She has also changed the party's logo from a flame to a blue rose.

'Hitler-like figure'
For Troin, the children's clothes seller in Cogolin, her interest in the National Front has grown with Marine Le Pen's rise. While immigration, job security and her fear of Islam remained underlying motivators, she was also attracted to the party's re-brand.

For her, the former leader "was too outspoken, too offensive. He was a Hitler-like figure," Troin said. "But Marine is different."

In the last presidential election in 2012 — the first with Marine Le Pen as leader — the party's gender gap closed to 1.5 percentage points. It's what Cevipof professor and FN expert Nonna Mayer called the "Marine Le Pen effect."

The party has long advocated clamping down on immigration and securing borders, and throughout her campaign Le Pen has consistently made the country's Muslims a target.

Image: Marine Le Pen supporters cheer
Marine Le Pen supporters cheer at a rally in the southern city of Marseille on Wednesday. Jeff J Mitchell / Getty Images
"In France we respect women, we don't beat them, we don't ask them to hide themselves behind a veil as if they were impure. We drink wine when we want, we can criticize religion and speak freely," she said during a rally Monday night, comments clearly aimed at Muslims.

During the rally, Le Pen pledged to suspend all visas from non-European migrants hoping to join their families in France — often code for immigrants from mainly Muslim North Africa and the Middle East.

After Thursday night's attack in Paris, she again singled out what she sees as the threat posed by Islam.

"It is a war in which there can be no retreat because all our population and all our territory are exposed," she said.

And for all her rebranding, Marine Le Pen can also fall back into the older, harsher style of messaging.

Cathy, a 50-year-old dental assistant who was shopping for groceries in Cogolin, said she was all set to vote FN but was taken aback by Le Pen's recent comments that the French were not to blame for the anti-Jewish policies of the government during the Nazi occupation in World War II.

Referring to the "Vel d'Hiv" roundup of Jews by French police in July 1942, in which nearly 13,000 were detained and deported to concentration camps, Le Pen told French radio earlier this month she thought France was "not responsible."

Cathy, who didn't want to be identified by her second name, said Le Pen's remarks had made her pause.

Others needed no time to reflect.

"The FN is xenophobic, racist and anti-feminist," said retired teacher Mireille Escarrat. "For me it feels like the 1930s. We're going backwards."

'I don't talk politics here'
Many of the National Front supporters interviewed by NBC News were reluctant to admit it, and others were concerned about being named.

"I don't talk politics here," a local woman said, having led the way into a backroom of her business in the town. The 60-year-old asked not to be named or for her business to be described because she felt that admitting her loyalty to the FN would damage her reputation.

"I wouldn't mind if it weren't for my business," she added, out of earshot of her customers. "But this is somewhere everyone can come whether you vote communist or for the right."

Even in this town — where 53 percent of the population voted FN in 2014 — voting Le Pen still carries a social stigma. There's no telling just how many closet female FN voters there may be.

The party's marriage of socialist economic policy and right-wing identity politics is working in the town, which sits in the FN's traditional southern heartland. With the decline of traditional industries and unemployment at 18 percent, locals worry Cogolin is being reduced to a seasonal economy dependent on rich resort communities.

Newly-converted women at the FN's regional headquarters in neighboring Sainte-Maxime said Sunday's election would be the first time they voted for the Front in a presidential race.

"We didn't vote for Jean-Marie Le Pen because he scared us," said Monique Guckert, 67, a retired shop assistant. "His ideas were too fascist, too racist. It was too much."

Even the FN mayor of Cogolin, Marc Etienne Lansade, admitted his mother would never have voted for Jean-Marie Le Pen.

"He drove her crazy," he said. "Women understand Marine Le Pen, she's divorced, she has three children, she works — she's a modern woman," he added, sitting in his second-floor office in the town hall.

Still, not all women appreciate Le Pen's message. On Monday, a topless protester carrying flowers charged the candidate during a rally northern Paris.

Le Pen does not try to make out that she is a feminist. Of her 144 manifesto pledges, only one addresses women's issues. In it, she promises to defend women's rights by fighting against Islam, implementing a plan for equal pay and combating social and job insecurity.

"She's a fake feminist," said Camille Froidevaux-Metterie, a political scientist and expert on women in politics at the University of Reims.

Asked if a Le Pen win would be a victory for women, she said that though symbolically "it would not be nothing." She said it would mean France is ready for a female president but would have elected one on a non-feminist agenda.

"It's a sort of paradox," she said.

Proph #fundie collapsetheblog.typepad.com

A Little More on Bullying

I mentioned in a recent post that, like Bonald at Throne and Altar, I actually support bullying under certain circumstances. Let me flesh that out a little more.

Actually, let me just state my rule for bullying: if it's used as a means of enforcing normative behaviors, I'm all for it. And yeah, that means giving shit to fairies and tomboys and so on.

Normative behaviors exist for a reason. Like tradition, social norms tell us provide us a measure of what is good and just, especially for those who are too stupid to figure it out on their own. Social disapproval of immoral behaviors (like homosexuality, adultery, etc.) is often a more powerful disincentive to commit them than legal consequences; there are limits to others' ability to probe into your legal indiscretions, but the stench of a social brand in some degenerate's ass can linger in a community's collective hindbrain for generations. And so it was that, for a long time, it was wholly unnecessary for governments to police morality: communities did it their own damn selves.

Of course, one can say, "Well, who are you to force the norm of traditional family on, say, some good-hearted, hard-working single mother?" But one would be an idiot for saying that, given the abundance of studies (at least one by no less-respected a medical journal than The Lancet, a casual Googling revealed) demonstrating that childen raised in single-family are worse off in pretty much every way: they exhibit higher rates of mental illness, suicide attempts, injury, alcoholism, drug addiction, and all-cause mortality, even after adjusting for socioeconomic status and parents' health. Traditional societies knew and understood that children did best who were raised in a norm-conforming household; it is only in our (supposedly) enlightened modern society that we make virtuous angels out of the sluts and cads who ruin their kids' lives so that they can find themselves (or whatever). That's why traditional societies ostracized such people while modern societies make movies about them while ignoring all the evil they bring into the world. Likewise with the destruction of traditional gender roles (in the form of flamboyant homosexuals, cross-dressers, and transgender freakazoids).

So to the extent that people bullied today are serial violators of perfectly rational social norms, they ought to be subject to social disapproval -- even quite severely so. Those who imagine there is a "right" to attend a school without being bullied are deluded: one never has a right to behave however one wishes without consequences. Accepting this fact is a key step toward maturity. I'm torn on the extent to which this ought to entail physical bullying (certainly, I think it's justified when one is being an asshole about defying social norms, as in the case of the transgender abomination that got his/her ass unceremoniously pummeled into a seizure at a Baltimore-area McDonald's recently for belligerently insisting on using an occupied women's restroom), but I see nothing wrong with quite persistent verbal ribbing.

But to the extent bullying represents mindless, irrational cruelty (for instance, assaulting those whose only crime is being skinny, awkward, smart, or whatever), it ought to be brought under control. Unlike defiance of social norms, being skinny or fat or awkward or smart really doesn't hurt anyone -- and there's no sense in punishing them for it. It's intrinsic to the nature of demographics, after all, that not everyone can be ripped, engaging, and of modest intellect). Of course, that's no reason to have to associate with them (and awkward people really shouldn't have any friends until they learn to go out and make some on their own), but again, it's no reason to subject them to punishment, either. An Unmarried Man has a good post on the topic related to fat (and pregnant) women; it's worth a read.

One may object to my characterization of bullying in defense of social norms as not only valid and reasonable but right and good as fighting fire with fire. It is, of course -- but sometimes that's perfectly advisable, as when one stops the spread of a firestorm by burning away the flammable brush in a certain circumfrence around it. It's worth bearing in mind that the same liberals who decry bullying are perfectly content to bully in defense of their own social norms, at the expense of Christians and non-sexual deviants and so on; FIRE is dedicated to fighting these types of bullying in universities, where it has the potential to devastate a person's future to an extent routine beating-up-fags stuff doesn't . If there is, in fact, something like a war going on to determine whose social values ought to be ascendant, I see no reason why one side should be expected to unilaterally disarm.

Even for the sake of the children.

kallmekammy #fundie forums.go.com

[Thread title: "READ YOUR BIBBLE'S!!!"]

In the area of woman wearing pants. The scripture's principal is still MODEST. A woman in tight fitting jeans or pants is immodest, but a woman in loose pants which are made for woman can be modest. So the cut and wearing of clothes determines whether they are modest or not mkay??

Also. A woman should not dress like a man.....or wear clothes that would cause one to think she was a lesbian!!! =^/ A woman can cut her hair like a man's cut which would bring her into question. But a woman wearing short hair that is not cut like a man's would not be suspected of being a lesbian. So again it is not so much the length of a woman's hair, but the style at which it is cut and worn. THINK people. Soon and someday soon we are going to meet the KING and are you dressed for Him? For the Brdiegroom cometh back to meet his Bride. Are YOU engaged????????????????????????????????????

[Her follow-up posts are at least as crazy]

battalen #racist stormfront.org

(NOTE: I don´t even fucking how to call this. Hairist maybe?)

(Osten)

I was brought to attention that my Polish ex boyfriend (he was white but had issues with my political belief that evolved gradually into aggression) was also on this site but attempting to spreading rude photos of me, hence I deleted my photograph. But I will create a private photo album of me with proof on my profile that contacts I allow through will be able to view, so moderators or non biased members can see that proof by adding me as a contact. This way it will stop all the silliness from aggressively vocal members and actually focus on promoting white nationalism, because I really love this site and have met so many good people here despite the vocal accusatory ones.

(battalen)

Well, I would not give much weight on photos, especially with advanced photo-editing & manipulation tools such as Photoshop & GIMP freely available. I do remember now, some girl popped up here claiming someone had used her photos, maybe it was related to this issue.

My wife is a blue-eyed blonde while I'm brunette with blue-eyes. I have two daughters, the elder one is blue-eyed & blonde, the younger brunette with hazel eyes. The elder has completed college and is working, the younger is about to finish college.

We know that natural blonde women are considered more feminine & light-hearted than brunettes. Both of my daughters are very beautiful, however even I'm able to observe slight differences in behavior between the blonde & the brunette. I was interested in Stryker1488's theories about how these differences could have developed, as I don't think Darwinian Natural or Sexual selection can explain them fully.

And when you have two blonde women at home, you can quite easily detect who is blonde or brunette on the internet without even meeting then - there are subtle variations in writing patterns & styles. For example, someone like Fading Light, I can immediately confirm she is a natural blue-eyed blonde.

While I'm not accusing you of anything, but in my personal opinion, you just do not come across as being a blue-eyed blonde White girl.

I remember Stryker1488 posting his mother & sister were natural blondes, so he might also have detected something unusual about you, that's why he probably flew off the handle. DYWM is the sharpest & most astute poster on this board and he also probably sensed something odd about you, which is why he started to attack you.

David J. Stewart #fundie jesusisprecious.org

On occasion I've linked to Charismamag.com in Florida for their interesting articles. However, I've been careful lately when I go to promote any website, to also see what images they promote. Today I found an interesting article on their website about 50 Reasons Why I Don't Drink (i.e., Alcohol), and began to promote it, but then I noticed a woman in colored underwear on their website, at the beach. That's all a bathing suit is... colored underwear. The bathing suit wasn't a full-body suit. It was just skimpy black underwear and a skimpy top.

...

Then I also noticed that Charismamag.com has an article titled, “How To Quit Porn In 2017.” What hypocrites!!! Charisma magazine are phonies!!! The best way to start giving up porn is for women to stop dressing like whores and stop compromising their virtue! But that will never happen, because people are wicked! So the next best thing is for everyone who loves the Lord Jesus Christ to do their part to stop the filth! We cannot stop what others do, but we have a choice! We do have a choice!!! God give us some Christian women who once again are proud to dress modestly. Ungodly women will hate you and laugh at you, ladies, if you dress modestly. Let them! It is better to receive praises from God, than from sinful men (John 12:43).

Charismamag.com chooses to display lewd, naked, ungodly women on their website, no doubt to boost their website's popularity by using unethical advertisements. We cannot stop ungodly women from taking their clothes off, but WE CAN refuse (as professed believers) to display photos of unclothed females!!! Kindly, there's nothing as wicked and of the Devil, than a woman walking around publicly in her underwear. It is commonplace these days, but it is still wrong! Even if everyone is doing wrong, it is still right to do right. I'm going to do right, even if everyone does wrong! I'm still going to proclaim the inspiration of the King James Bible, even if every church and Bible college in America errantly says it's not!!!

PhoebeDodgedShelby #sexist reddit.com

Literally everything to do with having a victim complex and dragging men down off their pedestals and defeating the patriarchy. Like it's a fucking war now, except even the WOMEN don't envision themselves as strong enough to conquer the evils of masculinity. So literally you've NOT been oppressed, you've just realised you're shitter in a lot of ways than men so men need to behave less awesomely to compensate for your shitness. I say this as a 34 year old woman; FUCK feminism as it manifests today. I've literally contemplated suicide to get off this earth because nothing makes sense anymore.

Please don't quit this game yet. The earth needs smart people like you.

Nobody listens though. I've been called a 'traitor to my gender' for merely pointing out that false sexual assault claims by women DO happen. Just that is enough to cast me as either plain evil or just not 'smart enough' to realise all the ways my life has been inhibited by men; despite over three decades of personal experience to the contrary.

You can't reason with that level of vitriolic fanaticism.

I thought that was third wave, where’s the distinction

3rd wave = equality feminism, still irritating with the conflation of equal opportunity with equal outcome but still, generally geared towards positive social outcome for all, LGBT equality and acceptance, women should have the chance to earn the same income and status as any man

4th wave = JUSTICE feminism - FUCK MEN, MEN ARE TRASH, women deserve REPARATIONS above and beyond equality as punitive damages for all the horrid things men have done. The patriarchy must be crushed, men have NO inherent societal value or place beyond that of oppressors. The time of WOMEN has arrived.

LOL what? Women never envisioned themselves like that. They envisioned being "empowered." This is a code word meaning "I want other people to do yucky things for me exactly like before, but I'll pretend that they aren't men. We'll just take male taxpayer dollars instead of our husbands' dollars to subsidize our shitty career choices and also make up a zillion rules so that things in yucky penisy workland are less penisy and our feelings don't get hurt."

So you agree with me...?

I don't think 2nd wavers or women in general were ever "oppressed." There was just real social change back then. So yeah, I agree in that it's mostly just amped up man-hate now. They want the whole world to be vagina-friendly. Everywhere. But the victimhood thing was always there. The difference is that the modern snowflakes are angry that DESPITE the excessive feminization of the workplace (huge HR bureaucracy, parallel justice systems) earning money or accomplishing anything worthwhile outside of the home STILL requires being "masculine." The 2nd wavers were grateful just for the chance to act more masculine occasionally without becoming social outcasts. There were still wars. Crime rates were high. Cars had no power steering or brakes, and broke down often. Cell phones did not exist. A nuclear holocaust could break out at any moment. The world was a more dangerous place. They had a certain respect for masculinity and how it deals with the real physical world.

Agreed. That's really what saddens me now; if anything I see a world that needs more strong, honest, guiding male influence, especially within the younger generations. Instead this hyper feminised shit is ruining society and morality.

vodkacel #sexist incels.co

[SuicideFuel] ascenscion is impossible

Many, if not all, here want to ascend.

By ascension, I mean finding a girl who truly loves you and will not cheat
Most guys will not care about her money status, ethnicity, social status, education, etc. As long she is faithful.

The criteria is DAMN simple. Yet...

THIS IS IMPOSSIBLE, if you are below 8 / 10. Simply as that. NO foid will lust or truly love you if you are below 8 / 10, and decide to remain faithful for the rest of her life in marriage (even then not guaranteed).

It does not matter:
if you are rich (unless you can surgery maxx)
have social status
have good personality (JFL at those who think that)
It does not matter if the foid:
poor or rich
educated or not
kind or not
Slav, Curry, African or Rice
Lust = biological instinct, that only depends on how you look.
JFL, if you think that there is 1 in 1 million special girl who will love you. Or that this time she will say yes, after you have approached other 100 foids.

Beta $$$ is NOT ascension. It is basically agreeing on letting a parasite inside your life and resources.
Prostitution is NOT ascension. That slut would never give you a chance, if you had no $$$.
3rd world country bride is NOT ascension = prostitution with extra steps

As a low SMV man, you cannot ascend. You can either embrace the harsh reality or live in illusion.

Otfried Best #fundie youtube.com

(Grandiose trolling of German Neonazi at press conference)

Uwe Faust: "My name is Uwe Faust from the party The Party (Translator's note: founded by a satirical magazine). I'd like to ask Mister Best a question. Mister Best, according to Federal Building Code, Section 126, every owner is obliged to label his parcel with the number assigned by the municipality, Now, I've noticed, shockingly, that many house numbers in Völklingen are marked in Arabic numerals.

What would you like to do against this creeping foreign domination?"

(audience roars with laughter)

NPD (Nazi) Mayorship candidate Otfried Best: "Just wait until I am Lord Mayor, Mister Faust! I will change that. We'll put normal numerals in place!"

Original German
Uwe Faust: "Mein Name ist Uwe Faust von der Partei Die Partei. Ich hätte eine Frage für den Herrn Best. Herr Best, laut Baugesetzbuch, Paragraph 126, ist jeder Eigentümer verpflichtet, sein Grundstück mit der durch die Gemeinde vorgegebene Nummer zu kennzeichnen. Jetzt ist mir erschreckend aufgefallen, dass in Völklingen viele Hausnummern mit arabischen Zahlen gekennzeichnet sind.

Wie möchten Sie gegen diese schleichende Überfremdung vorgehen?"

Otfried Best: "Da warten Sie mal ab, Herr Faust, bis ich Oberbürgermeister bin. Da werd ich das ändern. Da werden doch ma' normale Zahlen drankommen."

steve c #conspiracy realjewnews.com

As the famous Anglo-French writer Belloc once said, 'Every Jew should be regarded as an Agent of the English Empire'.

One might say the same about the WASP/Anglo in the Anglophone world as they are most all working in government and for the very Anglo-Jewish English Crown government.

[...]

The Jews have been intermarrying with the English royals for at least 700 years according to English historians.

The great anti-Zionist Jew, Israel Shahak exposed the Talmudic teachings that the Jews should take over the thrones of Europe by becoming wealthy, serving the King, then intermarrying with Royals. Jews control the major thrones of Europe, the English, Spanish, and Dutch thrones.

What unites the English Blueblood, of which our USA Senate is 80% with the Talmudic Jew is the British-Israelite teaching the Anglosaxon is the lost tribe of Judah and head of Israel.

[...]

It's best for astute readers to regard the American/English WASP, the prennial water boy for the Zionist Jew and his global aspirations, as a Masonic traitors.

Be very careful what you say about Israel's and Jewish corruption around any WASP, as the WASP blueblood considers himself to be Jew, at least if he or she is a Mason. This is the great curse of America, the WASP and his infernal Masonic Lodge.

[...]

If we are honest, we must be critical of world Jewish leadership, but we must be even more critical of the hypocritical WASP establishment, who is more than in bed with hellish Israel. Evil England and Israel, united at the hip in gross sin.

vexic929 #fundie comments.deviantart.com

[ You were bullied for being straight? Yeah, that's totally the same thing. >: Just like LGBT teens that are bullied and ostracized, you had no one to turn to in this society that is so against heterosexuals. You must have felt so isolated in an overwhelming homosexual culture that routinely teaches the younger generations to hate straight people for being born the way they are.

Okay seriously no, LGBT teen suicide is a /very serious/ problem that is steadily getting worse. Even if it focused on one group that is being bullied (and is being bullied /hard/), you don't support an end to the bullying of that group? Do you also get pissy when Black History month rolls around? Do you not support it? I mean, IT DOESN'T INCLUDE LATINOS. They're persecuted too. If we're going to follow your logic that EVERY awareness program must include EVERYONE, we should just make it 'Non white history month'. Boycott black history month, it's totes biased. >:< ]


I
was making a point in stating that. It irritates the crap out of me that this day was made for one group of people about a problem that affects EVERYONE. Everyone is bullied at some point in there life for some reason, it doesn't just affect LGBT. No, I don't get mad when Black History month comes around; why? Because it's about something that affected that specific group of people--the abolishment of slavery and the celebration of the accomplishments of people of that ethnicity.

[ I think it has a lot more to do with your general dislike of homosexuality than any good reasonI. :shrug: Would you be opposed to a 'Spirit Day' dedicated to kids committing suicide over racial bullying? What about 'Adopt a Shelter Dog' day? That doesn't include cats, so are you still pissed when all those sweet dogs get adopted? What about Breast Cancer awareness month? There's more than one type of cancer that affects patients. How about anxiety awareness week? There's more than one mental illness.

No one ever said it *just* effects LGBT. But the day was made in response to a string of suicides by LGBT teenagers- it's to honor them and prevent it from happening again. LGBT bullying is a /big fucking deal/ because the children affected by it live in a homophobic society and often, homophobic households. Unlike a straight kid or even a child of a minority race, they usually don't have a support system to turn to because of that; they can't open up to their families because they have to hide who they are. Having a voice- a day- raises a lot of awareness. That is a /good thing/. And there are plenty of anti-bullying programs that cover EVERY aspect of bullying; is it really so bad to have one dedicated to a specific type that happens to be very bad at the moment?

Basically, it's childish to be angry over what is essentially a good thing. Everyone knows bullying is bad, but there are plenty of people that don't realize how much more devastating it can be for LGBT teens due to the inherit isolation that typically comes with their status. This event /helps/ these kids. And it's ridiculously /heartless/ ]

You're willing to listen and are only looking for an argument (as made obvious by your comments on my other deviations). You won't find one here and responding would simply be a waste of my time, have a nice day.

[ Seriously, nice cop out. It seems to me that YOU are the one unwilling to listen and only interested in further entrenching yourself in your narrow-minded views. Are you so against an honest discourse? *Queerly was being nothing but polite and very articulate in outlining her thoughtful, well-reasoned responses.

Spirit week DOES bring awareness to all types of bullying- how could a week dedicated to bringing awareness not? It is simply targeted at awareness for LGBT youthes, a group which uniquely has less support than most others and thus is greatly in need of awareness. I'm sorry, but being bullied/made to feel guilty about being a heterosexual is nowhere NEAR the same thing, unless said heterosexual is immersed in a largely hostile HOMOsexual community. Were you? Did you have no hetero friends or family members to turn to? Were you afraid of even admitting it? Unless I'm horribly mistaken, of course not. ]

Considering you don't know the situation I can forgive you for calling it a "cop-out". On the contrary, she was anything but nice in her comments on my journal and stamps and was only aiming to make me angry and start an argument.

Furthermore, as I have stated numerous times, I don't think any one group should have a day for themselves when it affects everyone. And did you do any research on this subject? For one thing; it's not a week, it's a day. For another, until this year (and on deviantART only this year for that matter) I didn't see any awareness whatsoever on the day for anyone else who was bullied or any other type of bullying--hardly anyone at all acknowledged that (except for those of us who were irritated about it). And being bullied for another reason than being homosexual isn't the same thing? Since when? It hurts just the same and people are scared to turn to other people for help just the same. There's no difference other than the reason behind it. And to keep people from killing themselves? That's what TWLOHA is for (link provided in case you don't know what that is), which I wholeheartedly support because it focuses on how to solve the problem. It's not about one group saying "oh poor us, we're dealing with a problem everyone else deals with but we're more important!" which is pretty much exactly what Spirit Day is.

[ Well, I suppose you're correct that I haven't seen everything she has written to you, so I'll concede that, but I still think that it is a major cop-out to not respond to her last paragraph up there- I'd be very interested in your response to the points she raised which, as far as I'm concerned, are spot on and I couldn't have put it better.

Oh yes it's a day not a week, that does invalidate my stance. Was I also wrong on what it's about? Oh, no. So never mind it invalidates nothing. I'll admit I was reading quickly as I was a bit upset upon finding an individual who opposes something that I view as being very good and beneficial.

Plenty of groups have days/weeks/whatever devoted just to them- so, as *Queerly asked, do you oppose all of them as well? Or do you just oppose this because you also oppose what you see as a sinful "choice"? And I support your religious choices, it's perfectly fine for you to believe what you do, I'm certainly not attacking that, even if I disagree with it. But it shouldn't be affecting your opinion on how to treat LGBTs, on supporting a movement that is benefical for them, gives them help and awareness that they desperately need. Like I said, everyone knows bullying is bad. IT HAS AWARENESS. Not everyone knows however what is happening to LGBT youthes, and worse, in some of the more hostile areas, it is IGNORED.

Bullying of LGBT is different. How man times do I have to say this? It doesn't "hurt the same"- perhaps it might appear that way to you, if you are lucky enough to live in an area where LGBTs aren't living in constant fear- but let me tell you, that is not the norm. What makes bullying of LGBTS so different is that they are being bullied in a society where they cannot just turn to the adults for help- a society at large that is hostile and often teaches others to hate them. Which is what makes it different from, say, racial bullying, where those children at least have family to turn to and no one says 'you shouldn't have chosen to be black, put some on dye your skin!'

You know what I did when I was bullied? I talked to my mom, my friends, once even the teacher and guidance counseler.

Do you know what *Queerly did when she was bullied? Withdraw in to herself, far too afraid for her safety in her conservative southern community to go to the teacher, and too sick at heart to be able to admit her true issues to her parents out of fear of rejection/hurting them/making them question their beliefs.

To sum it up, I would like to ask what *Queerly asked before she was blocked:
Would you be opposed to a 'Spirit Day' dedicated to kids committing suicide over racial bullying? What about 'Adopt a Shelter Dog' day? That doesn't include cats, so are you still pissed when all those sweet dogs get adopted? What about Breast Cancer awareness month? There's more than one type of cancer that affects patients. How about anxiety awareness week? There's more than one mental illness.

Like I said, groups getting needed awareness isn't a new thing.

I'm not trying to upset you or argue with you for no reason, and you are certainly entitled to your beliefs. However, I am as well and I will try and implore you to stop fighting something that is a good thing. While I myself have seen plenty of LGBT awareness movements, if you yourself have not, then that proves that they need the day, or week, or whatever it is that they're given in whatever way, more than ever.

There are lots of issues in the world. No day or week or movement could cover them all. In this case, this day covers LGBT bullying. I ask again, what the heck is so bad with that?? ]

And this is why I don't think you or Queerly were even listening, I have stated my reasons very clearly NUMEROUS times, including in my responses to both you and her and you continue to ignore them. Since you won't listen to me when I straight out reply with my answers maybe you should try reading some of the other comments, the artist's comments, etcetera which all state what I have said a thousand times. I'm getting pretty sick of being asked the same questions over and over and then not even being listened to when I answer. And before replying I would like to ask you to please do your research--there is nothing, I repeat, NOTHING that sets LGBT bullying apart from other types of bullying other than media coverage and extensive whining. They all have different degrees of severity, the only difference is--like with most minorities--when they are targeted they have the media freaking out and jumping to conclusions.

Here are some interesting statistics: 1 in every 4 kids from elementary to high school is bullied; only 30% of those are bullied because of their sexual orientation. Over 50% of students who were bullied were bullied because of their physical appearance. Only 4% of bullying cases end with adult intervention, 11% of bullying cases end with peer intervention, and 85% of bullying cases have absolutely no intervention--regardless of the reasons behind the bullying.

And, as I stated before, the degree of severity varies with each case, there is nothing to show that an LGBT kid suffers more or less than any other kid who is bullied (unless, of course, you look at one of the extremely biased websites that completely ignores the statistics of a child who isn't LGBT being bullied--unfortunately there are many out there, the majority of which can't seem to even keep a standardized statistic). If you still insist that this day is needed might I recommend you also create a day for every other child who is bullied for whatever reason; go on, make a day for those who are bullied because they are overweight, skinny, tall, short, heterosexual, smart, stupid, non-athletic, mentally-disabled, physically-disabled, "nerdy", poor, rich, black, hispanic, white, asian, unpopular, has a speech impediment, has frizzy hair, has stick-straight hair, doesn't have a boyfriend/girlfriend, stands up for another child who is bullied...need I say more?

[ You truly don't believe that growing up in a society that is hostile towards you and in which you generally are too afraid to speak out doesn't differentiate LGBT bullying from, to use your list, "overweight, skinny, tall, short, heterosexual, smart, stupid, non-athletic, mentally-disabled, physically-disabled, "nerdy", poor, rich, black, hispanic, white, asian, unpopular, has a speech impediment, has frizzy hair, has stick-straight hair, doesn't have a boyfriend/girlfriend, stands up for another child who is bullied"?

If your answer is yes, then I suppose our conversation is at an end because you are correct, we are simply talking in circles. But if you believe that LGBT kids are just whining about their issues as exacerbated by the media... I'm sorry, but I would say that people like you are the reason awareness movements are needed.

Also if you're going to use statistics, please include source links. ]

If you haven't noticed, most people are the exact opposite of hostile towards them nowadays (kids don't necessarily count, children can be very cruel about everything). Such people are actually pretty much glorified (see LGBT celebrities and politicians) now. I've noticed more people being hostile towards me and several of my non-LGBT friends for having a different opinion on homosexuality than I have seen or heard of any sort of hostility towards my LGBT friends (not simply in the area I live in, I have many friends from other countries, states, and cities).

You misunderstand what I'm trying to say. I'm not saying that horrible stuff doesn't happen to LGBT kids and that they're only whining (although they [not all of them] tend to do a heck of a lot of it; as do most minorities), I'm simply pointing out that it doesn't ONLY happen to them so it doesn't make sense and is unfair to create a day just for them, regardless of how much awareness it raises.

There were mountains of sources most of which have been long since lost I'm afraid but a quick Google search of "LGBT bullying statistics" and just "bullying statistics" should bring up the vast majority of them.

Ann Barnhardt #fundie barnhardt.biz

Because remember, Diabolical Narcissists, like the fallen angels they mirror, are INVETERATE AND FACILE LIARS. Projection is a specific form of lying.

Unless you have been in a very, very deep coma for the past half century, you have seen this on a daily basis out of the political class. If I may be so bold, every day I see you all who still cling to the legitimacy of the political system trying to square the circle and process these events as if the Constitutional Republic still existed and this isn’t kabuki theater entertainment, and the term “mind screwed” leaps to mind, indeed.

Every time a politician puffs himself up and starts bloviating about “fiscal irresponsibility”, “disregard for the Constitution” or any such thing, whilst committing capital crimes on a near-daily basis – crimes of treason, crimes against humanity, and crimes against peace that literally merit execution, this is the quintessence of “projection”.

Having the people who exposed the PlannedParenthood baby parts trafficking prosecuted for attempted baby parts trafficking is societal end-stage projection.

Hillary Clinton railing that all women who report rape should be assumed to be telling the truth while she has spent her entire adult life character assassinating (and possibly having murdered) women who were raped by her serial rapist husband is societal end-stage projection.

Judas Iscariot lecturing Our Lord and the other Apostles about THE POOR (TM) and how the flask of spikenard Mary was anointing Our Lord with should be sold and given to THE POOR (TM), while being himself a thief (John 12: 3-6). Yeah, that’s projection. Just a l’il bit. L’il bit.

When our lord and savior jorge bergoglio, a textbook diabolical narcissist and likely sociopath, rails, for example, against “namecalling” and “labeling”, whilst delivering homily after homily doing exactly that – Hor-hay project-ay. The best example of this is in Bergoglio’s um, document, Evangelii Gaudium, specifically the jawdroppingly oblivious paragraph 94. Behold:

94. This worldliness (said the man who is completely obsessed with being adored by the world) can be fuelled in two deeply interrelated ways. One is the attraction of gnosticism, a purely subjective faith whose only interest is a certain experience or a set of ideas and bits of information which are meant to console (like Soul Annihilation, or false ecumenism, or “who am I to judge?”, for example?) and enlighten, but which ultimately keep one imprisoned in his or her own thoughts and feelings. The other is the self-absorbed promethean neopelagianism of those who ultimately trust only in their own powers (I’m in charge around here! All authority rests in me! I’LL TAKE THEIR HATS…!) and feel superior to others because they observe certain rules or remain intransigently faithful to a particular Catholic style from the past (like 1974?). A supposed soundness of doctrine or discipline leads instead to a narcissistic (wheee!) and authoritarian elitism (WHEEEEEE!!), whereby instead of evangelizing, one analyzes and classifies others (“O God, I give thee thanks that I am not as the rest of men…” said the inveterate namecaller, literally AS HE IS NAMECALLING), and instead of opening the door to grace, one exhausts his or her energies in inspecting and verifying (said the pathological, persistent namecaller). In neither case is one really concerned about Jesus Christ or others (like when he refuses to genuflect to the Consecrated Host, and tells atheists NOT to convert so that they can continue to amuse him). These are manifestations of an anthropocentric immanentism (said the man who openly preaches humanism). It is impossible to think that a genuine evangelizing thrust could emerge from these adulterated forms of Christianity (said the most violent and enthusiastic adulterer of Christianity, well, since his homeboy Luther).

In micro terms, a Diabolical Narcissist will tell you that you are insecure, needy, self-absorbed, judgmental – whatever the DN is, he will accuse you of being that. If he is a liar, then YOU are the liar. If he is a cheater (assuming a romantic relationship or marriage), then he will inevitably accuse YOU of cheating. If he is stealing from you, he will accuse you of stealing from him. If he is acting like a child, he will accuse you of acting like a child. If he is lazy, he will accuse you of being lazy. If he drinks too much, he will accuse you of drinking too much whether you do or not. I could go on like this ad infinitum.

some incels #sexist reddit.com

Re: Incel lurker who hates this culture

(gigatruecel)

But there’s more to me and more to my life than having sex. I love my family. I love video games, podcasts, theatre, music, animals, rain, reading, etc.

This is what we mean when we say cope. It's not just sex. It's a lack of romantic and social intimacy. This is shit human beings need to feel sane.

We're not saying everyone sucks. Half the shit on this sub is just memes. But you're fucking coping if you think you can live a happy and fulfilling life without intimacy and social relationships. You fucking can't, and you have NO idea what you're missing out on.

It's another world entirely. Falling asleep staring into the eyes of someone who loves you and trusts you completely. It's the essence of the human experience. Why do you think history is filled with love stories and romanticism? It is one of the strongest emotions we can feel, connecting with another person at that intimate level is critical for our well-being.

We are denied these experiences because we are ugly and/or short. Our lives are a fucking joke.

(ShallowEcho)
"childish made-up terminology" - Aka I can't be bothered to read up the shit and since I don't understand it I need someone to spoon-feed me, wah wah I'm a 21 yo manbaby.

"Anyone who tries to look on the bright side and actually be happy is “coping” - If you base your happiness in false premises you're fucking coping, no way around that. Reality is tough and while plenty of females won't admit to these awful rough things, the fact of the matter is that those superficial "horrid" thoughts are what guide their mate selection, you can keep the "not all wamehn" cope as long as you want you'll eventually come to terms with it.

"Don't go for those women" - You're implying there are women we can go for, fact of the matter is, unless you're someone who literally has 0 self-steem and wants to be stepped on and cucked, you probably aren't gonna really find anyone in your life if you're an ugly fuck. If you earn enough income and lack the self steem you can find some femoid that will fuck you a couple times and then see some chadster behind your back while you bankroll her, that's the best you can hope in an "optimist" scenario. You're talking out of your ass.

"But there’s more to me and more to my life than having sex."- This proves to me you don't even fucking know what the deal is. It's not about finding someone to fuck, you can pay hookers for that, it's about finding a relationship you big fucking mongo. It's like you took a big chug of IT and just came here in your soy-fueled rage to dump a fucking paragraph no how fucking retarded and out of touch with this community you are, and you do so in a hillariously sad fucking way because you're also trying to teach a lesson without having even learned who you're talking to. Get a fucking grip man.

(Salusa-Secundus)
Retard, women can be nice to you but they'll never be attracted to you. This is what we mean. They aren't all bitches to lower tier men but they'd all sooner fuck the tall handsome Trump supporter over us,.even if they were feminists.

There are white supremacists getting laid RIGHT NOW while you rot away in misery.

why would i want to sleep with/have a relationship with someone who would sleep with a white supremacist? My point is, I don't care if awful women sleep with awful men. They can have each other. Women are more complex than you give them credit for. Humankind as a whole has a variety of people. And women are human. ergo, there are different women with differing preferences. Some may prefer racists, but others prefer feminists, to use your example. They can't all be painted with such a broad brush.

Richard Spencer (you know him) has a LIBERAL girlfriend. Half of Reddit is basically male feminist virgins and he's having way more success than them.

All women are awful by that metric. They can be nice and even friends with you but they'll always pick the guy they are attracted to, at least for sex.

Face it boyo.

THEY PREFER THE GUY THEY WANT TO FUCK. Doesn't matter for shit what kind of person they are.

(enjoy_life88)
This is just another IT meme - "I'm a virgin, but at least I'm not an incel!"


I’m 21 years old
I love video games, podcasts, theatre, music, animals, rain, reading, etc.

You're coping, just like all of us. No one said there are not other things in life that one can enjoy, to forget about the fundemental things your life is lacking. That IS coping.

But add 10 years. The effect of copes will fade. The void inside you will get bigger and bigger.

Get off your high horse, fren.

(MayflyEng)

I don't enjoy self identifying as an incel for the same reason a woman may avoid the title of feminist. People who fit under the umbrella take the word too far and apply unwanted context to it. If you say you're a feminist people hear feminazi. If you say you're an incel, people hear woman-hating ephebophile.

I suppose i object to the word cope because of the context that surrounds it as well. A incel can't find joy in something without someone commenting and reminding him that his life is terrible and the thing he finds joy in is really only a distraction. But for me personally, I think I'd enjoy the things I mentioned regardless of relationships or not. Maybe I'd enjoy them less often, because I'd have a relationship to fill my time, but I'd still enjoy them.

And maybe you're right about time being a deciding factor in my "naivete". I can't see the future, but i think I'm overall a decent enough person to find someone before I'm 31.

You're probably fakecel then.

What has given you this hope you will find someone by 30?

You're probably not actually incel if people haven't crushed that hope out of you.

How many times have you been rejected by your looksmatch?

Edit: not sure how someone who's 5'2 still has hope lol unless they have a model tier face, and even then... Good for you I guess. One day that'll be gone and it will hurt.

I've 5'2", somewhat overweight, no muscle mass, a very plain-ugly face, kicked out of college, so poor I'm straddling the poverty line, and I don't have a car. But I'm also a good person. As long as I've got that going for me, I still have hope

Cope. Most of the people here are good people. In fact the majority of the world is good people. It doesn't get you anything.

Women even go for murderers over incels, but you won't see anyone here tell people to bundymaxx

Lose the weight. Fatcel is volcel, but IDK if it matters at 5'2. Still good for quality of life though.

Good luck with the poverty.

Anonymous Coward #conspiracy godlikeproductions.com

Group of Hellenic Re-establishment (G.H.REES).

End star wars—Stop WWIII.

Ultra urgent message of planetary security

Special responsibilities for the Russian government

To the government members of all nations , U.N/O.N.U member states, via their embassies in Greece.

Athens, 13/5/2016, G.H.REES prytaneum/headquarters.

Subject: Receipt of astrostrategics information transmitted to planet earth from the forces of the four (4) outer planets of the solar system to the governments of planet earth, all under command of mutinous space forces in the inner planets of our solar system (666, 777, 888).

Sirs,

See below a summary of the information transmitted from the forces in the four outer planets via “ heavy, slow neutrino transmitters” in the vicinity of planet Saturn, and received by “ heavy, slow neutrino receivers” of the “space search division” of G.H.REES in the city of Patras, Greece.
You may deliver this summary of information to your specialised university staff for further analysis, as you, as politicians , are incapable of doing so due to a lack of specialized knowledge.
We add that it is likely that these heavy , slow neutrino transmissions were made possible through concentrated radiation neutrino-naser transmitters , since the above transmissions took place with an acute angle of transmission , arriving on planet earth with a 2,000 km radius. We give you summaries of the above transmissions , with prefixes depending on the case:

A). Prehistory of inner galactic astrostrategics: Mutiny in four constellations, that is, 4 left-turning solar systems in the vicinity of our local galaxy, with the constellation of DRACO (A’DRACONIS) leading this initial mutiny 70,000,000 years ago ,against the interstellar galactic government of the constellation of ANDROMEDA.

B).Cause for this mutiny was the excessive extraction of energy from radioactive metals on their planets , forbidden by the legislation of the government of Andromeda. Such energy extraction is also forbidden as it can cause destabilization of “ matter-energy dimensions” above and below the dimensions of “zero point” , thus causing “infiltration” of the “ matter-energy” dimensions.

C). Attacks of space vessels , “war planets”, of the four mutinous constellations against planets in other constellations for the stealing of radioactive metals and other natural resources, which stealing is strictly forbidden by the government of the constellation of Andromeda , ruling over approximately 70 billion solar systems in the local galaxy. This number is only a fraction of the 200 billion solar systems in our galaxy, ruled by a government of “ greatest matter inspissation” , and by the “ central government of inspissation-rarification of our galaxy”.

D). Raiding space vessels of the constellation of DRACO arrived in our solar system, originally inhabited by the black race originating from the star system of SIRIUS as the central solar system of 13 solar systems. Through genetic engineering , these hostile draconian spaceships spawned and spread across our planet the draconian yellow race ( pre-historic Chinese), and the draconian fauna (reptiles ,dinosaurs) and flora (cacti). Their main target was the extermination of the anthropoid black Sirian race , the local Sirian flora and fauna, leading to the desertification and destruction of the planet, so that stealing the planet’s natural resources and radioactive meterials would be made easier. The above attempt to steal the planet’s natural resources and radioactive metals took place 65,000,000 years ago . The galactic government of the “ constellation of Andromeda” dispatched to planet earth combat space vessels , which ousted the draconian populations (chinese) and exterminated the dinosaurs.

E). More raiding by bandit spaceships of the mutinous constellation of DRACO took place 20,000 earth years ago, led by the so-called “invincible war planet LEVAN-LEVANHIAH “ or “SELENE-MOON” ,flagship of the draconian astrofleet. This MOON flagship made its first unsuccessful attempt to go into orbit around planet earth 20,000 earth years ago, however its second attempt was successful and was put in orbit 13,500 earth years ago. Due to the abnormal, unnatural increased mass concentration of the MOON+EARTH “duo” , our planet is constantly going into a shrinking, spiraling orbit towards the sun, rather than the normal, natural expanding orbit of all heavenly bodies in the universe. This shrinking orbit will eventually cause earth to eventually crash into our sun in the distant future.

F). The 27-member (24+3) draconian government of the flagship Moon-Selene-Levan landed the first genetically engineered Chinese populations on the white pelasgian continent of ATLANTIS . The andromedian forces present on our planet at the time successfully warded off a draconian-atlantian invasion attempt of the continent of Aigis and Europe, at which point the draconian MOON used its hyper-gravity technology to bring about the destruction and sinking of Atlantis and Aigis (today’s Mediterranean sea). The Chinese atlantean populations moved to the territories of today’s China.Following that, the draconian bandits of the “MOON” provoked civil wars within the white andromedian race and genocides of the white andromedian populations by hordes of white-yellow Mongols or Touranian crossbreeds. These wars ,all of them conceived by the lunar draconians , were caused primarily on account of religious differences within the white andromedian races . The prime target of the draconians is (was, from now on), to rule over the four(4) outer planets and beyond , over the star system of Sirius as the “coccyx” of the Universal Organism ,and thus an area of utmost importance for the entire Universal Organism , so that they could blackmail from there billions of inhabited planets in the universe.

G). Following two world wars on our planet (1914,1940), both planned by the draconian leaders of the flagship MOON via draconian “demons” who gave orders to the Saxon and Hebrew lodges , lunar draconians, led by draconian Lord Dragon Sin-Sion-Sina-Jedi-Jade-Jed-Jude-Jehova, have masterplanned the outbreak of WWIII led by Chinese “HONG” as the supreme hyper-lodge of the planet and above ALL other lodges of the East and West. Through WWIII, the lunar draconians intend to genocide 5 billion people of the white and indigenous black races , white-yellow Touranian race, and black-yellow races in the B’ and C’ phase of WWIII . During the A’ phase of WWIII, the lunar draconians have planned a war conflict between the two trilateral adversaries of US.E.J (USA, EUROPE,JAPAN), against R.I.C (RUSSIA, SIITIC ISLAM, CHINA). As for the end of WWIII, the lunar draconians have planned the survival of ONLY the Chinese and Korean populations , as the only pure yellow draconian populations of planet earth.
Contrary to paragraphs A),B),C), D),and E), containing information given to G.H.REES by the andromedians in the vicinity of planet Saturn, paragraph F) contains a mix of information given by the andromedians of Saturn and G.H.REES research , while paragraph G) only contains G.H.REES research information.

H). The above research information from G.H.REES was transmitted via heavy neutrino (neutrino-naser) G.H.REES transmitters to planet Saturn, where it was received by the andromedian forces stationed there. These andromedian forces of the galactic government andromedian astrofleet , bearing in mind G.H.REES ‘s research information , are notifying ALL governments of planet earth via the following ultimatum:

“Any governments of planet earth that will carry out the planned WWIII on the planet , will be annihilated without being allowed the slightest chance of survival through “ acts of expiation”, according to the laws and legislation of the government of the “constellation of Andromeda” .(see ancient Greek law). Likewise, not only will Touranian-Mongolian governments and the draconian governments of China , and North and South Korea be excluded from “acts of expiation”, but also the populations of these Touranian-Mongolian and draconian nations should WWIII break out. This translates into a mass extermination of the populations of these Touranian-Mongolian and draconian nations, in case the planned lunar draconian WWIII breaks out between the axes of US.E.J and R.I.C.

Jews, Saxons, Albanians, Bulgarians, a number of Turks/Hungarians/Romanians, Fins,other Mongols of Eurasia and a number of Islamic nations are all of Touranian-Mongolian descent , that is, a white-yellow crossbreed.
The Andromedian forces in the four (4) outer planets , arrived there in mass numbers after the earth year 2000 (A.D= after draconian medium-Rabbi “Jesus or Jehosouva Christ”), are calling upon the members of the Touranian governments and Touranian –Mongolian populations of planet earth, to take the side of the white andromedian race , that is the white blood of their white-yellow crossbreed, against the yellow side of their crossbreed, if they wish to survive peacefully on planet earth through “acts of expiation” according to the galactic law. This is because the pure yellow draconian populations of China and North and South Korea will be expelled from planet earth and taken to another solar system by the andromedian space forces , even if they manage to survive by accepting to commit “acts of expiation”.

I). Since earth year 2000 A.D , the combat division of the andromedian starfleet arrived at the orbits of planet Saturn has been negotiating with the draconian forces of the MOON for the unconditional surrender of the draconian forces occupying the inner planets of our solar system . Following the ultimate surrender of the MOON and its escorting by andromedian ships safely out of our solar system , the now shrinking orbits of the planets will begin to expand naturally , through use of “space engineering” so as to stabilize these orbits of the planets of our solar system , and to reverse the now shrinking orbits and their ultimate impact with our sun. G.H.REES asked for more details of the above mission and negotiations but was turned down on account of “ confidentiality of negotiations”.

G.H.REES’s Neutrino-Nasar receivers ( neutrino amplified stimulated absorption radiation) of the space research division of G.H.REES in the city of Patras , Greece, received the following clarification-command only, that is: “ In case the Draconian forces ultimately agree to an unconditional surrender and a lifetime commitment of “acts of expiation” in a different solar system , according to galactic laws, it is forbidden that any court sentence or legal actions be taken against them for the crimes they have committed”. The same will apply to the Touranian and Mongolian governments and populations of planet earth , should they wish to commit similar “acts of expiation” according to the galactic universal law, after giving up committing crimes of the galactic penal code.

J). WWI and WWII are also included in the above crimes, with WWIII still at its starting phase, falsely attributed to a religious war and starting with a provoked attack of the “antichrist West (US.E.J) 666”, against “Christian Korea 777” and “Christian China 888” after 2023.
All of the above false ideologies pertaining to “ Antichrist 666” and “ Christian 777 and 888”, were conceived by the lunar draconian forces , with the aim of genociding the white andromedian race of planet earth by the counterattacking forces of “R.I.C-777-888” against “US.E.J-666”. Only the pure draconian populations of China 888 and the two Koreas 777 are to survive this genocide.

K). The space research division of G.H.REES at Patras, Greece, informed the andromedian forces at planet Saturn that the lunar draconian forces as well as the forces of the Cronian andromedian mutineers (andromedian traitors who betrayed the galactic government of Andromeda and joined forces with the draconians of the MOON) , have planned a fake “ arrival of andromedian forces” on planet earth. During this fake arrival, it has been planned that the mutinous saturnian (cronian) forces will pose as the true andromedians , so as to deceive the armed forces of “ U.S.E.J-666” and drag them to a world war against the armies of “ R.I.C -777-888”. These fake saturnian forces posing as the true andromedians will also commit “war crimes” and “ crimes against humanity” against the armies and populations of “R.I.C” so that counterattacking “R.I.C” will ultimately genocide the unarmed civilians of “US.E.J”.
The andromedian forces at Saturn replied to G.H.REES that: “ Even the saturnian traitors and other andromedian mutineers will be allowed to commit “acts of expiation” , if they so wish, and manage to survive not in our solar system but rather in the constellation of Andromeda.

L). Particular responsibility rests with the Russian government : Although Christianity is a Hebrew cult (both these religions ,along with Islamism, were conceived by the lunar draconian forces), and although the members of the Russian government are Touranian Israelites, the predominant Christian tendency among the Russian people is still able to intercept the degradation and corruption brought about by the Touranian Hebrews and and Saxons within the white race nations of “US.E.J.”. We call upon the Russian government to act accordingly , in order for these actions to be deemed “acts of expiation” for the survival of Touranian populations of planet earth.

M). Meanwhile , we call upon the Chinese hyper-government of “HONG” , as well as the hyper-government of the West of the Touranian Hebrewsaxons of “AOA” and “ OTO” in London, the Hebrewsaxon governments of the “USA” and “ E.E” , and the Touranian governments of the Balkans and Eurasia, to immediately cancel the planned enslavement of the white andromedian Hellenes so the blackmailed Hellenes will accept the setting up of “ the empire of Constantinople 666” and the political-military leadership of this “Greek empire 666” of “ US.E.J” , for a military assault of “NATO “ and “SEATO” against “R.I.C” . This assault against “RIC” will cause the counterattack of “R.I.C” and the genocide of white race populations of “US.E.J” , with the Greeks the first up for genocide. Because execution of the above evil planning by the lunar draconian forces will “ result in irrevocable death penalties and exclusion from any possible means of survival via “acts of expiation” against ALL draconian and Touranian governments and populations of the planet”. That is the warning of the andromedian forces of Saturn.

That’s all for the time being….

On behalf of G.H.REES,
Karageorgiou Cr.Cr. Giannis, G.HREES representative
National and planetary security general of G.H.REES
12 Elpidos str, Nea Ionia , Volos, Greece.
Tel: [removed by submitter]
================

RELEVANT DOCUMENTS AND LINKS:

The Chinese-eyed dragon-turtle agent of "HONG" commands: "Let Greece go bankrupt"
(European Union taking orders from Dragonian China. Trilateral Axis US-E-J , USA - EUROPE - JAPAN)
GOOGLE IT!!!

"The convention for the future of Europe has ended with a show of a rapid rhetoric. The president of the convention, mister Valery Giscard d'Estaing closed the last meeting with a last minute changes to the first draft of the European constitution, adding providence for an official EU flag, one anthem, one anniversary and one slogan.
But (Giscard) kept his last word for the Wu Kei (comment: You may call the statue EL SENDAI-JEDI-GENOCIDOFAGGOTI), a turtle with a dragon head, something that mr. Giscard placed on his desk throughout every meeting.
(Giscard's statement was:)
"The last person I would like to thank is my Wu Kei turtle. It followed us and led us throughout our entire journey. When we were in the middle of the river, it guided us, just as it did for the first Chinese emperors, until we finally reached the river shore. And I expect, just as many of you do also, that from the early beginning, it knew whereof wanted to take us" (!)
Meanwhile, mr. Giscard took some lettuce leaves and offered them to the turtle statue. The turtle didn't say anything."

================

P.S.2: We present to you the Geostrategic Mathematical Codes which has elaborated and assigned the Chinese Masonic Hyper-lodge “HONG” in the below Geostrategic Axles which, without exception, were founded by “HONG” in order to design and to conduct the World War III, and in order to genocide the 2/3rds, namely 5 billion of all terrestrial races of the planet, from the pure Draconians – Yellow armies of China and of United Korea._ The Geostrategic Codes were cross-verified from Electronic eavesdropping executed by passive “Neutrino Receivers” of G.H.REES (technology) over sessions of masonic lodges of Hong-Kong, of Shanghai, of “AOA” – “Ordo Adeptis Atlantis” London, and over the environment of the “Planetary King of Israel”, arch-Rabbi Baruch or Barowghs of “USA”._

1): 666/A: US.E.J., USA – Europe – Japan._

2): 666/B: T.I.M., Tibet – India – Mongolia._

3): 777/A: North Korea._

4): 777/B: South Korea._

5): 888:A(+): R.I.C., Russia – Islam – China._

6): 888/B(+): C.J.T.H.S.M., China – Japan – Tibet – Hebrews – Saxons – Mongolia._

7): 888/C(+): C.K., China – Korea._

8): 888/C(-): J.T.H.S.M., Japan – Tibet – Hebrews – Saxons – Mongolia._

9): 888/B(-): Whites of Russia and Islamic States._

10): 888/A(-): Black Race nations._

The Mathematical signs (+) and (-) mean that the Geostrategic axis 888/B(+) has been designed to genocide the semi-axis 888/B(-) of Russia and Islamic States, and that the axis 888/C(+) of China and Korea has been designed to genocide the semi-axis 888/C(-) Japan – Tibet – Hebrews – Saxons – Mongolia, namely in order to genocide all the Hebrews and the Saxons of the Planet, as “not pure Yellow”, namely as Mongols White-Yellow._

The above means that the Chinese “HONG” has programmed to genocide the White populations of Russia with code 888/B(-), and the Hebrews and the rest Mongols of Russia with code 888/C(-). Therefore, withdraw immediately from “PACT OF SHANGHAI”, and abort immediately the supply of weapons and high technology, oil, natural gas, and space technology towards China and towards the two Korean states.

We (finally) present to you the fronts of the 1st phase of World War III, as those have being programmed from “HONG” of China, from “AOA” London, and from the arch-Rabbis Baruch of “USA”:

3rd W.W. “COSMIC ETNA” 2012

666/A
666/B
777/B

Versus

777/A
888/A
and remnants of the armies of “B.A.S.T./R.” Bulgaria – Albania – Skopje – Turkey – Romania – that will seek refuge in China territories.

================

DRACONIAN (CHINESE) SCHEME ARMAGEDDON
[link to www.youtube.com (secure)]

The silent genocide!!!
10.000 suicides in Greece from the begining of the crisis (2009) not announced by the mainstream media
GOOGLE IT!!

MASER - MASAR directed-energy technology weapons of G.H.REES
(note: This is the simplified version of the NETRINO - NASER strategic supremacy technology of G.H.REES)
GREEK ELLHN KAI CHAOS 2 BLOG - GOOGLE IT!

FROM THE ORBIT OF PLANET SATURN INTERPLANETARY SIGNAL OF PLANETARY SECURITY TOWARDS PLANET EARTH
(Year 2010 Document)
GOOGLE IT!!!

Royce E. Van Blaricome #fundie christiannews.net

Royce has claimed that Jesus is mentioned by name in the Constitution.

MarkSebree:
Where? Article and paragraph please. If in the Amendments, then the Amendment, and in applicable, the section and paragraph.

By the way, the Declaration of Independence is not the US Constitution.

You making a claim that is so easy to show to be false does not change the facts either.

Royce E. Van Blaricome:
Ever watch Bill O'Reilly when he gives the "Word of the Day"? If so, you'll be familiar with "Go look it up. If someone gives you the answers you don't learn anything and you don't remember it."

I know full well that the DOI isn't the Constitution. That's why I was the guy who pointed out to someone below a few days ago that "Creator" is not in the Constitution but rather the DOI.

You making a claim that is so easy to show to be false does not change the facts either. The words are right there in Black & white and they've NEVER been erased.

So thank you for showing who really has NO credibility because you're absolutely right - it is SO easy to show your absolutely wrong and your claims are provably false.

MarkSebree:
If "God, Christ, Jesus is [sic] clearly stated in the Constitution", then you should be able to point to the exact places. You have not shown that I am wrong, or that my claims are false. In fact, all I did was ask you to substantiate your claim, and you are dodging and running away.

Royce E. Van Blaricome:
I can. And btw, the correct word is "is". God, Jesus, Christ are one in the same.

I'm not dodging and running away of anything. And actually, it is YOU who made the claim with "You making a claim that is so easy to show to be false does not change the facts either."

So, since it's so easy, go and do it. As I've repeated said, it's right there in Black & White. I'm not spoonfeeding you squat because people don't learn anything from that. Just as I also said on here before.

MarkSebree:
"I can."

Then do so.

"And btw, the correct word is "is". God, Jesus, Christ are one in the same."

Then you should only be using one name, not three. As you have them written, they are three names, and thus the correct form of the verb is the plural.

"'m not dodging and running away of anything. And actually, it is YOU who made the claim with "You making a claim that is so easy to show to be false does not change the facts either.

So, since it's so easy, go and do it. As I've repeated said, it's right there in Black & White. I'm not spoonfeeding you squat because people don't learn anything from that. Just as I also said on here before."

Fine. It is only possible to show a negative in this case because the solution space is finite and small. None of the words "god", "Jesus", "Christ" or any other deity are mention in the US Constitution or in any of its amendments. No specific religion is mentioned in the US Constitution. The only mentioned of religion in the US Constitution are restrictions on the government, and those mentions are generic and apply equally to all religions. The complete transcript of the US Constitution can be found at www dot archives dot gov.

The real burden of proof is actually on you. You have made the affirmative claim that the US Constitution "clearly states" or references your deities.

Royce E. Van Blaricome:
Evidently, you have a little problem with tracking and remembering what I previously said so let me repeat myself:

Ever watch Bill O'Reilly when he gives the "Word of the Day"? If so, you'll be familiar with "Go look it up. If someone gives you the answers you don't learn anything and you don't remember it."

"Then you should only be using one name, not three. As you have them written, they are three names, and thus the correct form of the verb is the plural."

Your Biblical ignorance does not dictate the use of the English language.

"None of the words "god", "Jesus", "Christ" or any other deity are mention in the US Constitution or in any of its amendments. No specific religion is mentioned in the US Constitution."

Wrong.

Thank you for posting the website address for all to go to. I appreciate that. I actually went there and I appreciate you proving yourself wrong.

It's right there on that very site you gave in black & white, MUCH APPRECIATED!!

Oh, and btw, I further REALLY appreciate just how blind the spiritually-dead can be.

Theeohn Megistus #conspiracy in5d.com

In the beginning of this universe Divine Creator created “Games”. The Game for this Universe was called Polarity Integration. The goal was simple: experience polarity and integrate it; once achieved, reunite with Divine Creator. The players of this game would be the Humanoids and the Reptilians. The Humanoids were given a creation myth which stated that the Humans could colonize any planet they chose, but if they find another race on the planet, they must negotiate a peace treaty and strive for harmony. The Reptilians were given a creation myth that stated that they owned the Galaxy and had the right to colonize any planet they chose. If a non-reptilian race is present, they could and should destroy it. Humans were created right-brain dominant (or feminine polarized), Reptilians left-brain dominant (or masculine polarized).

The Reptiles were given a head start so that their technology would start out superior to the Humans. Their home world was called Aln and was located in the Orion Constellation. The Reptiles already attained space travel when the humans were still swimming in the oceans. The humanoid home world was Avyon in the Vegan star system and existed initially as aquatic primates (the Cetaceans).

When humanoids became advanced enough for space travel about 22 million years ago, they colonized another planet called Avalon. Soon the reptiles arrived and a conflict resulted. They infiltrated the colony with their advanced technology and while courting friendship and trust, sowed the seeds of discord between those that wished to grow spiritually and those that wanted to grow technologically. A civil war ensued and the reptiles supplied both sides with sufficient technology to annihilate themselves. This was round one. The reptiles won.

The Founders of the Game moved some of the humanoids to Sirius B so they could be away from the reptilian interference. Over a very long period of time two groups emerged called the “Etherics” (non- physicals) and the “Physicals.” The Etherics were feminine polarized and the Physicals were male polarized. The Founders then moved the Physicals to Aln, the Reptilians home world and the Etherics were moved to Tiamat, the primordial Earth.

The Reptilians weren’t real happy about the Physical Humanoids showing up on their planet and soon the battles began and the colony was nearly destroyed. Some of the humans were forced into slavery and others went underground and formed the Black League. The Black League managed to escape Aln for Tiamat to join the Etherics.

The Reptilians eventually found out about Tiamat and decided to colonize it. When they arrived, there was a proto-humanoid civilization and the Etherics. The Etherics sent positive energy to the Reptiles in an effort to create a peaceful coexistence and get them to let go of their Creation Myth. It worked well for a very long while. It almost looked like integration had already occurred. There were snake reptiles on one side, dinoid reptiles on the other and the humanoids in the middle. The humanoids had learned farming and were growing enough food to feed the whole planet. This was subsequently called the Great Experiment, the forerunner of planet Earth. This was the first time Etherics had been used to obtain a peaceful coexistence and it was amazingly successful.

However, word got out that a planet existed that was living in peace and harmony and the ruling Orion Reptilians decided to pay a visit. This was, of course, in violation of the Creation Myth and they immediately started sowing the seeds of discord among the Reptiles in an attempt to convince them that the Humanoids were secretly planning their destruction. It took a very long time for the ruling Reptilians to work this plan through because the Etherics kept sending thoughts of love and harmony and the physical humanoids kept sending them food. But ultimately the Creation Myth won out and the Reptiles developed a plan to destroy the humanoids through germ warfare.

The proto-humanoids understood what was happening and decided that they would leave the planet and go to the Pleiades aboard the starship Pegasus and the Etherics would mutate back into the aquatic primates (whales and dolphins) and maintain the biosphere. A plan was devised to rid the planet of the Reptiles through implosions of the underground fusion generators. About 98% of the Reptiles were destroyed in the ensuing world-wide cataclysm but a few survived and were present when the remaining planet was repopulated as Earth. Another small group was given sanctuary aboard the Pegasus and went to the Pleiades. Another group fled to the planet Maldek. This all happened about 8 million years ago.

A long period of peace existed after these events. The land guardianship role was vacant so the cetaceans and spiritual hierarchy began searching for a replacement which they eventually found on the fourth planet of the Vega system, the birthplace of present-day humans. They were aquatic primates at that time but through assistance of the Galactic Guardians their evolution was allowed to jump forward to become the Vegan Humans and subsequently created a new galactic guardian group. This was about 4.5 million years ago. A Galactic Federation was created and in the ensuing migration over 2.5 million years, the Galactic Federation agreed to colonize Earth again. The Earth Colony Hybornea was created in the northern lands near present day Florida (the Earth axis has shifted since then). It was a civilization that existed for nearly a million years beginning two million years ago.

The Lyrans decided that, in order to live in complete harmony, they would eliminate the self-defense function. They did this through genetic engineering. However, it left them defenseless so they developed a warrior race which lived separate from their civilization. They were genetically engineered with enhanced adrenaline output to react more aggressively than natural. However, this change caused an imbalance which limited the ability of this altered being to connect to its creator. These new helpers were unstable and threatening to the civilization that created it. As a solution to the problem the Lyrans exiled the whole population of altered beings to a sparsely inhabited planet in a far-off corner of the galaxy. To ensure this would never be revealed to anyone, they altered all memory of this experience and no records were allowed to be taken. This new planet was called Earth. Humanity was left on this “prison planet” to work out the genetic imbalance through adaptation.

Sometime after humans were marooned on Earth, a different extraterrestrial race arrived and attempted to enslave them. However, they did not comprehend human warlike capabilities and were repulsed. They have been planning retribution ever since and now confer with the present-day hierarchy at the top of the secret societies. The planetary awareness of these beings has been in the form of the beast or Satan or the devil. If their plan is allowed to be completed, the planet could be destroyed. They don’t care, they only want revenge.

A war of liberation broke out on Lyra about 360,000 years ago during which the terrorizing army fled to the Pleiades and took possession of the Hesperides system. The name was changed to the Pleja system in honor of their leader. She led an expedition to the SOL system and took control of Mars, Earth and Malona. Conflict broke out on Malona over control of the planetary government. Earth was evacuated back to Lyra-Vega. The war on Malona ultimately pulverized the planet and caused significant destructions on Mars, Venus and Earth.

A peaceful group of Lyran-Vegans migrated back to Earth many years later and developed a high civilization of Hybornea which lasted 6000 years and was again destroyed by wars. About 53,000 years ago wars again broke out in the Lyran system and a leader named Pelegon came to Earth with 70,000 men to establish another civilization which lasted 10,000 years and ultimately was again destroyed by wars. About 100,000 people fled to the Barnard Star (Beta Centaurus) while Earth was thrown back to the Stone Age.

They returned after 7000 years under the leadership of Atlant to create the great Atlantian civilization. His wife Karyatide created Lesser Atlantis and her father Muras created the great civilization of Mu. These blossomed into a planetary civilization which lasted 18,000 years until, in 13,000 B.C., a group of scientists tried seizing power. They were trying to again create a race to support their violent tendencies. Before the scientists were subdued and escaped back to Beta Centaurus, much of the continent of Atlantis was destroyed.

Two thousand years later this same group returned for revenge under the leadership of Arus (the Barbarian) and his 200 sub-leaders. He conquered Hybornea and began to systematically subjugate the rest of the world by attacking India, Pakistan, Iran, Iraq and surrounding areas. It was Arus and his men who were the “Sons of Heaven” that bred with the Earth females called the “Evas” to create the biblical Adam and Eve,the ancestors of many present-day humans. The descendants of Arus left the planet in 26 A.D. after creating Jmmanuel and implanting the Galactic laws and philosophies in humanity.

The origins of Lemuria began on a continent in what is now the Pacific Ocean around 900,000 B.C. and lasted until 26,000 B.C. It was a Lyrian/Sirian styled civilization with democratic principles of governance. It created a number of daughter empires during its existence; the most important of those was Atlantis (which existed in part, on a huge island-continent in the center of the Atlantic Ocean), the Libyan/Egyptian Empire in Africa and the Yü Empire of central China and Tibet.

Due to the influence of renegade Pleiadians / Centurians (Anunnaki), the Atlanteans began developing a hierarchical society which led to feelings of separateness and superiority. After they were granted equal guardianship of the planet 26,000 years ago by the Lemurians, they began plotting ways to grab the sole guardianship. They found allies in the colonies of Alpha Centauri and the Pleiades mostly through the Galactic Federation outpost colonies that shared the concept of a hierarchical society. They and various Pleiadian and Centaurian rebel-renegades plotted the destruction of Lemuria. Their plan was a technical success; however it resulted in the destruction of one of the Earth’s moons, the entire continent of Lemuria, cataclysmic events over the entire earth and a mini-ice-age.

The Atlantians (with the assistance of the Pleiadian and Centurian Rebels) used space ships with force fields to cause one of the Earths moon’s to spiral inward and just as the moon reached the ‘LaGrange Point’, they blasted it with particle beam weaponry. This resulted in a massive meteor shower over Lemuria with the resulting rupture of its subterranean gas chambers and the sinking of the entire continent. The physical destruction of Lemuria was so complete that nothing remained except legends. This was Great Flood #1.

Atlantis had its beginnings about 100,000 years ago. It was destroyed three times; the last time was coincident with Great Flood #3. In the second incarnation, which began 25,000 years ago, they had made great technological progress which was far greater that anything man has attained today however, it lacked sufficient spiritual development and became locked into materialistic endeavors. They wished to replace the clan structure of Lemurian society with an elite structure. This concept of governance was not well received and resulted in a series of costly civil wars across the entire planet. The clan structure is based on groups of people who all shared the same vision and goals about what should be accomplished in their respective fields. It was similar to our present-day scientist and technical trade-groups, except that these trade-groups also had limited governing authority. It meant that the most knowledgeable people were the ones in charge. It has been the elite form of governance that has been in place on this planet ever since Atlantis came to power 25,000 years ago.

They brought in one of the artificial Maldek moons to help balance the planet. The destruction of one of Earth’s two moons caused an unstable wobble in the Earth. This artificial moon was, in fact, a fully armed battle station. It was also an attempt to signal to the rebellious holdouts that military superiority was at hand which was ready and able to end all civil wars and rebellions. The rebellions instead continued over the entire 10,000 year period of this Middle Empire. There was a period of terrorism, torture and inquisitions. They created a superior ruling class which was sustained by the myth of a god-king. A single supreme god-king ruled over all.

Following the destruction of Lemuria, the Libyan/Egyptian Empire negotiated an understanding that allowed them to maintain some autonomy over their own affairs; however they did have to make some concessions to do this. The only other Empire of significance was the Yü, which refused to bow down to the Atlanteans. They even issued several decrees demanding an apology to the other empires for their careless and inhumane destruction of Lemuria and the subsequent cataclysms.

The Atlanteans, jointly with the Egyptians, countered with demands to rescind the decrees. The Yü Empire refused. The combined forces of the Atlantians, the Egyptians and the renegade Pleiadian Centurian allies forced the remnants of the Yü Empire underground. They still exist today as the Kingdom of Agharta in deep underground caverns beneath the Himalayan Mountains and under present day Tibet. The entrances from Tibet were all closed after China invaded in 1949. It is not clear, but is believed that they were searching for the entrances. Attempts to find it using modern day tunneling equipment have been unsuccessful.

Towards the end of the second Empire, autocratic rule was in full force and the remaining rebel alliance was exiled to southern Europe, to a place called Ionia (Greece) and there they would stay until they renounced their ways and complied with the ruling authority. This rebel alliance consisted of the former ruling elite as well as leading scientists. They decided instead to create a Lemurian style governance with plans to ultimately bring their government back to Atlantis. In other words, they became even more organized and dangerous than before they were exiled.

This did not sit well with the ruling authority of Atlantis. The rebels had defied them at every turn and now they were a greater threat than before. A plan was devised to end the problem by destroying Ionia by a method similar to the way they destroyed Lemuria. The plan required the assistance of the rebel Pleiadians and Centurians. This plot was discovered by the Ionians. The result was that the Ionians were able to counter the attack by interrupting their energy beam from Nibiru and the moon exploded over Atlantis instead. Atlantis therefore was destroyed in much the same manner as it had destroyed Lemuria. The Atlantean subcontinent was reduced to a few scattered islands. One of the two Firmament layers was destroyed as well. This was Great Flood #2. This happened 13,000 years ago.

This event did not completely destroy Atlantis however and attempts were made to reconstitute the civilization with what remained. They developed a crystal technology that was capable of transmitting energy wirelessly over great distances. They used the device to propel and guide airplanes, surface vehicles and submarines. They tapped solar energy and also found a way to tap the collective consciousness of the human mind. They eventually found a way to use the collective mind in harmony with the crystals and the Earth as a power source. The people became subservient to this system of mind and power control against their will (ala “The Matrix”). They also found a way to harness the power of the crystal to rejuvenate a person endlessly. One of the crystals is in the Biblical Ark.

Several thousand years before the first flood, the Anunnaki showed up in a ceremonious fashion and presented themselves as gods from heaven to the Atlantians. They started plugging into the ego-consciousness of the leaders by stimulating and fueling their base desires. New technologies were offered as gifts and in return they would do their bidding in holding influence over their subjects in rather depraved ways. They were instrumental in creating mind-Earth resonance devices and even came up with a way to alter the mind of the people to obey their wishes through a slow-pitched electro-magnetic pulse transmitted through the crystal generator network. This sound, which was inaudible to the human ear, caused a release of neurochemicals (the peptides that influence behavior) that caused irrational emotional states and submission to authority. They began attacking lesser civilizations to conquer and take their resources. Through genetic engineering they also helped develop a mutant human who was disconnected from his higher self. These humans would be unaware of their spirituality and would be much easier to control. These evolved into present-day humans.

The final destruction of Atlantis occurred sometime around 10,000 years ago. There was a conflict in the Middle East between the Rama Empire, the Egyptian Empire and the Sumerian Empire. In an attempt to end the conflict they destroyed some of the crystal temples that held up the Firmament. The idea was to open a hole just big enough to flood the enemy out of their positions. However, there was a simultaneous destruction of multiple temples on both sides which destroyed a sufficient number to cause the entire Firmament to collapse. This caused all of the water ice suspended in the atmosphere to come crashing down in a cascade effect over the entire planet. What remained of Atlantis was gone forever beneath the waves. A significant portion of Atlantis still exists at the bottom of the ocean in the Central Atlantic, off the coast of the Carolinas, the Bahamas and the south-western coast of Cuba. This was Great Flood #3.

The Firmament was created before humans existed. They were placed here by the Game Lords to allow for the development of sentient life approximately thirty-five million years ago. It has been destroyed and repaired many times. It consisted of two layers of water ice that acted as a shield against harmful radiation and caused there to be a uniform climate across the entire Earth surface. The temperature was in the high 70’s near the equator and the low 70’s at the poles. The winds were a modest 5 mph, the skies were always sunny, and there were few clouds, no hard rain, no significant winds and no storms. The ice in the Firmament created a lensing effect which made the Moon, Sun and stars all look bigger than they otherwise appear. The Firmament held about as much water as all the oceans rivers and streams on the planet, so when it came down, it would appear as though the sky was literally falling down.

Of course, the empires of Sumeria, Rama and Egypt were all destroyed in the subsequent flood. This flood spread world-wide to encompass the Americas, Asia, Europe and Africa. Every indigenous culture has a flood story. It rained for 40 days and in that time an entire world civilization was destroyed. What were left were legends and myths of gods and goddesses from an age which was completely erased from the earth. Approximately two million people survived the event on the surface. The Agharta (Lemurian) Empire also survived as they were already protected underground.

The Atlantean rulers and their associates fled to the star system of Hadar (a.k.a. Beta Centauri). The people of Hadar insisted that nothing should be done to save what was left of the human race. An argument ensued with the Pleiadians over the issue but the renegade Pleiadians won out. They intervened and restored many areas including the Middle East (Sumeria), the central valley in Mexico (Maya and other Mesoamerican civilizations), the Indus valley area of India and in North Central China near the city of Xian, and the entire Nile river basin in the land of the Egyptians.

So the restoration of life on this planet was once again in the hands of the same people who caused the problem in the first place. It was their intervention that triggered the destruction of Lemuria, the destruction of Atlantis and the entire world civilization. Through it all, it still didn’t sink into the Pleiadian rebels what they were doing to mankind. In the period 1500 B.C. through 1200 B.C. the renegade Pleiadians were forced to withdraw from direct intervention by the main defense forces of the Pleiadian Star League. This finally brought the “reign of terror” to an end.

The Spiritual Hierarchy was responsible for sending the Christ, Budda, Mohammed, Ahkenaton and other ascended masters to show us “the way the truth and the light”. This planted the seeds of spiritual consciousness. Other attempts to bring back the Sirian/Lemurian style governance included Noah and the Hebrews. Noah didn’t get very far and after the Exodus; the Hebrews instituted the concept of Judges to bring the people a concept of a society led by spiritual beings. However, these attempts failed because the human psyche was not ready for it and it was decided that planting the idea of a Christ consciousness would grow into the human psyche over thousands of years and be ultimately successful. Emperor Constantine modified these teachings in 325 A.D. at the Council of Nicea.

Because of the destruction of the Firmament, a significant amount of damaging radiation has been allowed to hit the planet surface. This causes a disastrous effect on all living things. There was no reasonable chance that humans would be able to survive over the long term independent of outside support with their spiritual selves disconnected.

Most humans don’t know that their primary mission on the planet is to be a guardian of the planet; that without their conscious support of the biosphere in concert with the cetaceans, all life on the planet falls apart, literally. The only thing that’s still holding it together right now is the cetaceans and the Spiritual Hierarchy. A guardian is one who brings in the energies of creation and regulates them for the biosphere. The Earth land guardian is man. It is a very unique process whereby the creative life energies given by the Spiritual Hierarchy are physically transmuted into maintenance life energies. Chanting, singing, dancing, ceremony and meditation are all forms of this process. A guardian must consciously and subconsciously maintain these inter-dimensional energies so that they are dispersed in a proper manner. Using Universal Law, a guardian imagines, then combines this with feeling to create. Children do this instinctively when they play and sing and jump around although this is decidedly less focused.

Billy Roper #racist theroperreport.whitenationalists.net

Demography is Destiny

The 116th Congress epitomizes the principle demography is destiny. Race is much more than pigmentation, as most of us know. Race is defined by the behavior, morality, values, and culture produced by its benefactors, among other things.

As the racial demographic of the United States shifts towards a non-white majority, we will begin to see a change in the culture as non-whites become social influencers in areas such as entertainment and politics. Non-white inclusion in positions of power such as Congress means the almost certain passage of legislation that is antithetical to white interests; especially having the support of pandering, weak white ‘allies’ in Congress.

This Congress, however, should trip alarm bells for all of us. There were over 200 candidates running in statewide and congressional races that were black, latino, Asian, Native American, homosexual, or intersectional; and more than 80 of those ‘enriching’ candidates won their elections.

Both Michigan and Minnesota elected Muslim women to Congress less than a couple decades after 9/11. Rashida Tlaib from Michigan and Ilhan Omar from Minnesota. Both were sworn in on the Koran – a slap in the face to our veterans and the families who have lost loved ones to Islamic terrorism.

Rashida Tlaib wasted no time expressing her loathing for America and the President. In a tweet that was quickly deleted she stated, “Americans have spent decades raping and pillaging my people. What goes around comes around.” As to Trump, we will ‘impeach the motherfucker’, she stated. There was backlash over the latter comment from unsympathetic factions of society, but she refused to apologize – a sign of strength white apologists could learn from.

image

I expect that sharia-style legislation will be advanced on behalf of their constituents, as both are devout Muslims. One of the fundamental beliefs of Islam is sharia. Once they have a large enough representation to gain political power they begin to implement sharia in piecemeal fashion. It has been Islam’s historical prerogative.

Not only are the Muslims reveling in the leftist affirmative action bandwagon, so are the Jews. In fact, this Congress will be 3 times as Jewish as the United States. Jews have seen a disproportionately high number of seats in Congress several times over the past couple of decades, so this is no surprise. This time, however, they have been emboldened, as indicated by the first bill introduced by Congress since convening being a pro-Israel Anti-BDS Legislation.

Anti-BDS laws are unconstitutional. It proves that dual loyalty in Congress is a reality; especially with Jews. If passed the bill would essentially criminalize boycotting Israel – a clear violation of constitutionally protected freedoms. Fortunately, the bill did not receive the necessary votes to pass, but it does speak to the power of the Jewish lobby and the loyalty of the Jews in Congress.

This Congress also has an historic number of openly homosexual Senators and Representatives. As the Marxist push for the destruction of the West gains steam, the mentally ill and unnatural will be revered.

Referred to as the “rainbow wave” more than 600 homosexual candidates ran in races ranging from local-level races to Senator. Nearly 400 of those won their primary, according to the Victory Institute, an organization that tracks homosexual political hopefuls. Of the 400, over 20 ran for Governor or Congress, and 10 won. Both Colorado and Oregon now have homosexual Governors, and Congress can add at least 9 openly gay Senators and Representatives. You can probably expect homosexuality to be advocated in schools and daycares around the country now more than ever. It is a battle for the soul of our nation, and the minds of our youth are front and center. With the rise and acceptance of homosexuality, we have also seen an effort to normalize pedophilia.

Let’s not stop with the gays, Muslims, and Jews. Latinos had a hat in this race too, winning over half of their races. Most publicized of these being New York’s own Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez, the radical socialist of 29 years old, and also the youngest member to ever be elected to the house. She has already proven to be an incompetent nitwit, which is why she’s so dangerous. The 116th also saw a record number of Hispanic lawmakers at 45. It will also have the largest Hispanic caucus in history at 39 members. Plenty of voting power to get amnesty or make the path to citizenship even easier, thus replacing more whites.

This election also saw some substantial gains for blacks. Ayanna Pressley (D-Mass) and Johana Hayes (D-Conn) both became the first African-American women to serve their states in Congress. This Congress will also see an overall increase in African-American lawmakers in the House and Senate with a total of 55 up from 49 in the previous term. Rep. Will Hurd (R-Texas) being the only black Republican in the house. Aunt Maxine will be proud!

Last but not least in the diversity queue are Asians. While not comparable to the other privileged groups, Asians still saw noteworthy gains in this election with an historic number of 20 to serve between the House and Senate.

What do all of these groups have in common: a hatred for whites. They have all been indoctrinated to believe that we are a privileged class of oppressors, and they feel that this is the era for retribution. Retribution will come in the form of legislation designed to elevate and benefit them at our expense, and to further suppress and drain our people; especially white males – the sole target of this Marxist garbage. Sadly, we have given these people an easy path, and our people have remained enslaved to falsehoods that reinforce and justify our acquiescence.

This is just a small taste of what’s to come. This is history in the making! The history of our demise, and a dismal future for our progeny! The next several years will be interesting, to say the least. With Jews, Muslims, homosexuals, blacks, and Latinos writing legislation I’m sure white people will become even more marginalized and oppressed, but, hey, I’m a fan! Maybe the multitude of white cucks will finally be disillusioned and experience an awakening to the fact that demography is destiny!

Triweekly Antifeminist #fundie triweeklyantifeminist.wordpress.com

The esteemed commentator Chinzork wrote:

For one of the first posts on this blog, I think you should debunk all of the common talking points against abolishing the AOC. The talking points get repetitive after a while, so an article debunking all of them sounds good.

Alright then, you got it. Herein is a compilation of the 15 most popular Blue Knight arguments, each argument followed by a thorough dissection thereof.

#1: Teenagers only become sexually mature after completing puberty around 16.

This is a wholly metaphysical proposition; a statement of belief. The Blue Knight starts out from the premise that a “completion of puberty” is a prerequisite for this nebulous state known as “sexual maturity,” then makes the circular argument that, because a 13-year-old has not yet completed puberty, he or she are thus sexually immature. “Sexual maturity” is an altogether arbitrary concept, and there isn’t any way to measure it or test it.

The Blue Knight makes it seem like he or she has objectively examined the issue and reached the conclusion that the age of “sexual maturity” just so happens to start when puberty is over; but there has not actually been any such objective examination of the issue – it simply has been assumed (axiomatically) that this is the case, and the whole “argument” proceeds from this unproven, arbitrary, and essentially metaphysical assumption.

The Blue Knight argument posits that 1) without “sexual maturity” sex is harmful and as such should be illegal; 2) a full completion of puberty is a prerequisite for “sexual maturity.” You may well give the following counter-argument, accepting — for the sake of discussion — the former premise, while rejecting the latter, and say thus: “children become sexually mature after completing adrenarche around the age of 9.”

Fundamentally, however, I have seen no evidence whatsoever that a “sexually immature” person is necessarily harmed (or victimized) by sexual relations merely due to being, according to whatever arbitrary definitions one uses, a “sexually immature” person. I suspect that, as a matter of fact, “sexually immature” people often enjoy sex and benefit from it even more than the so-called “sexually mature” folks. And again, the very distinction between “mature” and “immature” is altogether metaphysical in this regard, like the distinction between “pure” and “impure” or “holy” and “unholy.” It is hocus pocus; theology not-so-cleverly disguised as biology.

According to Blue Knight “morality,” an extremely fertile 15-year-old female should be prevented from sex (because “sexually immature”), while a 55-year-old female who has no ovaries left should be free do get fucked however she likes. It is very clear that such a “morality” is really an anti-morality; it is against what is biologically natural, it is against human nature specifically, it is degenerate, and it is detrimental to the interests of civilization and the TFR.

#2: The Age of Consent protects young people from doing things (sex) which they don’t really want to do.

I have seen no evidence that young people “do not really want” to have sex. On the contrary, I have seen, and keep seeing, that young people greatly desire to engage in sexual activities. That is why they engage in them. If 11-year-old Lucy is a horny little slut who enjoys giving blowjobs to all the boys in the neighborhood (many such cases), the Age of Consent does not protect her from something which she is reluctant about doing; it prevents her — by deterring men from approaching her — from doing something which she does in fact desire to do.

The Age of Consent is simply not needed. Think for a moment about young people. Do you not realize that they are just as eccentric, and can be just as wild, as older people? Why is it that when a 19-year-old chick randomly decides to have an orgy with 3 classmates after school, that is okay; but when a 12-year-old chick likewise randomly decides to do just that, oh noes, she is a “victim” of a horrible crime? We accept that each person is unique, independently of age; and we realize that there are children –not to mention young adults — who are very much into X while others are very much into Y. Why, then, should it be so “shocking” when it turns out that some children, and plenty of young teenagers, are very much into sex? Being interested in sex is arguably one of the most natural things there are, on par with being interested in food; certainly it is more natural than being interested in physics and chemistry and mathematics, right? If we accept the existence of child prodigies, children who are naturally driven to pursue all kinds of weird and special callings, why can’t we accept that there are indeed lots of children who pursue the very natural thing which is called “sex”?

Young teenagers have extremely high sex-drives, and the idea that they “do not really want sex” is contradicted every single moment. This is all the more remarkable given that we are living in a puritanical, prudish, sex-hostile, joy-killing, pedo-hysterical, infantilizing society; yet teenagers manage to overcome this intense anti-natural social programming, and do what nature commands them to do. “Child innocence” is a self-perpetuating myth, which society shoves down the throats of everyone all the time since age 0, and then uses this self-perpetuating myth which has been forcefully injected into society’s bloodstream to argue that “oh gee, young people just don’t really want to have sex.”

The entire entertainment establishment is concomitantly brainwashing children to remain in a state of arrested development aka infantilization, while conditioning the consumers of this “entertainment” to only find old women attractive. That’s one reason why I believe that we must create Male Sexualist aesthetics – we must reverse the brainwashing done to us by the entertainment complex. The television box is deliberately hiding from you the beauty and the passion of young teenage women, and is actively engineering your mind to only find older women attractive. And yet, despite there being a conspiracy by the entire society to stifle young sexuality, young sexuality lives on and thrives. Well, not really “thrives” — young sex is in decline, which conservative total dipshits blame on pornography rather than pointing the finger at themselves for propagating a climate that is extremely hostile to young sexuality — but it still goes on, to the consternation of all Puritans and Feminists everywhere.

Blue Knights claim that young teenagers are “peer-pressured into sex.” This assumes that your average teenager is asexual or close to being asexual, and thus would only engage in sexual activities if manipulated into it by his or her environment. The reality, meanwhile, is that those 12-year-old sluts who have orgies after school time (or during school time) are often as horny as a 16-year-old male. They are not being pressured into sex – they are being sexually restrained by a society that is terrified of young sexuality.

#3: Young people who have sex grow up to regret it.

First of all, when the whole of society is determined to portray young sex as a horrid thing, it is no wonder that people — especially women, who possess a herd mentality — arrive at the conclusion that they’ve been harmed by it. If young sexuality were presented in a positive light by the media-entertainment-state bureaucracy-academia complex, people would be more inclined to remember it fondly than regretfully.

The second thing is that it doesn’t even matter. People feel regret about doing all kinds of things – so what? Does that mean that for each and every case of such “regret,” society needs to go on a witch-hunt for “victimizers” in order to inflict punishments upon them? It’s time to grow the fuck up and accept the fact that people sometimes do things which later on they regret doing, and that this is an integral part of life, and that the state has no business protecting the civilians from “bad feelings.” That’s literally what this Blue Knight argument boils down to – “the state should punish men because women experience negative feelings due to their own behavior.” No, women should learn to deal with their bad fee-fees without demanding the state to find “abusers” to penalize. We are living in a totalitarian emotocracy (rule by emotions) and I’m sick of it.

Also: what is the difference between feeling regret about fucking at 13 and feeling regret about fucking at 17? Women generally feel bad about promiscuous sex (hence the phenomenon of “regret rape” false accusations), and they feel it at the age of 21 as much as at the age of 11; actually, older women may be even more regretful than young ones about sexual activity, because they’v been longer exposed to Puritan-Feminist brainwashing, and because their biological clock ticks much faster. So, according to the victimization-based morality of Blue Knights, men who sleep with 23-year-olds should also be punished. Again, the Blue Knights want men imprisoned solely due to some vague negative fee-fees felt by some women. This is emotocracy in action. No wonder that testosterone and sperm counts are in sharp decline – society is ruled by catladies, and is structured according to catlady morality.

The state simply should not protect people from the consequences of their own behavior – and here “protect” means “punish men,” and “consequences” means “vague negative fee-fees.” Our society is severely infantilized by the victimization-based morality, and infantilization is degenerate.

#4: Young sexual activity is correlated with many bad things.

That may or may not be so, but what are the implications? Generally, people who are natural risk-takers will do all kinds of things, some of which may be positive, others negative, and still others just neutral. The conservadaddy making the “correlated with bad things” argument implies that punishing men (and women) for young sex would somehow reduce those negative things supposedly correlated with young sex. That, of course, is bullshit. If a risk-taking 12-year-old decides to have an orgy with her classmates, she will remain just as much of a risk-taker whether or not her classmates or other people are punished. Depriving her of the opportunity to take “sexual risks” won’t diminish whatever other risk-taking behaviors she is prone to.

The thing about Blue Knight arguments is that they aren’t arguments at all. There is no logic in stating “young sex is correlated with X, and X is bad” and then using that to support the criminalization of young sex. This is the same logic used by pedagogues to justify pedagoguery, only in reverse: the pedagogues argue that education is correlated with intelligence (as measured by IQ tests), then use that claim to imply that education makes people smarter, and therefore everyone should undergo education. This is a wholly fallacious argument. At the risk of sounding like a spergtastic redditor goon – correlation does not imply causation. The Blue Knight argument is not an argument at all. It’s plainly illogical.

By the way, I’d say that there are plenty of negative things correlated with young sexlessness – such as growing up to be a school shooter, for instance. You’ll never hear Blue Knights discussing that.

#5: Some Statutory Rape legislation allows teenagers to have sex among themselves, and only prohibits older people from predating upon them.

This argument typifies what I call the “victimization-based morality” aka “victimology.” The people making it assume — against all the available evidence — that within any relationship between a young person and an old person, the former is necessarily victimized by the latter.

The individuals making this argument (usually you’ll hear it from women) will often tell you that it is “creepy” for older men to be interested in young women. They will pretend that young women are exclusively attracted to young men, when in reality they are attracted to men of all ages – to men as old as their father as well as to their classmates. My own life experience confirms this, as I personally, in-real-life, know of women who fucked significantly older men when they were aged 14-15. It was all passionate and voluntary and enthusiastic, believe me. And the many accounts you can find on the internet leave no doubt that it’s common for young women, pubescent and even prepubescent, to be sexually attracted to significantly older men.

It is important to stress the point that the women themselves pursue and desire those sexual relationships, because the Blue Knights have created the false impression that the entire argument for abolishing the AOC rests on our attraction to young women, an attraction which according to the Blue Knights is completely unreciprocated; whereas in reality, it is incredibly common for young women to initiate sexual relationships with men as old as their father. It takes two to tango – and the tango is quite lively indeed. Given the sexual dynamics elucidated by Heartiste, wherein women are sexually attracted to “Alphas,” it makes perfect sense that young women would be sexually attracted to older men even more-so than they are sexually attracted to their peers, since older men possess a higher social status than young ones, relatively speaking. Again, life experience confirms this.

Thus, there is no sense in punishing old men who fuck young women, unless, that is, one embraces the whole “taken advantage of” argument, an argument which relies on a denial of the biological and empirical reality on the ground, and simply defines (as an axiom) all relationships in which there is a “power imbalance” as “exploitative.” That is, there is no evidence that any “exploitation” is taking place in such relationships, and Blue Knights assume its existence because they refuse to believe that young women can be horny for older men.

Also, the Blue Knights will bring up argument #1 to “substantiate” argument #5, and argue that due to the “sexual immaturity” of the younger party, the older party must be forbidden from being in a sexual relationship with it altogether – because otherwise there may be “exploitation.” Again, the moment you realize that a 12-year-old female can be as horny as a 16-year-old male (who are, needless to say, extremely horny), the idea that the slut is prone to be “sexually exploited” by a sexual relationship with a man who is statistically likely to be high-status (and thus naturally sexually attractive to her) become absurd. And as we’ve seen, the whole “sexually immature” line is ridiculous – it has never been shown that maturity, for whatever it’s even worth, is reached at 16. In saner, de-infantilized times, 12-year-olds were considered to be mature, were treated as such, and evidently were mature. Hence my saying: “child (and teen) innocence is a self-perpetuating myth.”

#6: You only support abolishing the AOC because you’re a pervert.

A common ad hominem. Now, it is expected that possession of a naturally high sex-drive would be correlated with sexual realism (i.e. being woke about the reality of sex), because a high sex-drive individual would be much likelier than a low sex-drive individual to spend hours upon hours thinking about the subject of sex in its various and manifold aspects. But that only goes to prove that it is us, the “perverts,” who were right all along about sex – and not the catladies and the asexuals who haven’t ever thought about sex in realistic terms because they never had any incentive to do so. Our “bias” is a strength, not a weakness.

There really isn’t anything else to add here. When they accuse you of being a pervert, just agree & amplify humorously: “oh yeah, I jerk off 8 times each and every morning before getting out of bed – problem, puritan?”

#7: You only support abolishing the AOC because you are unattractive and trying to broaden your options.

Also known as “projection.” Well, actually, there also are men who make this argument and not just dried-out wrinkly femihags, so let’s address it as if a man said it. Again, this is an ad hominem that presupposes that your motivation to engage in sexual politics of the Male Sexualist variety is merely your desire to improve your personal situation in life. Now, even if it were true, that 1) wouldn’t matter, because what matters is the arguments made and not the ostensible motivation behind them; 2) there is nothing essentially wrong with trying to improve one’s situation in life – and “there are no rules in war and love.”

By the way, abolishing the AOC, by itself, is not going to get all of the incels laid over-night. There are other measures that must and will be taken to ensure sexual contentment for all of society. Abolishing the AOC is a crucial part of the program, but it’s not the single purpose of Male Sexualism, in my view. What I personally would like to see in society is maximal sexual satisfaction for everyone. There are many ways to try reaching that point.

Anyway, the point is that “you are motivated by a desire to increase your options” is not even true regarding most of the prominent Male Sexualists. Presumably. I won’t speak for anyone else, but I’m married, and very satisfied with my great wife.

14376_7
Big Beautiful Women are not for everyone, but I’m cool with it. In this scene from the Israeli film “Tikkun,” my wife — who is an actress — plays a prostitute. Sorry, Nathan Larson, I’m not sending you her nudes; this one should suffice.
As a matter of fact, as I wrote in one of the last posts on DAF, my own kind of activism would not be mentally possible for me if I were not sexually satisfied. I’m not driven by a personal sexual frustration; on the contrary, as I keep saying, what drives me is essentially a spiritual impulse, which has awoken to the extent it has as a result of getting laid.

#8: If you support the abolition of the AOC, it’s because you’re a libertine who believes in “everything goes.”

Some Male Sexualists are, unmistakably, libertines – and proud if it. However, others are faithful Muslims. The notion that opposition to the AOC must necessarily be tied to libertinism is nonsense. Look at traditional European societies 350-300 years ago – almost none had an AOC at all, yet they were hardly “libertines.”

This Blue Knight line is somewhat related to the “LGBTP” meme – they think that we are Progressives trying to advocate for pedophilia as part of a Progressive worldview. I think that it’s safe to say that no one in Male Sexualism belongs to the Progressive camp, which is the camp where Feminists and SJWs reside. That said, some versions of libertinism (sexual libertarianism?) aren’t so bad, anyway. As TheAntifeminist said in a comment at Holocaust21:

[M]y utopia as a male sexualist would be somewhere like 1970’s Sweden or Holland.

This is a legitimate view within the movement.

#9: If young people are allowed to have sex, their innocence will be ruined; sex is exclusively for adults.

Here we see the Enlightenment-spawned Romantic idealization of “childhood” as a period that, due to whatever values one attaches to it, must be preserved against encroachment and incursion from the “fallen world of adults.” This is the Romantic basis of modern-day infantilism.

It used to be understood that the purpose of “childhood” is growing up into adulthood. The so-callef ‘child’ should be made into an adult, should be given adult tasks, adult responsibilities, and — all the sooner — adult rights. Today, society does just the opposite, and infantilizes people with a historically unparalleled intensity. That’s the result of elevating “childhood” into an ideal form. No wonder that now, it’s not just teenagers who are called “children,” but people in their 20s. That’s the process of infantilization which society goes through.

As usual, conservative dipshits, addicted to their own Romantic conceptions, claim that “actually, children are not nearly infantile enough these days.” They don’t see the pervasive “kid culture” that has completely zombified kids into being basically a bunch of drooling retards; no, what the prudish-types care about is “MOAR INNOCENCE,” as usual.

Fact is, kids today are not shown anything about the real world; a whole culture of idiocy, blindness, silliness, and clownishness has been erected like walls all around them. It is the culture of the TV channels for kids, the culture of Toy-Shops, the culture of child-oriented video games. Muh “birds and bees.”

Look, I get the temptation to indulge in infantilism. In fact, I’m probably a hypocrite, because I haven’t yet begun doing anything to de-infantilize my own 19-month-old son. He, like most toddlers, also watches the stupid TV shows and has all of these damn toys all over the place. It’s not easy resisting the ways of the system. But the real problem is that society is not structured in a way that allows children to be de-infantilized. When people only get a job at 18 or at 21 or they are NEETs, and there is an age-ist Prussian School System that is mandatory and which brainwashes its prisoners to believe that “school is good,” and Feminist careerism is pushed on all potential mothers by the media-entertainment-state bureaucracy-academia complex, it’s no wonder that people are very immature nowadays. That only goes to show how radically modern society must be transformed, in my opinion.

To get back on point: “childhood” and “adulthood” are both fictional concepts. These may be useful fictions, but they are still fictions. The telos of childhood is adulthood. It’s a transitional state, and if we must choose an arbitrary age when childhood should be officially and finally over, that age should be 9. That is, if we discover that 10-year-olds behave in an infantile manner nowadays, it’s because their parents — and, crucially, society at large — have not properly de-infantilized them. It’s a wholly artificial state of affairs, rooted in Romantic delusions.

Young people should have sex, because young people should experience real life in order to become functional adults; and an integral part of real life is — and should be — the sex life. Far from constituting a “problem” for young people, sexual intercourse is one effective way for getting young people to see the broader picture of reality. Deprived of sex, ‘kids’ grow up with warped and unrealistic notions about reality, and suffer dysfunction as adults. They don’t get to learn what’s important and what’s unimportant in life when they should learn it – young. Getting laid gives you a mentally clear vision of priorities in life, gives you a clarity of mind which allows you to deeply reflect on what’s actually going on in the world. Sex is necessary for young people, whose one and only task is to — repeat after me — become adults. Sex is a fundamental part of a fulfilled adult life.

#10: Young sex leaves young people traumatized.

No, it doesn’t. The ‘trauma’ stems entirely from being repeatedly and incessantly told by Blue Knights (Puritans, Feminists, Conservadaddies, Catladies, etc.) that a horrible crime has been committed against you by a wicked individual, that you have been “taken advantage of,” “deprived of innocence,” “ruined forever,” “sexually exploited,” “abused,” and the rest of the victimological jargon. The sex itself and the relationship itself feel good, and are indeed good biologically and psychologically; they bring fulfillment to one’s life and a satisfaction for one’s fresh and burning biological needs. The whole “trauma,” such as it is, is inflicted by society on the younger party, due to society’s strict adherence to a victimization-based morality.

That’s why I call for a Moral Revolution. This is not a troll. As long as people adhere to a victimization-based morality that sees “power imbalances” as inherently and fundamentally victimizing, people won’t be able to think logically about young sexuality. The current prevailing system of social morality must be replaced with a new one. Once that is achieved, all of this “trauma” — which is inflicted by the Blue Knights on horny young people — will dissipate and evaporate altogether

Young people greatly enjoy sex, and will go to great lengths to achieve it, overcoming the very many mechanisms of sexual oppression established by Blue Knights.

#11: Young people don’t know what’s good for them, and therefore need to be protected from risky situations.

If young people don’t know what’s good for them, it’s because society itself has successfully destroyed their ability to know what’s good for them. I mean, by the age of 10, a person should have a basic idea about what life is all about. If that’s not so for most or all people, something is deeply rotten in society.

And the reason for this indeed being the modern state of affairs is exactly because the protectiveness of parents, combined with wholesale cultural infantilization, has rendered young people incapable of independent thought. Thus, instead of “MOAR PROTECTION,” young people need infinitely less of it – so that they will learn to deal with reality.

And at any rate, sex is not as risky as the Blue Knights claim it is. They scare people about STDs, but then the solutions to that problem are well-known, and are completely independent of age – if instructed properly, and possessing a responsible personality, a 10-year-old can behave just as carefully — if not much more carefully — than many 40-year-olds.

Then there is the issue of pregnancy. First of all, what I wrote in the above paragraph about responsiblity applies here as well – the pregnancy-avoidance methods are well known. Secondly however, there’s a great differences in here: pregnancy is not a disease. It’s not a bad thing, but a good thing. I support young pregnancy and young parenthood. That is the primary “risk” which Blue Knight scare-mongers warn about, and I don’t see it as a risk at all. Instead of being protected from reproduction, people need to be instructed about how to reproduce. I once wrote, trollishly as usual, that if there should be any schools at all, then the “homework” of young females should be getting impregnated. The essence beneath the statement is on-point: pregnancy is good, because reproduction is good; fertility is good, while sterility is bad.

So, in my view, young people should not be protected from the “risk” of pregnancy. They should be instructed about it, made to comprehend the how’s and why’s of it, and then allowed to use their mind-faculties to figure-out what should or should not be done. That’s the gist of any de-infantilization program.

#12: Young people don’t desire to have sex.

Young people do, as a matter of actual fact, very much desire to have sex; much more-so, even, than many old people.

#13: If the AOC is abolished, parents will no longer be able to control their children.

What is the purpose — the very raison d’etre — of parental control over children? To turn children into functional adults, so as to allow them to form families and continue the bloodline. This cannot be achieved by hindering the ability of children (or “children”) to engage in the one thing that marks the arrival of maturity – sexual activity. Sexual activity is the thing that most unequivocally transforms an un-developed person into a developed person. Since the purpose of parenthood is the creation of adults, parenthood should serve to (at the very least) give-way in face of the natural maturation of children, rather than artificially prolonging “childhood” in order to extend the period of parental control. Parental control is only good insofar as it allows parents to facilitate the de-infantilization of their children; when, as in our deplorable times, parental control is used to exacerbate the infantilization of children, it is in the interest of society to tell parents to fuck off.

Since parents these days abuse their parental power and authority by artificially prolonging the infantilization of their own children, the abolition of the anti-natural AOC is exactly a thing that is needed in order to put parental control in check. The power of parents vis-a-vis their children must be drastically reduced when the child reaches the age of 8. That’s usually the age when sex, reproduction, and marriage all become relevant. If you want to argue that 8 is still too young, perhaps (maybe) we can compromise on 10. Point is, between 8 and 10, parental power should be dramatically restricted.

As a 23-year-old father, I can tell you that parents and family in general continue to significantly shape your life long after you cease being under “parental control.” An abolition of the AOC won’t result in all teenagers running away from home never to be seen again. But it will, God willing, result in the establishment of many new young households. That is something that we should strive for – getting teenagers to form families. That is the meaning of creating adults.

#14: Without an AOC, there will be grey-zone situations of child prostitution.

Child prostitution should be legal.

#15: Abolishing the AOC will increase pre-marital sex, which is a bad thing.

First of all, I couldn’t care less about whether or not sex is “pre-marital.” I had fucked my wife and impregnated her before we were married; so what? What matters is the bottom line: the creation of a patriarchal and stable household.

The second thing is, people today marry extremely late, and many forgo marriage altogether. This is related to the war against young sexuality: not reproducing when young, people struggle to reproduce when old; and living in sexlessness until the late teens or early twenies (or until later than that), a total sexual dysfunction takes over society, and people find it difficult to form long-lasting relationships at all. Young love shines the brightest, the younger the love, the brighter it shines; couples who start young last longer than those who start old.

Puritanical Blue Knights have brought about the plummeting of the TFR in Western Society. In my view, pre-marital sex should be accepted, as long as everyone involved understands that the purpose of any “romance” is the formation of a household. Early teenage marriage should be encouraged, and if early teenage sexual intercourse facilitates that, so be it – it’s all the better. It is not sex that is harmful to young people; sex is good for them. It is sexlessness that is the central and overarching problem of our times.

In conclusion
Man, that was exhausting, I gotta say. But hopefully, this post will serve as a guide to answering Blue Knight talking points. All of you must remember this: before you can annihilate Blue Knightism, you must mentally internalize what it is that we Male Sexualists believe in. In moments of uncertainty and doubt, consult this post, and you may find the core idea needed for you in order to formulate your own Male Sexualist position about any given issue.

There is a new revolution on the horizon. I don’t know how long I personally have left in this world. Perhaps the intelligence operatives threatening me will decide against killing me, or maybe they’ll slay me this very night. Who knows. What I want you to do is to take the ideas provided on DAF and now on TAF, understand them, and spread them. This is not a cult of personality or a money-making scheme. This is a political movement that has its own ideas, ideas that may initially appear groundbreaking but which in reality may also be primordial, ideas which we hope will be implemented in reality – be it 30, 80, or 360 years from now. At some point in the future, somewhere on the face of our planet, there will be a Male Sexualist country.

If during the next half-decade we manage to bring into the fold both edgy 4channers and 8channers (“meme lords”), and serious, intelligent, competent, affluent, deep-thinking, and strategizing supporters, we will be able within several decades to achieve our political objective.

Ferdinand Bardamu #racist eurocanadian.ca

The White race’s intelligence and behavior has been under intense selective pressure since late medieval times. These new environmental forces significantly increased White resilience in the face of adversity. The first of these was the Black Death that ravaged Europe from 1347 to 1351. As one of the most catastrophic pandemics in world history, it killed off one-third of Europe’s population. The evidence of bioarchaeology, drawn from skeletal analysis of burial remains from “Black Death” cemeteries, reveals that far from being random, the plague was very selective in its choice of victims (DeWitte, 2014). The weak and the elderly were at increased risk of infection. Given the strong correlation between poor health and IQ, the Whites who survived were much stronger, healthier and smarter than ever before. The dearth of peasant labor led to an increase in wages, rising living standards and the invention of labor-saving devices. This greater wealth and prosperity liberated many from the common drudgery of daily life. A century after the Black Death, the Renaissance scaled even greater heights of intellectual and artistic achievement.

The 17th century colonization of North America also subjected Whites to strong selective pressure. The first Englishmen to have disembarked on American soil had survived religious persecution in England as Puritans objecting to the “Roman idolatry” of Anglican ritual; they had survived the perilous transAtlantic voyage, unaffected by typhus or scurvy. In New England, the Puritans still had to contend with disease, the harsh winters and the “merciless Indian savages” that lay hiding in the primeval forests of the eastern seaboard. If the weak and unintelligent managed to survive the voyage, they would eventually be killed off by starvation or Indian tomahawk. This pattern of eugenic selection affected all English settlers, including those motivated by purely secular and commercial interests. By the end of the colonial period, the Anglo-Saxon in the Americas had emerged as one of the finest and most evolved specimens of the White race.

The purifying effects of eugenic selection had rapidly accelerated the evolution of Homo sapiens in Europe and North America: the fittest White men had always left behind the most offspring, but after the ravages of bubonic plague and the hardships of American colonization, their broods became larger, healthier and more intelligent. White men of lesser ability, if they were lucky enough to find mates, typically left behind few descendants, with fewer still managing to survive past childhood.

A significant increase in the population of intelligent Whites inevitably led to a rising per capita rate of innovation. This peaked in 1873, during the reign of Queen Victoria (1837-1901), but declined rapidly after that (Huebner, 2005). With the new science and technology, the White man was able to raise incomes, improve public health and increase longevity across the Western world. Eugenic selection for higher IQ made it possible for the White man to develop more sophisticated military technology. This far surpassed anything that had ever been developed by the ancient Greeks and Romans or even non-Whites. By century’s end, approximately 84% of the earth’s surface was controlled by the colonial empires of Western Europe. Intellectual and creative development had scaled such heights that Europe even gave birth to a race of intellectual supermen. These were the Victorian polymaths, who numbered among their ranks the colorful Sir Richard Francis Burton (1821-1890). He was a man who excelled at every subject that commanded his undivided attention. He was a brilliant writer, scholar, explorer, geographer, translator, diplomat and swordsman. A master linguist, he spoke an astonishing 40 languages and dialects fluently. This period of continuous White evolutionary development wasn’t to last forever. By 1914, the golden age of White intellectual and creative superiority had come to an end.

II: Western Intellectual Decline from Late 19th Century to Present

The general intelligence of the Western industrialized nations has declined since late 19th century, according to a meta-analysis of over a dozen reaction time (RT) studies. A cognitive, but not an economic or thermodynamic, limit has apparently been reached. There are now fewer individuals with the intelligence to solve complex mathematical and engineering problems, which is why the rate of innovation has significantly decreased since 1873. “Genetic g” - g-factor in the absence of gene environment interaction - has decreased by 14 IQ points over the course of a century, at least in the Anglophone nations of the UK, USA, Canada and Australia. This means a decrease of 1.23 IQ points per decade (Woodley et al., 2013). To eliminate the possibility of overinflated RT latencies because of hardware and software lags (Woods et al., 2015), the meta-analytic findings were adjusted for lag time. The result was that the Victorians were still faster (and smarter) than modern Western populations (Woodley et al., 2015).

Measures of vocabulary, relatively insensitive to environmental influence because of greater overall gsaturation and heritability rate, provided additional evidence of superior Victorian intelligence. A study tracked WORDSUM item frequencies over the course of 150 years. For this, a database that stored 5.9 million texts from the 1500s to the present was used. The most difficult and therefore the most highly g-loaded WORDSUM items exhibited sharper declines in historical usage since mid-19th century, consistent with declines in “genetic g” observed among Western populations (Woodley et al., 2015).

After decades of “massive IQ gains,” cognitive reversals were observed in Norway (Sundet et al, 2004), Denmark (Teasdale & Owen, 2008), the Netherlands (Woodley & Meisenberg, 2013) and elsewhere. In one study, genes associated with educational attainment and cognitive ability had declined in frequency across birth cohorts in an Icelandic population. It was estimated that a loss of 0.3 IQ points per decade would substantially affect Iceland if allowed to continue for centuries (Kong et al., 2017). James Flynn, discoverer of the eponymous Flynn effect, has acknowledged the reversal of cognitive gains in certain Western countries, especially those of Scandinavia. At a 2017 conference hosted by the International Society for Intelligence Research (ISIR), he admitted: “I have no doubt that there has been some deterioration of genetic quality for intelligence since late Victorian times.” Flynn has projected substantial losses of about 6 or even 7 IQ points for Scandinavia over a 30 year period. Such a reversal in intelligence would have catastrophic effects on the societies and economies of Scandinavia, now being flooded by hostile elites with Third World “migrants.”

A relevant question is: “If the post-WWII consensus acknowledges the existence of massive IQ gains over the last century, how does one explain cognitive reversal in the most industrialized nations?” This phenomenon is known as Cattell’s paradox and its solution is Woodley’s co-occurrence model. Although phenotypic intelligence has increased since WWII, genotypic intelligence has decreased. The anti-Flynn effect is really a “Jensen effect” because it has resulted in losses on psychometric g.

III: The Role of Dysgenic Selection in Western Intellectual Decline

Mass “immigration” from low-IQ regions of the globe, such as the Middle East, South Asia and Africa, have no doubt contributed to declines in the average intelligence of the West. In one recent study (Woodley et al., 2017), Third World “immigration” was associated with IQ declines in 13 different nations. High levels of Third World “immigration” are always significant predictors of Western cognitive decline; its most pronounced effects are on IQ subtest batteries with the highest g-loadings. Nevertheless, Third World “immigration” does not fully account for dysgenic selection among Western populations. Declines in genotypic intelligence occurred long before the advent of Third World “immigration,” which only partially explains the Western world’s declining IQ.

The greater fecundity of intelligent Whites, compared to the unintelligent, had always been the norm, especially since the 1400s. This changed during the Industrial Revolution; more intelligent Whites delayed having children until later in life, through a combination of abstinence and contraception, to further their educational aspirations and develop their innate potential. Medical breakthroughs significantly improved general health and nutrition, which prolonged human lifespans. This allowed less intelligent Whites to survive childhood and have significantly more children than those who were more intelligent. The rise of social welfare liberalism in the 20th century merely exacerbated this trend. As Western governments progressively taxed their wealthiest and most intelligent citizens, their wealth was unfortunately redistributed to less industrious and less intelligent members of the White race, who squandered the money as they multiplied recklessly.

More recent studies have shed further light on the negative correlation between intelligence and fertility. In one study, the higher the intelligence and socioeconomic status of adolescents, the lower their likelihood of having offspring. This dysgenic effect was more true of females than males, indicating that women become choosier the more wealth and status they accumulate (Reeve et al., 2013). Among adults, a negative correlation between intelligence and odds of parenthood was discovered; every 15 point increase in a woman’s childhood IQ would decrease a woman’s odds of parenthood by about 20% (Kanazawa, 2014). The female role in the transmission of intelligence is a substantial one because the genes for intelligence are X-chromosomal; if more intelligent women since the late Victorian period have had less children than the unintelligent, one can only expect a gradual decline in the national intelligence of Western populations.

Analysis of a large genealogical database revealed that Iceland’s national IQ had decreased over time because more intelligent Icelanders were having less children. Although IQ declines per decade were small, statistical significance is attained when viewed from an evolutionary timescale. Dysgenic fertility may potentially undermine Icelandic economy and society within a few centuries, unless it is reversed (Kong et al., 2017). Polygenic scores, which capture selection against g (such as dysgenic fertility or “immigration”), are the most significant predictors of the century-long decline in “heritable g” (Woodley et al., 2018). The “neurotoxin hypothesis,” like all environmental explanations, fails to adequately predict temporal trends in general intelligence because cognitive ability is under much stronger genetic than environmental control. The worst environmental deprivations (i.e. severe malnutrition) or the most costly and ambitious environmental interventions rarely, if ever have a lasting effect on heritable g.

Most experts in intelligence, cognitive ability and student achievement now attribute the anti-Flynn effect to dysgenic fertility, Third World “immigration” and worsening educational standards in Western countries; in contrast, they are far more unanimous among each other in attributing environmental causation to the Flynn effect, in striking agreement with Woodley’s co-occurrence model (Rindermann et al., 2016). Based on the evidence, Western intellectual decline is largely caused by a negative IQfertility gradient, with Third World “immigration” becoming an increasingly significant contributor as time goes on.

IV: The Road to “Idiocracy”

Nobel laureate William Shockley proposed a Voluntary Sterilization Bonus Plan (1972). He presented this as a “thought experiment.” This would be open to all members of the American public, regardless of “sex, race or welfare status.” For each IQ point under 100, the recipient was to be given $1000, as long as he or she was willing to undergo vasectomy or tubal ligation. This was not an original proposal, as it had been first suggested over 40 years ago by American journalist and scholar H.L. Mencken, albeit in a rather humorous context. What all of these proposals neglect, and what modern eugenicists have failed to acknowledge, is the obvious sex differential in contributions to dysgenic fertility, probably because of the natural sympathy that men typically have for the opposite sex.

The low-IQ male, unless he is among the 20% of males considered physically attractive, is permanently excluded from the sexual market. This is because of his lifelong inability to acquire the material resources that allow him to compensate for his genetic inferiority. On the other hand, the low-IQ female poses a far greater threat to the mental hygiene of Western populations, by virtue of her role as sexual selector. For the low-IQ female, there will always be large numbers of reasonably attractive males willing to satisfy her many sexual and financial needs. If the low-IQ male must be handsome or rich, the low-IQ female must only be of childbearing age if she wishes to attract a mate of fairly decent genetic quality. The Industrial Revolution brought with it substantial improvements in public health and nutrition, making it easier for low-IQ females to survive childhood, only to breed as much as possible throughout their reproductive years.

When, in 1869, Sir Francis Galton made his famous scientific prediction of declining Western intelligence based on anecdotal observation of changing Victorian demographics, what he really observed was more low-IQ females than ever before surviving childhood to satisfy their instinctive desire for maternity. This trend has continued without interruption to the present, making low-IQ females the primary driving force behind the dysgenic fertility that has resulted in declining general intelligence in Western industrialized nations. No successful eugenic policy can exist without taking this into full account. In order for Dr. Shockley’s proposal to have made any sense from an evolutionary perspective, the bonus for females should have been quadrupled or even quintupled for each IQ point under 100.

Into this volatile mixture was added feminism, a pernicious ideology that grants both unrestricted individual autonomy and reproductive choice to women who should not be allowed to breed for eugenic reasons. In recognizing that all women have the same rights, feminism reveals itself to be just as dangerous as the Third World “immigration” promoted by hostile elites. By encouraging low-IQ females to engage in promiscuity, march in “slut walks,” wear “pussy hats,” and breed prolifically - while high-IQ females delay parenthood because of their educational aspirations - feminism has merely accelerated the decline in general intelligence among Western populations, already well under way since the Industrial Revolution. As Whites get dumber, their “Western uniqueness,” including their high intelligence, creativity and ability to produce more geniuses than any other race of people, will disappear with them. This radical transformation of the underlying genetic structure of Western populations could take place within less than a 100 years. Few people recognize the fragility of Western intellectual gains because of selective pressures exerted by the Black Death in Medieval Europe and the 17th century colonization of North America. By undermining Western mental and racial hygiene, feminism threatens to return Whites to the way things were before the agricultural revolution of the Neolithic age.

Helmuth Nyborg, extrapolating from present trends and projecting them into the future, allows us to better visualize in concrete terms the post-apocalyptic scenario that awaits Western civilization (2011). He shows what happens when a racially homogeneous society like Denmark, with a population of over 5 million, is subjected to both “Internal Relaxation of Darwinian Selection” (IRDS), referring to the preservation and multiplication of the genetically disadvantaged, and “External Relaxation of Darwinian Selection” (ERDS), in reference to “super-fertile” Third World “replacement migration.”

When both internal and external relaxation are combined, “Double Relaxation of Darwinian Selection” (DRDS) is produced, a clear and unobstructed path to Western “idiocracy” in Denmark. By 2072, ethnic Danes will be reduced to 60% of the population, from a high of 97% in 1979; minority status will be reached by 2085. In 1979, Danish phenotypic IQ was 98, but by 2072, it is 93, having dropped 5 IQ points in less than a century. As national IQ decreases, Denmark will be gradually transformed into a Latin American “banana republic.” Ethnic Danes, demoralized by feminism and social welfare legislation, will have no choice but to acquiesce to the destruction of their own country. Significant damage to the economy and educational infrastructure are to be expected; a 5 point drop in Danish IQ means a 35% reduction in the nation’s GDP. Democracy will inevitably become unsustainable as average national IQ plummets below 90; it will be replaced by the authoritarian political culture and religious dogmatism found in Middle Eastern, African and Latin American societies.

Belief that “more White babies” are the answer to dysgenic fertility among Whites is just as dangerous and genocidal as the liberal belief that Third World “replacement migration” is “cultural enrichment.” Since low-IQ females leave behind more offspring than those of high IQ, more White births would reduce high-IQ females to an “endangered species.” This would intensify the “Internal Relaxation of Darwinian Selection” already occurring in Western populations. As Whites “devolve,” they will no longer be able to maintain their own Western industrialized societies. A demographic transition of such magnitude would transform Western Europe and North America, the Occidental heartland, into a cultural and biological extension of the Third World. Since women are loyal to wealth and power, but not race, one can expect genocidal levels of miscegenation between White females of low intelligence and the non-White foreigners who have dispossessed Whites and conquered the West.

To reverse the process of dysgenic selection, the White man must do three things:

He must get rid of the hostile elite.

He must forcibly repatriate all Third World “migrants,” including their descendants. Forced “remigration” is not an unrealistic policy; mass population transfers have been successfully carried out before, i.e. deportation of Germans, 1944-50, from Eastern and Central European countries to Germany and Austria.

If selective pressures in medieval Europe and colonial America led to the steady eugenic improvement of Western populations, making it possible for them to conquer 84% of the globe’s surface, only their re-emergence will reverse the dysgenic selection that has bedeviled the White race since the mid-19th century. This can only be accomplished through a rigorous application of classical eugenic principles.

If the White race is to survive, only its strongest and most intelligent members must be prepared for the harsh Darwinian struggle that lies ahead. Wasting precious resources on mental and genetic defectives is sheer pathological altruism. Race-conscious Whites have a collective interest in raising healthy and intelligent offspring, but no such interest can exist when it comes to those who are weak and unintelligent. They are “life unworthy of life”; even they would not consent to such a truncated and meager existence if given full possession of their normal faculties. From a White nationalist perspective, to bring such children into the world is selfish and morally irresponsible; they impose unnecessary fiscal burdens on Whites and use up resources that are better invested elsewhere.

The race-conscious White man is faced with a dilemma: because of liberal elite hostility to his own ethnic genetic interests, any program of eugenic enhancement would be outlawed under the current totalitarian leftist order; at the same time, he cannot simply wait out the elite-managed decline of Western civilization. In less than a few generations, most of his race may become drooling mental defectives, if they haven’t already miscegenated themselves out of existence into the burgeoning mass of Third World “migrants” who now infest his homeland. If he must take action, he must take it now, otherwise all is lost.

Race-conscious Whites must abandon all leftist-controlled urban areas to “live off the grid.” By colonizing relatively unpopulated areas of North America and Western Europe, the White man will return to a rustic existence, filling the countryside, the mountains, the forests, the tundra with Whites only settlements, similar to the Boer-only settlement of Orania in South Africa. Living the way his ancestors did centuries ago will ensure that no Third World “immigrant” follows him into the mountains or the wilderness. Self-imposed hardship will further intensify Darwinian selective pressure on Whites, jumpstarting the process of natural eugenic enhancement, just as it did during the early colonization of the Americas. Once race-conscious Whites have become sufficiently numerous, they must embark on a program of state-sponsored eugenics. This will be used to strengthen the White population until they are able to wrest control of North America and Western Europe from the hostile elites and their army of greedy “migrants.”

The new ethnostate will be constitutionally grounded on Aristotelian political philosophy and neoDarwinian biology; it will be a meritocracy based on eugenic principles. Eugenics, the scientific ideological core of the new White nationalism, is easily reconciled with the aristocratic political science of Aristotle; both are concerned with the development and formation of the best possible citizen, one along genetic and the other along characterological lines. Aristotelian philosophy is based on a linear hierarchical conception of reality; this overlaps with the dominance hierarchies of the animal kingdom and of all human socio-political organization. Furthermore, the capacity for superior moral development is improved substantially by superior genes. In an Aristotelian political order informed by eugenic principles, the state would ensure that all citizens have both the mental and physical capacity to live the good life. Mandatory genetic screening would be one of the conditions of citizenship; those at risk of transmitting hereditary diseases or conditions, such as criminality or low IQ, would undergo compulsory eugenic sterilization. Only the best and most virtuous citizens, the biologically and intellectually superior “aristoi” or natural-born aristocrats, would be the ones allowed total freedom of action in the political sphere.

In the ethnostate, the aristoi of the White race will determine who must give birth and who must be sterilized. These men are not petty bureaucrats, but aristocrats selected on the basis of health and IQ. Their sole task is the promotion of White racial survival, whatever the cost. For those who believe eugenic sterilization is barbarous and cruel, allowing the birth of children who suffer from mental retardation or cystic fibrosis is much, much worse. For this reason, only the healthiest, high-IQ females will be allowed to breed, even being massively incentivized to do so. Encouraging the natural increase of healthy, intelligent Whites, at the expense of the low IQ and genetically unfit, is the most White nationalist thing a White man can do for his race.

Some will necessarily object: “But state-sponsored eugenics will infringe on individual rights and freedoms!” This is a common, but groundless objection. The “right to procreate” is not an absolute. In 7 utilitarian ethics, rights are never ends in themselves; they exist to maximize the happiness of the greatest number and must be tempered by social obligation. Furthermore, not all men have the capacity for individual freedom. The Greek philosopher Aristotle recognized the existence of natural slavery because of the inability of some to reason autonomously, even though they may be responsive to reasoned instruction. Whether a man is free or not must be determined by his capacity to reason (for us, his IQ).

Legislation regulating some of the most intimate areas of our lives is hardly controversial; if we allow government to enforce this legislation, ostensibly in the interest of public safety, why not allow government to decide who gets to reproduce and who doesn’t? If the low IQ and genetically unfit are allowed to breed recklessly, as they do now, Western civilization will eventually be reduced to smoldering ruins. Unregulated breeding is far more dangerous than any black market specializing in the sale of illicit firearms or drugs. Society would be much safer if it allowed every citizen to acquire large arsenals of weapons without special licensing, but criminalized the marriage and procreation of the low IQ and genetically unfit.

If a large minority of race-conscious Whites emigrate, seceding from the leftist totalitarian state to independently pursue their own racial interests, reversal of dysgenic fertility and Third World “immigration” may be accomplished within a few generations. As race-conscious Whites strengthen their race through genetic enhancement, the totalitarian left will get weaker, forced to increasingly rely on low-IQ Whites and “migrants” for manpower. From their bases in the Pacific Northwest or Lapland, race-conscious Whites, stronger and more intelligent than ever before, would raid globalist-occupied territory, slowly enlarging their own dominions until the reconquest of North America and Western Europe has been completed. This is not without historical precedent. Medieval Spanish Christians, reduced to a small area of their own country, seized the emirates of Mohammedan Andalusia one by one, until the last emirate of Granada had been defeated, its Moorish inhabitants expelled from the Iberian peninsula in 1492.

Race-conscious Whites must live, think and breathe race, just as they did during the long and distinguished reign of Queen Victoria, when Whites were at the peak of their intellectual and artistic powers. In this age of drab multicultural uniformity, the White man’s race is his most formidable weapon, a thorn in the side of those who wish to replace him with the low IQ peasant masses of the Middle East, Africa, South Asia and Latin America. Nothing terrifies the hostile elites more than the prospect of encountering race-conscious White men bred for superior intellect and physical strength, able to aggressively pursue their own racial interests undeterred by elite and non-White hostility.

Julian Vigo #sexist feministcurrent.com

In an effort to move to a greener existence, I recently switched to an ecological toothbrush. As I have been living uniquely from solar panels for almost two years, I was forced to ditch my electric toothbrush. In choosing an ecological toothbrush, I studied materials, as well as the advantages of recycled plastic brushes versus those with replaceable heads. In the end, I had to eliminate every single option aside from the single one I chose. Yes, I had to exclude that which did not meet my personal standards and convenience.

I think a lot about exclusion these days. The #MeToo campaign which emerged in reaction to the sexually aggressive acts of Harvey Weinstein is clearly a female-centered campaign. But recently I’ve seen arguments that #MeToo should be extended to include males. While being “inclusive” of everyone might seem like a nice idea, the reality is that there are perfectly rational reasons for exclusivity in many situations. Our shared experiences with certain humans help us form bonds where and when we need them. These bonds can often make life bearable for those experiencing particularly painful moments in their lives. Commonalities help to create community. The truth is that all communities are exclusive, in one way or another, of individuals who don’t share certain experiences or requisites. While some might be tempted to argue exclusion equates to segregation, such arguments are very much apples and oranges, particularly in the context of women’s rights.

There are several key differences which should be underscored, when discussing “exclusion” in the women’s liberation movement, beginning with the myth that feminism must focus on males. Thanks to liberal feminists like Emma Watson, among others, many women have been made to believe that arguing for the inclusion of males in the women’s movement is a worthwhile cause. But any group in protest of its oppression by another group is within its rights to demand that the oppressor not be included in its organizing. For instance, when labour unions secured the legal right to represent employees in 1935, employers were excluded from the class of employees because it was understood that employers (as well as managers and supervisors) held power over workers. In terms of economic class, it seems that most people are on the same page when understanding which group holds power over another.

Similarly, civil rights advocacy began with the premise that there is social inequality between people of colour and white people, making a necessary distinction between who is being oppressed under white supremacy. Robbing a person of the right to distinguish the oppressor class means that she is barred from speaking about and identifying her oppression.

Nobody expected the Black Panthers to consider the marginalization of KKK members from their organization for good reason. Similarly, no such claim of exclusion was made about the Million Man March in Washington D.C. in 1995, when approximately 400,000 African American men converged en masse in the nation’s capital to engage in teach-ins, worship services, and community organizing. While there was a discussion over the fact that women were excluded, there was also recognition that black men had the right to gather without women to discuss their issues, and this action was largely supported by African American women. Two years later, the Million Woman March was held in D.C. to focus on issues specific to women.

This sort of exclusion is not based in hatred or a desire to do harm. Exclusion is how we decide, like me and my ecological toothbrush choices, what meets our needs. Exclusion is not necessarily about owning a card to an elite club — it is about setting a particular direction for an individual, group, activity, community, and so forth. All social groups exclude in some way. While I am a big believer in reaching over the aisle to dialogue with those responsible for our subordination, I also recognize the need of any group to make decisions within its group before reaching across that aisle.

(..)

Does the fact of breast cancer support groups for women mean that males cannot get breast cancer? Of course not. And there are breast cancer support groups for males. Why? Because males and females experience breast cancer differently. Commonalities between same-sexed bodies are part of the social intimacy that both males and females alike cherish across cultures. Be it in the hammam or the steam room, the hospital ward, or the changing room at the gym, there is intimacy between people of the same sex that provides a space of security and dignity. Females especially value these spaces because the public sphere is not safe for women. Being in a female-only changing room can offer women a needed reprieve from the daily sexualization of their bodies, and from unwanted male attention and judgment.

The issue of “exclusion” has become a touchpoint for the left in recent years. Most notably, we have seen exclusion being derided as bigotry in trans activist circles where women who say they would not feel comfortable with a male in their change rooms, their women’s shelters, or in a women’s prison are labelled transphobic. Yet both these examples come from real life paradigms. In 2007, Vancouver Rape Relief Society won a case against Kimberly Nixon, a trans-identified male who had attempted to join the training group for peer counsellors at the women’s shelter.

Nixon was asked to leave the group account of having been born male, and because the shelter operated on the basis that women could best counsel other women, having had the specific experience of growing up female under patriarchy. The B.C. Court of Appeals’ decided that Vancouver Rape Relief had the right to determine its own membership, as any oppressed group of people has the right to “discriminate” when organizing in their own interests, as a class. Currently pending in Texas is the case of three female inmates who are suing Federal Medical Center Carswell in Fort Worth, claiming that, “They are living in a degrading and dangerous environment by being forced to share showers and bathrooms with the transgender inmates.” The truth is that, for most women, sex does matter. What is more remarkable is that males who claim to have an internal “female identity” have zero compassion for or comprehension of the reality women face in a male supremacist world, and would prefer women put aside their own material reality, comfort, and safety in order to validate men’s feelings.

Choosing a female gynecologist or desiring a female-only space for changing is not meant to incriminate all males as, to paraphrase George W. Bush, “evil doers.” Rather, a woman might choose a female gynecologist both because she feels a woman would better understand her body, but also because she feels safer in that vulnerable state with someone statistically unlikely to assault them. Women’s desire to change in a locker room without male-bodied persons would likely be based on something similar, as well as a desire to maintain healthy boundaries that too often go unrespected. In excluding males from female spaces, women are demanding that society accept the healthy boundaries of women, even if, in certain scenarios, males might wish to be on the other side of the line.

Last week, Bustle ran a story arguing that “some members of LGBTQ community feel that the [#MeToo] campaign focuses too strongly on the gender binary and seems to erase nonbinary or genderqueer people from the conversation.” But what this statement really conveys is that males feel excluded from a conversation lead by women speaking out about male violence. While I would not deny that males experience violence, it is overwhelmingly violence inflicted by other males. What makes #MeToo important is that violence against women and girls is coded into the structural social hierarchy. When women contribute their #MeToo stories, they are doing so as females who have, from childhood, been groomed as objects that exist for male use.

It cannot be overstated that females suffer disproportionate levels of sex-based discrimination and violence, including sexual harassment, domestic violence, rape, and trafficking. Women are quite aware that they are discriminated against and physically abused because of their sex, regardless of how they may feel, internally, about the gender roles imposed on them. It is entirely insignificant, for example, how the over 200 women who James Toback sexually harassed identified. To demand that #MeToo include non-binary people is to miss the point of the feminist movement: feminism has from its inception been explicitly about breaking the hierarchy and stereotypes reinforced through gender which demanded women not leave the house, not vote, and not work. It is not the “binary” that is the problem so much as it is gender itself, under patriarchy. Men who rape women don’t care whether their victims feel “binary” or not.

What Bustle would like is for women to use a language that is seemingly more neutral, less politically objectionable, and more inclusive… of males. Otherwise there would be no uproar with focusing specifically on women’s voices and experiences in this campaign. Males insisting on being “included” in women’s social protest against sexism is just more of the same sexism — women are being instructed to shut up about their oppression by males unless they include males. Beyond that, under patriarchy, women are always under pressure to be sexually available to men. This new language of “inclusion” that frames “exclusion” as inherently harmful has led to males who identify as transgender to insist that women include them not only in their groups and politics, but in their beds. That this is explicitly sexist is made clear through the fact that I have yet to see any male who identifies as trans pressure heterosexual men into sleeping with him.

A narrative that insists on coercing or goading women into including their oppressor is anything but progressive. Likewise, insisting that the language of gender neutrality is what matters in a conversation about sexual violence is far from revolutionary. Taking up the five-cent terms like “non-binary” and “queer” will have no impact on the facts of sex-based oppression for females. The challenge we face as a society is not to carpet bomb women’s movements with accusations of “exclusivity” and “bigotry” when women recognize that males and females are different and have different needs. Creating linguistic games might seem avant-garde to undergraduates, but the reality is that gender is what prescribes the behavioral cues engrained in females throughout their lives. Gender is what is hammered into females as a class, rendering them subjects of a discourse they have no power to respond to. The notion that gender can ever be neutral is patently absurd since gender is not the solution. It is the problem.

Changing language to be “be more inclusive” is counter-revolutionary and pretending that such language does anything other prevent women from effectively organizing towards their own liberation is delusory. The language of gender inclusivity does nothing to dismantle the social and political inequalities that females face. It does, however, create a lovely illusion (especially for men who want to seem progressive in their attempts to thwart our movement): that saying “genderqueer” makes one a “feminist.”

Questioner #racist realjewnews.com

Down South, there are some nasty little varmints called “fire ants.”

In the West, their are some nasty little devils called “Jews.”

They (fire ants) exist in large numbers, and if you happen to step into their territory, they climb onto you in large numbers, and stealthily occupy your body surface from toe to head.

They (Jews) also exist in large numbers, and as they stepped into OUR territories (we allowed them, their so called Diaspora), they climb into every crevice of power they can occupy… economic, legal, political, and executive.

You (most people) do not feel them as they do this. Somehow, you are unaware of your risk. You can say that for both fire ants, and Jews.

Then, one of them causes you to feel it’s presence… and you instinctively slap it (usually on your neck). I mean… fire ants.

Or, one of their crimes gets you angry, and you instinctively speak out. About the Jew’s criminality, I mean.

Instantly, as you kill the one, a signal is immediately sent to the other thousands, even the ones that worked their way into your socks. You are now being simultaneously bitten (stung) by the hordes. Again, I mean fire ants.

Your entire body is on fire, and you can even die (rare, but it happens).

Or, instantly as you denounce the Jew properly, the other hordes of Jews instantly attack you in numerous ways… slander, boycott, physical attack, or even murder. They call it “The Law of the Rodef”. Whatever it takes, up to death, to stop one who stands in their way.

A strategy that clearly works with fire ants is — avoid their attacks by taking the offensive, find their nests, and destroy it and them.

As to our status under Jewish domination, we are in effect working as their attack arm militarily, while being milked of wealth in our daily lives. Milked dry, I might add.

We are currently (Christians in the West) serving the beast by fighting Jewish Wars against the Muslims. The Jews are, unfortunately, now preparing similar treatment to the Orthodox Slavs & Catholic Europeans.

The first self-declared enemy of Jewish history was the Egyptians. In modern day terms, these are represented as Arabs and Sunni Muslims. Jews have slaughtered these for over a generation, with their repeated and carefully timed assaults.

Their next most hated self-declared enemy were the Persians (Iranians). In modern day terms, these are represented as Shia Muslims. Same as above, with the biggest slaughter of all coming in the impending attack on Iran.

Sometimes, they gleefully watch (and sometime arrange) for the Muslims to slaughter each other (Iran-Iraq War, or coalition against Saddam in 1991).

They hate Romans (Europeans), mostly because of Vespasian & Titus, and the later failed Bar Kokhba rebellion. But they need the European wealth and blood, so they for now, are simply infiltrated.

They hate Germans (Nordics) because of Hitler, who saw them for what they are. This irrational hatred (they imitated much German culture and strategic thinking) is compounded because they (Jews) know their Holy-Hoax is a lie meant to subjugate this people for all time, and some Germans still dare to deny the lie.

Liars are always most infuriated by the one who knows of their deceit.

Of course they hate Christians everywhere, with a passion that out-burns the fires of Hell, because of the Jesus Christ that they would gladly stone or crucify even today. Luckily, that fire awaits them below.

They hate Slavs, for the Eastern Vikings that became today’s Russia and Ukraine destroyed their Khazar Kingdom long ago. As some Jews extent are descendants of the Khazars, this rankles beyond reason.

They showed that hatred for Slavs once before (1917-on) in terrifying action: a Jew fired bullet to the neck of an Orthodox priest at Lyubianka prison, or a Noble’s place unto death in the Jew run work-camps of Siberia, or Kaganovich’s Peasants’ starvation en masse in Ukraine and Russia in the 1930’s, or a machine gun bullet in the draftee’s back fired by a NKVD Jew commissar to keep the assault going.

Or, the crime that Jews most celebrated, the Jewish ordered murder and rape (yes, they raped the dead little girls) of the Czar and his family in Yekaterinburg. Subsequently named for their murderer, Sverdlov (a Jew).

Unfortunately, few know how to deal with fire ant risk.

More unfortunately, even fewer know anything about the Jewish threat.

The fire ant cannot be reasoned with. Neither can the Jew.

You cannot convert fire ants into honeybees. A few Jews do convert to Christianity, however. +BN is the shining example of our day. St. Paul was the fore-runner of such men, rare in history.

We can destroy fire ants, only if they have not already infiltrated our body.

We cannot destroy the Jewish masses, they have already infiltrated everything including our nostrils.

You cannot attempt to deport them to your neighbor’s territory. Hitler attempted that, and you see what happened.

No, a solution must be found, before a true world holocaust — and I don’t mean fire-ants.

Silver Fox 1957 #conspiracy dailykos.com

Whatever happened to the Chavez/Maduro supporters around here?

They would be here, but they're only halfway through the Caracas bread line


The bread line caused by Obama, Hiterly and the CIA blowing up the economy?

Ok. Everyone is getting plenty to eat. The stores are full. No one’s starving. The capitalists are refusing to produce goods, causing artificial shortages. And when they import goods, they divert almost all of it to Colombia or the Black Market.

How bout if you economic geniuses tell me how you can have mass shortages in a capitalist economy? And capitalists run the whole Venezuelan economy.

I’m waiting. Come on, geniuses, let’s hear how you get mass shortages of goods in a free market economy. It’s not even possible.

OK, this one isn’t satire, apparently. Capitalists in Venezuela aren’t permitted to function as capitalists. They don’t have access to raw materials either foreign or domestic, and they’re only allowed to sell below their costs production. Thus there’s no production. It’s true that a lot of production is diverted to Colombia or (more commonly) the domestic black market, but the chavista idea that the producers are diverting it isn’t correct. Rather, it’s the people who arbitrarily have first dibs on buying at ridiculously low mandated prices (typically the government’s most fervent supporters, curiously enough) who are doing that.

Not one thing you say here is true.

The stores are full. There are only shortages of a few things, and those tend to be basic items. There have been deliberate and artificial shortages of other things such as toiletries, medical goods, etc. This was all done to blow up the economy to get rid of the Chavistas. They have raids every week of warehouses full of hoarded goods. The last raid captured 21 million syringes. There are lots of people with plenty of money who want to buy stuff. And there are shortages. What sort of crap is that? So produce goods to supply the people with dollars waiting to buy stuff. Capitalism 101.

The oppositon has admitted many times that they are sabotaging the economy. The latest one was when an opposition leader said they were “boycotting the economy.”

What you say is nonsense. They have access to all of the goods they need to produce anything they want. Anyway the stores are full. Just not of the stuff people want to buy at the prices they want to pay. 95% of the goods in the stores are not covered by price controls. Price controls only cover a few basic goods. The prices are too low, but the government keeps raising the price controls to deal with business demands.

This entire crisis has unfolded as Maduro has stocked his government full of rightwingers from the business community and opposition. So this “failure of the Left” happened under the watch of rightwingers. Maduro has seriously caved to many of the demands of the Opposition. In fact a lot of people think he is a sellout. So this crisis happened after Maduro met demand after demand of the opposition. But the Opposition are like Republicans on Steroids. They keep moving the goalposts.

You know why those price controls were put in in the first place? Because the Opposition tried to blow up the economy. They had a lockout strike 10 years ago in which they shut down the economy by closing the doors of their businesses. This created artificial shortages and inflation raged. So Chavez put in price controls. They’ve since been lifted on many goods. So the Opposition forced the price controls in the first place.

You are wrong that goods are not diverted from production. The government gives dollars to import goods. First of all, the business sector generally takes these dollars and either invests them overseas in the US or diverts them to the money black market where they can sell them at a markup. So a lot of the dollars to import stuff are immediately diverted to the black market. In fact, the business sector is not producing anything. They would rather just play the money market. What goods are produced are diverted immediately to the black market or shipped to Colombia for a markup.

Fully 35% of goods imported are immediately diverted to Colombia where they can sell them for more money.

This whole mess is caused by a black market in currency which is a whole other ball of wax. This was caused by currency controls, but those were put in due to opposition meddling too. The opposition was shipping their money out of the country to the US instead of investing it. It’s called capital flight. Chavez put in price controls to stop that as he had to. Venezuela continues to lose $50 billion/year to capital flight. It’s still a huge problem. The currency controls were no big deal for a long time until the oil price blew up, then everything went to hell, and a black market for currency rose which screwed up everything.

Really this whole mess has been caused by the decline in oil prices, which incidentally was done by “leftwing” heroes like Obama and Hitlery. They negotiated a deal with Saudi Arabia to spike production to crash the price of oil. The purpose was “screw Russia.” A secondary purpose was to screw some other US enemies like Venezuela. So it’s the US and your pals the Saudis who crashed the price of oil as part of a scam to crash the Russian economy.

Price controls only cover maybe 5% of goods, and even that is iffy. So rice is covered, but a rice dish with chicken in a package is not. So chicken is covered, but not rotisserie chicken which the stands have plenty of. True there is a low profit on the price controlled stuff.

The capitalists had been refusing to produce this stuff as soon as the controls went in because the profit margin was too low. They could make a profit, but not enough of one. So the government was importing all that stuff on the price controlled list. Then the oil price blew up and the government went broke, so they had no money to import price controlled stuff. So shortages. Then a lot of planned sabotage.

PS you realize that the markets in the wealthy and middle class areas are full, right? Including all that price controlled stuff. There are no shortages of one thing, not even price controlled stuff, in the wealthier areas. Tell me how this is because capitalists can’t function.

The main problem is the black market in dollars. The way to deal with that was to float the currency, but Maduro did not have the balls to do it. This is a policy failure, but it’s not leftwing or rightwing. But to float the currency is a tough decision and it would hurt a lot of people. They did a partial float though. The black market dollars are now worth 4X the government rate, but before it was 90X the official rate.

Seeing as price controls only cover a small % of items, where do you get off with this “price controls ruined the economy” stuff.

Besides a lot of the price controls allow for a modest profit. I think some are below the cost of production but not most. And Maduro keeps raising them anyway.

Keep supporting fascists abroad while opposing them at home. It’s a grand tradition in the Democratic Party all the way back to 1900.

Ricardo Duchesne #fundie eurocanadian.ca

We should not be satisfied. In my books The Uniqueness of Western Civilization and Faustian Man in a Multicultural Age I emphasized the "continuous creativity" of Europeans from ancient Greek times to the present. I also went back to the revolutionary contributions of pre-historic Europeans in the domestication and riding of horses, their co-invention of wheeled vehicles, their principal contribution to the "secondary-products revolution," their invention of chariots, their creation of the most dynamic language in history, the proto-Indo-European language, their nurturing of the only true aristocratic culture in history (in which rulers were not despots but first among equals), their origination of the first heroic and tragic literature, and, most important of all, their responsibility for the appearance of "self-consciousness" in history, which laid the foundations for the Greek Miracle.

I highlighted the scholars who wrote about the Greek invention of secular observation of nature, the invention of mathematical proof, the invention of artistic realism, the invention of prose writing, the invention of historical writing, the invention of politics, the invention of infantry warfare, the production of the highest sequence of the greatest thinkers in history, the Hellenistic Revolution in Science, not to mention technological and economic novelties.

I also mentioned the Roman contribution of the first rationalized legal system that recognized each citizen as a legal person, Rome's unsurpassed engineering, aqueducts, Latin literature, and rational infrastructure of war-making as well as the greatest empire in human history. I argued that the Middle Ages were one of the most creative periods in history as evidenced by the invention of universities, corporate autonomy of the church and towns coupled with the "first modern legal system," the invention of mechanical clocks, the scholastic method of investigation, the best water mills, Romanesque and Gothic architectural buildings unsurpassed in history, the three field system of agriculture, an entire Renaissance in the 12th century.

The West is filled with "origins," "transitions," "inventions," "renaissances," "discoveries," and "revolutions": the Printing Revolution, the Portuguese rounding of Africa, the discovery of the New World, Cartographic Revolution, the Italian Renaissance, the invention of perspective painting, the Copernican Revolution, the Newtonian Revolution, the Military Revolution, the Glorious Revolution, the French Revolution, the First Industrial Revolution, the Second Industrial Revolution, the German Philosophical Revolution(s) from Leibniz to Kant to Hegel to Nietzsche to Heidegger, the invention of the Novel, the Romantic Rebellion, the Darwinian Revolution — to mention a few.

Meanwhile, the Rest of the world remained stuck without any major novelties after the inventions of the Bronze Age that we associate with the rise of civilization as such. There was change, but no revolutionary novelties, no major thinkers, no major scientists, no major artists. There were a few philosophical reflections by Muslims out of their reading of Aristotle early in the Middle Ages, and some novelties in pharmaceutical ingredients and optics. The Chinese also produced a few trinkets by way of water clocks, firecrackers, and paper. But Chinese "development" consisted only in demographic expansion, intensification of rice farming, and the building of big ships called "junks."

Measuring European greatness has always entailed an evaluation of the way artists, novelists, philosophers, composers, mathematicians have occasioned a breakthrough, a new way of explaining history, a new style of poetic expression, a whole new philosophical outlook. In contrast, the measurement of non-European greatness tends to be about men who were good at following an existing tradition, perfecting an existing style of painting and poetic expression, reinforcing the unquestioned thoughts of sages.

The standards for Western greatness are far higher. Here is a glimpse of European greatness in classical music. We learn that in Claudio Monteverdi (1567-1643), pioneer of opera, "for the first time in history there was a complete unity between drama and music." We learn that "it is harmonic intensity above all that sets Bach's music apart from that of his contemporaries...In Bach's music a completely new harmonic language is forged [...] There is no music in the literature that has Bach's kind of rightness, of inevitability, of intelligence, of logically organized sequence of notes."

When Haydn started, "the new music — the music of the style galant — was in its infancy and Haydn put everything together. It is not for nothing that he is called the Father of the Symphony. With equal Justice he can be called the father of the String Quartet...Rococo is left far behind; this is Classicism of the purest kind, and the music is big." Beethoven, "from the beginning he was a creator, one of those natural talents, full of ideas and originality [...] Then came Eroica, and music was never again the same. With one convulsive wrench, music entered the nineteenth century."

Berlioz "was a natural revolutionary, the first of the conscious avant-gardists...Uninhibited, highly emotional, witty, mercurial, picturesque, he was very conscious of his Romanticism [...] he was in every way a revolutionary, fully prepared to throw established and even sacred notions into a garbage can." Chopin "was not only a genius as a pianist, he was creatively a genius, one of the most startlingly original ones of the century [...] For the first time the piano became a total instrument: a singing instrument, an instrument of infinite colour, poetry, and nuance, a heroic instrument, an intimate instrument." [The above citations are from The Lives of the Great Composers, 2006].

This kind of originality can be found in all the arts and sciences of the West. Actually, the entire history of physics, chemistry, biology, geology, historical writing, logic, archaeology, anthropology, sociology, economics, geography, is dominated by Europeans from beginning to end. After all, these disciplinary fields were all invented by Europeans.

Why this is so should be the mother of all historical questions. Yet even the thought that Europe was slightly greater terrifies an academic world obligated to push a multicultural mandate in education. This explains the hysteria against King. Talking about European greatness is now identified as "mentally stunted."

The only unique contribution Europeans are allowed, known as the "great divergence," is the Industrial Revolution, with perhaps permission to connect this revolution to the rise of modern science. But students are quickly reminded that China is now surpassing the West in industrial development. Jack Goldstone and Kenneth Pomeranz are two prominent names behind this historical revisionism. They say the West was merely different in reaching an industrial state first thanks to the exploitation of the Americas, the availability of coal in England, or the "fortuitous" development of an instrumentalist-engineering science in the 1700s. A few critics are begging for the inclusion of Western liberal institutions in the assessment of this divergence. But all in all, the uniqueness of the West is now suppressed.

This is what diversity enrichment entails.

Anita #fundie scienceblogs.com

I truthfully don't think you people (evolutionists) are thinking logically here at all.

For one thing, what happens to a pen when you throw it up into the air? Yes it has all this great trusted energy as its going up, but than it eventually comes crashing down.

The calculations for disorder done in the opening paragraphs of this forum suggest that the sun allows for more order. However I think that this is just an temporary illusion. In the long run (just like the pen) things become completely disordered and do not have any more energy to appear ordered. Such as water running upstream, or ice melting and crystallizing, metabolism, digestion, condensation, or a seed and an embryo.

These things are just temporary illusions. Thus in the overall scheme of things, they are becoming disorder.

Life (such as a seed or embryo) has only the exact amount of thrusting energy it needs to allow it to grow and serve its purpose. This "information" was ALREADY previously assigned to it in the blueprint of its DNA (assigned by the creator). There is no mechanism that shows us that DNA can evolve... meaning it has no available assigned energy left other than to procreate and pass on its genetic material. A living thing only has enough time and energy to be born, live and die.

Conclusion... Entropy is eventually closing in on all of us. The Universe tells us this! It is steadily loosing gas. This means less stars are being born and eventually the lights will all go out.

Additionally, the Human geno can only replicate offspring so many times before things go haywire. That is why we should not have kids with our brothers or sisters.

All these little technicalities concerning entropy or the labeled 2nd law of thermodynamics are just inconsistencies that serve for nothing. It serves no purpose in arguing about these technicalities especially when one opens their eyes and truly LOOKS - our resources are diminishing.

Unknown author #fundie hizb.org.uk

The idea of a Caliphate is constantly mocked by the West and their secular Muslim agents that rule over the Muslim World. The people who call for it’s implementation are labelled extreme and radical in the Western World and are imprisoned, tortured and even killed in the Muslim World. This is besides the fact that an Islamic Caliphate was implemented for over a 1000 years and is a part of history that cannot be ignored. In this article, we take a look at some of the contributions of the Caliphate to the World.

The first Islamic State was established by the Prophet Muhammed ? himself, in Madina Munawara in the 7th century. Based on monotheism it united people of different colours and creeds and eradicated status inequality. It eventually came to be embraced by many nations and peoples. At its height it stretched from Morocco and Spain in the west, to the Philippines in the east, from the Steppes of Khurasan to the north and to the jungles of modern day Congo to the south. The Muslim world leapt from a period of ignorance and division to a time of unparalleled unity and strength. All of this can be seen from many periods of Islamic history.

During the Abbasid rule of the Khilafah, they began a project of creating a capital city that would be revered around the world. The Abbasid Caliph, Al-Mansur assembled engineers, surveyors and art constructionists from around the world to come together and draw up plans for the city. Over 100,000 construction workers came to survey the plans and were distributed salaries to start the building of the grand city.

Baghdad was the first circular city in the world. Within fifty years the population outgrew the city walls as people thronged to the capital. Baghdad became a vast emporium of trade linking Asia and the Mediterranean. By the reign of Mansur’s grandson, Harun Ar-Rashid (786-806 CE), Baghdad was second in size only to Constantinople. European towns, cities and settlements built walls to prevent raids from outlaws and armies but were typically vulnerable at four points; the corners. If enough pressure was applied at any of these points the wall would collapse and troops could flood through the breach. The Muslims solved this problem by building circular cities.

After the defences of the city were complete, attention turned to how the Abbasids would feed the rest of the Ummah. The development of agriculture under the Abbasids was a phenomenon; the scarcity of water had converted the barren Arab lands into a vast desert, which had never yielded any substantial agricultural produce. The scattered population always imported supply of food grains to supplement the dates and the little corn grown in their own lands. Agriculture in Arabia had been very primitive and was confined to those tracts where water was available in the form of springs. Madina, with its springs and wells was the only green spot in the vast desert. The Abbasids dealt with this by first controlling the flows of the Tigris and the Euphrates rivers. The irrigation system in the land was greatly improved by digging a number of new canals, the largest flowed between the Tigris and Euphrates. This canal was called Nahr Isa (Isa canal) and was open to ships for transportation between Syria and Iraq. This led to navigation routes opening to India and the Persian Gulf. The Abbasids reconstructed the existing canals, lakes, and reservoirs, which were first built under Hajjaj Bin Yusuf in 702 CE. After this the swamps around Baghdad were drained, freeing the city of malaria.

The Abbasids in the 8th century initiated probably the greatest translation project translating the work of the Ancient Greeks into Arabic to preserve them from being lost forever. The careful and painstaking archival work took time, effort and coordination. An institute named Bayt Al-Hikmah was set up and run by the Abbasid Khilafah in Baghdad for this purpose.

At the behest of the caliph an observatory was built and numerous educational institutes which made literacy widespread were created. Other rulers such as Al-Mansur ordered plentiful resources to achieve the task. Translation became a state industry and the Muslim scholars succeeded in what is still regarded today as a truly incredible feat.

Observatories were set up in Baghdad and became an unrivalled centre for the study of humanities and for sciences, including mathematics, astronomy, medicine, chemistry, zoology and geography. The scholars, scientists and specialists drew upon the translated works of previous civilisations such as the Persian and Greek works that included those of Pythagoras, Plato, Aristotle and Socrates. Such works were accumulated and Baghdad became home to a great collection of world knowledge.

Europe had been embroiled in almost constant wars of horrific brutality. Invading hordes and fleeing refugees swamped the continent. In contrast large sections of the Muslim world especially those parts not on the frontiers were serene and tranquil for hundreds of years. In this atmosphere various cities flourished and the story was the same throughout the rest of the Muslim world.

When the Muslims entered Spain in the early 8th century they found people who lived in stone hovels, dirty places with a central hole in the primitive roof to let out the smoke from the small fire they lived around. The inhabitants of these pits would be consumed by soot, tears streaming down their faces. Eye and respiratory diseases were common.

The Spanish would refuse to wash, believing in a form of spirituality that meant they had to avoid an earthly or materialistic life. The animal furs they wore were handed down from generation to generation. The stench was often overpowering particularly as they lived close together in their airless cells. The Muslims, were used to courtyards, canals and gardens. The great city of Damascus in Syria had over a hundred thousand gardens alone. Guided by Islam and a vision of the betterment of humanity the Muslims sought to change this. By the 10th century the Spanish city of Cordoba had two hundred thousand homes, over half a million places of worship, nine hundred public baths and libraries containing hundreds of thousands of volumes. Moreover the streets were paved with stone, cleaned, policed and lit at night. Conduits brought water to the people’s homes and to the city’s many squares and gardens. Students from all over Europe descended upon the city to learn from the acknowledged master scholars of the age.

Throughout almost all of Islamic history the Khilafah and the Muslims were a minority ruling over majority non-Muslims. The Qur’an and the examples of the Prophet highlighted how non-Muslims should be treated. The Treaty of Umar ibn Al-Khattab, in which he guaranteed the Christians of Jerusalem their right to practice their faith in total religious safety became the standard model in Islamic history.

The Ottoman conquest of Constantinople in 1453 CE is considered a seminal event in history, but it was also the first time the Ottomans came to rule over a large number of non-Muslims. Constantinople had historically been the centre of the Orthodox Christian world, and had a large Christian population. As the Ottoman Khilafah expanded into Europe, more and more non-Muslims came under Ottoman authority. In the 1530s, over 80% of the population in Ottoman Europe was not Muslim. In order to deal with these new Ottoman subjects, Ottoman Sultan Mehmed instituted the Islamic rules of ruling over a diverse population, later institutionalised into the Millet System.

Under this system, each religious group was organised into a millet. Millet comes from the Arabic word for “nation”, indicating that the Ottomans considered themselves the protectors of multiple nations. Each religious group was considered its own millet, with multiple millets existing in the Ottoman Khilafah. For example, all Orthodox Christians in the Ottoman Khilafah were considered as constituting a millet, while all Jews constituted another millet.

Each millet was allowed to elect its own religious figure to lead them. In the case of the Orthodox Church (the biggest Church in the Ottoman Khilafah), the Orthodox Patriarch (the Archbishop of Constantinople) was the elected leader of the millet. The leaders of the millets were allowed to enforce their religious practices related to worship.

In addition to worship, millets were given the right to use their own language, develop their own institutions (churches, schools, etc), and in some cases collect taxes. The Ottoman Sultan generally exercised control over the millets through their leaders. The millet leaders ultimately reported to the Sultan, and if there was a problem with a millet, the Sultan would consult that millet leader.

The Ottoman Khilafah reigned from 1300 to 1924 CE. Throughout most of its history, the Millet System provided a system of religious harmony and belonging throughout the Khilafah. As the Khilafah expanded, more millets were organised. Separate millets existed for Armenian, Catholic, and Orthodox Christians, with each sect being divided further into more specific regional churches.

These decrees by the Ottoman sultans Mehmed II and Bayezid II granted the Greek community ownership of the church. The decrees and church remain in Istanbul today.

As the Khilafah weakened European intervention took place and they began to use each millet against each other – something that did not happen for hundreds of years. When the liberal Tanzimat were passed in the 1800s, the millet system was abolished, in favour of a European-style secularist government. The Ottomans were forced to guarantee vague “rights” to religious minorities, which limited their freedoms. Instead of being allowed to rule themselves according to their own rules, all religious groups were forced to follow the same set of secular laws. This actually ended up causing more religious tension in the Khilafah and was one of the causes of the genocide of the Armenians during World War One in the Ottoman Khilafah’s dying days.

The Millet System was a unique and creative solution to running a multi-ethnic and multi-religious, transnational state. The rights and freedoms it gave to religious minorities were far ahead of their time. While Europe struggled with religious persecution into the 1900s, the Ottomans created a harmonious and stable religious pluralistic system that guaranteed religious freedom for hundreds of years.

Whilst no doubt, the Khilafah also had many problems as any human state will have, it’s contribution to the World was unparalleled. The history of the Khilafah demonstrates that there isn’t a contradiction between Islam and Science. In fact, it was under the Caliphate through which scientists such as Ibn-Haitham were to revolutionise the approach to build conclusions upon the observable universe through testing and observation. The motivation for Muslims to excel in science and technology was underpinned by the Qur’an which encourages mankind to exploit the earth’s bounties for the benefit of all peoples.

“He put at your disposal that which is in the heavens and that which is in the earth, all from Him.”[Al-Jathiyah:13]

It also dispels the myth that the Caliphate has a barbaric view towards Non-Muslims. Whilst there maybe incidents in history of Non-Muslims not being treated fairly, this doesn’t change the fact that Islam inherently mandates Non-Muslim citizens to be treated fairly.

“He who hurts a dhimmi hurts me, and he who hurts me annoys Allah.” -Tabarani

These are but only some of the contributions of the Caliphate to the World. It’s clear that the backwardness and camel age attributed to the Khilafah is part of an ideological propaganda campaign to smear the concept of an Islamic polity. Today, Muslims all over the World have the desire to live under Shari’ah law despite the propaganda against the Khilafah. The only obstacle to this, are the imperial powers and their agents that govern the Muslim World by Secular rule. However, the arrival of a Khilafah based upon the method of the Prophet PBUH is inevitable as it has been promised by Allah SWT. The acceleration of the aggression against Islam and those who call for it’s implementation via a Caliphate by the World superpowers is only but a testimony to it’s nearness. Once the Khilafah arrives it will once again lead the World in science and technology without compromising on addressing and solving the problems of mankind.

There will be Prophethood for as long as Allah wills it to be, then He will remove it when He wills, then there will be Khilafah on the Prophetic method and it will be for as long as Allah wills, then He will remove it when He wills, then there will be biting Kingship for as long as Allah Wills, then He will remove it when He wills, then there will be oppressive kingship for as long as Allah wills, then he will remove it when He wills, and then there will be Khilafah upon the Prophetic method” and then he remained silent. (Ahmed)

Brandon Straka #fundie walkawaycampaign.com

The #WalkAway Campaign is a true grassroots movement, founded by former liberal, Brandon Straka, dedicated to providing a place to share #WalkAway testimonials and personal journeys to freedom. It is inspiring, exciting, heart-wrenching, and extraordinary to watch and read the stories of the individuals who no longer accept the current ideology of the Democratic Party, what it has become, and are now bravely sharing their stories with the world.

Some of us left long ago, while many have only recently begun to reject the narratives of the left. Some people have wanted to #WalkAway for some time now, but have feared the consequences they may be forced to endure from friends or family if they were to share their true feelings and #WalkAway.

The #WalkAway Campaign encourages and supports those on the Left to walk away from the divisive tenets endorsed and mandated by the Democratic Party of today. Classical liberalism on the left is a thing of the past. Today’s leftist pseudo-liberalism is more committed to expanding the scope of government, pushing us into collectivism, and groupthink. The Democratic Party has gone astray, and it is time to recognize that there is very little true liberalism practiced there anymore.
?
The “liberal” agenda of today has become authoritarian and fascist: forcing people into government-controlled health care; restricting school choice to assigned government-run schools; stifling speech that challenges liberal beliefs and candidates; buying political support from corrupt interest groups; welfare programs that breed dependence upon the state; legal preferences for particular groups rather than equality for all before the law; establishing price floors and ceilings enforceable by law; using government to redistribute wealth just to satisfy their egalitarian instincts, and shaming anyone who dares to deviate from their obligatory way of thinking.
?
The Democratic Party of today has adopted a destructive belief system, happily and without skepticism, separating people into groups based on identity and organizing them into camps of victims and oppressors. If you are a person of color, an LGBT person, a woman, or an American immigrant; the Democratic Party wants you to know that you are a victim and destined to stay that way.

They will insist that you are a victim doomed to exist within a system that is rigged against you; that you are a victim of systemic oppression; that you are a victim of your circumstances; and that no amount of hard work or motivational action will ever allow you to overcome your victimhood or the privilege of those around you.

This is perhaps the Democratic Party’s greatest and most insidious lie.

If you are a minority in America today the liberal media and left-wing politicians don’t want you to ever discover this lie. So they bombard us with stories designed to reinforce the narrative that you are in danger, that you can not succeed. They manipulate your fears and concerns by telling you that you are disadvantaged, disempowered, and disposable… to everyone except them.

Minorities in this country, are told by the Left, their entire lives that they are not welcome on the Right. They are told that they are hated because anyone who isn’t a Democrat is racist, bigoted, homophobic, xenophobic, and sexist. It is now the time for us to help minorities recognize that they do not owe their subjugation and allegiance to the Democratic Party. Centrists, Libertarians, Independents, and Conservatives believe there is a seat at the table for everyone. It is time for us to show minorities that they are cared about, appreciated and welcomed by conservatives and Republicans alike.

We invite Americans who have never been Democrats to join the campaign to share their own written and video #WalkWith testimonials supporting those courageous enough to #WalkAway. We need Americans on the Right to stand up and use their voices to tell the world the truth about what it actually means to be a conservative in America. We must come together to declare, loudly and often, who we really are, our real values, and finally expose the lies the Left has tried to place on us for far too long.

The #WalkAway Campaign also serves another fundamental purpose. For far too long, the Left has controlled the narrative in this country within the news and media, while the “silent majority” on the Right have done what they always do – remain silent. The Left has been allowed to reinforce the narrative that everyone on the Right is a bigot, a racist, a homophobe, a misogynist, and so on. This dangerous lie cannot be perpetuated any longer.

The Left has become so extreme and relentless that it is now the time for us to fight back!

The #WalkAway Campaign is a movement of Patriots from all walks of life – men, women, black, brown, white, straight, LGBTQ, religious, and non-believers – who share something very important in common.

WE ARE ALL AMERICANS, and we will not surrender our country.

various TERFs #sexist reddit.com

(WOW, for once, it's not transphobia, just a shit load of old-fashioned, general sexism (and some racism and hypocrisy of course))

(solanas2016)
It's just men. It's not "men like this". Deference has gotten us nowhere. Men.

(solanas2016)
sorry not sorry, but just as i refuse to waste my time "validating" the bespoke misogynist "identities" of mtts, i refuse to waste my time "validating" the at-maximum two good things any handmaiden's personal nigel has done in his lifetime. like, a few dudes have eaten you out until you came? great, shitheads can take a bow before they get the shepherd's crook. otherwise they have treated you like a woman: stolen your labor, and, as individual representatives of the the illustrious firm of Male Supremacy and Sons, horizontally integrated your mind, your body, and your time to please and enrich the other shareholders.

if you want to provide me with concrete examples of redeeming features of men, then i am willing to listen. but the "not all men" rhetoric that my half-assed re-iteration of basic radical feminist principles seems to have provoked in you comes across as a pre-emptive strike against having to answer that question. there is not exactly an abundance of anecdotes or data on the positive things men have to offer women in this world, here in this ostensibly feminist forum or in non-feminist or anti-feminist ones or in history or literally anywhere. please think about what that silence means before you send me another message telling me i'm not whispering sweetly enough into our oppressor's ear.

(uterusesb4duderuses)
"Why is the Japanese population dwindling?"

Because Japanese women want jobs and independence, and Japanese men want to fuck anime pillows and rubber dolls. That is literally why. Japanese men are angry that women are growing spines so instead they imagine super cute little girl voices for their sex dolls and envision anime life for themselves while the real world passes them by.

"My son accepts it, my daughter can't." Yeah that's because your son is another man who's probably going to end up in the same sorry situation and your daughter is freaked out that you're a worthless dude who wants a quiet fuck object as a life partner instead of a human being.

(86023485)
Women want jobs and independence in all modernized countries, but fake fantasy fuck toys for men haven't taken off to the same level in any other country I've seen. This "herbivore" culture is like MTGOW only more widespread and possibly even creepier.

I suspect the real reason is a bit more complicated than that. Maybe it has something to do with overpopulation. Japan is one of the densest populated industrialized countries in the world. But population can't grow forever, especially not in places as dense as Japan.

(IceIceKitty)
The arguement I've heard against it is that men will just practice their violent fantasies on these dolls and then move on to hurt real women, same argument behind not selling child sex dolls, same argument behind not watching pornography. People believe rape porn will sate rapists but actually it just fuels their obsession. I read something where the repairers of these sex dolls say they often find stab wounds and hacked off limbs. Creepy shit. We don't fear it for the reason they think though, it would be great if they actually left women alone but I don't think it would happen quite like that. Especially considering here we have yet another man forcing his fetish on his family.

(Elle_Ciel)
The argument is pretty simple: porn is addictive. It's no different than anything else that fucks up your brain chemistry. If a man is already obsessed to this degree, he's pretty far along into an addiction to begin with. There's no satiating them with fantasies forever. Once they get bored of the dolls, they'll need to up the ante to get the same high. They'll destroy their lives and hurt other people to satisfy a compulsive urge.

Either we start treating those desires as inherently sick and in need of serious treatment, or we'll have to deal with perverts after they turn into serial killer pedophiles.

(throwiesdg)
HA! Totally agree. I thought I would be sad when my divorce was finalized, but my biggest dream now is to eventually move out of my city into a teeny little cottage somewhere and have a little spinster's paradise. I could happily live without dating or having another relationship, and I can think of at least 3 or 4 friends who have told me they feel the same way. I'd be insanely happy with a Golden Girls-esqe future.

I don't think men realize just how many women feel the same way. Fewer men hassling me when I walk down the sidewalk or DMing me out of nowhere because they think there's a remote possibility they could laid from it? Fewer angry men shitting up the internet with their misplaced rage against women? Yes please!

(throwiesdg)
That's the thing- I love sex! I have a healthy sex drive, I'm straight, and I'm relatively young. You'd think with all those factors I'd be the exact type of woman who would never want to be alone. Yet still, the upsides of living with my ex never quite outweighed the downsides. I'll never again leave a freshly cleaned home only to return to a mess, or have to do someone's laundry, shampoo a stained carpet for the 3rd time in a month, or come home late to find that he's still waiting for me to cook a meal when I'd be so much happier eating a bowl of cereal and going to bed. Knowing this makes me so happy :)

My grandfather passed a few months ago, and I swear my Grandma still hasn't shed a single tear. It's not that she didn't love him, but it was soooo exhausting for her to cook, clean, and care for him that his passing felt like an enormous weight off her shoulders. I feel the same way about my ex (and most men, to be honest). I still love him and wish him the best, he's a good man, but a terrible partner and I'll pray for the poor woman who gets him next. Nowadays I see my grandma spending her days going to craft fairs with her ladies group, having luncheons, volunteering at church, etc and she seems so fulfilled and happy. I knew I didn't want to wait 40 years to live my life the same way

(susandeath)
I have to say I really do love my bf but its awesome to only see him once a week. Its often enough to satisfy my sex drive and I get the added bonus of only having to do extra cooking and cleaning once a week and its not that much because I'd be cooking for myself anyway.

I don't see myself ever wanting to move in with someone.

(qwertypoiuytre)
I would fully support the production and selling (even giving away for free?) of sex dolls or robots if they came with some stipulation as being only available for use on some remote island (or spaceship? planet?) and men upon going there could never come back. I think my proposed program would only create positive benefits for the rest of humanity.

(LittleOwl12)
Japanese men are a little infamous for their bullshit attitudes against women. It explains a lot of creepy anime.

Asian women have a very high rate of "marrying out" and I'm guessing a lot of it has to do with their feminism is outpacing the men's. I know that a lot of people are concerned that the extreme work hours have actually harmed people's abilities to interact with each other intimately. So there's been a counter-culture of young men who try to cut their hours short, help out with the kids and spend time with their wives and families. And change diapers! Clearly this loser didn't get on board. But points to the ones that do. They tend to be healthier and happier. Go figure.

various commenters #fundie breitbart.com

RE: Davos: Indian Prime Minister Says Attacks on Globalism Must Be Stopped

(info beam)
Why isn't India allowing muslims to invade their country in the name of globalism? Ah ok. Just white countries that need this ''globalism''. 10/4.

What is happening is our enemies are queuing up in order to destroy us. Globalism = the end of the west. Nothing else too it.

One other thing is that the globalists all have one thing in common- all left wing.
I have to assume that islam is currently being ran by left wingers. It would explain the ease in which the western leftists are so compatible.

(Aneurysm311)
Bingo!!! 2nd largest demilitarized zone on the planet between India and Pakistan. Globalism is great for the 3rd world, just sucks for the West. Outside of getting cheap Wal-Mart tee shirts, all your left with is wage stagnation, federal tax increases, trade deficit, and unfunded liabilities (owed by your grandchildren). But it fine as long as that is all soaked up by white countries and white people... to the point where they can no longer reproduce and are exterminated from the Earth

(VirtualParticle)
“All of us, we are linked together as one family." --Oh Really?
(1) Will Modi allow a million caucasians to immigrate into India annually? ---And spend Indian taxpayer's money on them?
(2) Will India stop banning stores like Tesco, 7-11 and Walmart? --Modi decries protectionism but bans such multinationals from entering his own country!
(3) Will he allow US chicken and beef into his own country? No but he preaches "globalization" !
* * * This Clown is a World Class Hypocrite, Nothing More * * *

(Brother Antony)
And in the meantime his own people live, sleep, beg and die in the gutters of Mumbai. Been there, seen it.

(Charles McRae)
They down not allow Christian NGO's in India unless things have drastically changed. India is determined to stay a Fourth World country. The culture that made the Western world boom or as the race hustler say the white world great, will work any where on any race.

(VirtualParticle)
I think Ganesh the elephant god is Modi's animal worship of choice.
He also turns a blind eye to millions of women (including white tourist women) raped every year in India, countless brides burnt to death by unhappy husbands, rich Indians who play "master and servants" with their poor fellow citizens, the open air shiiting of people in the streets (even when they have toilets) --does his best to make India a real model Shiithole.

(Brother Antony)
He may be another of those Indian freaks that orally recycles his own urine in the morning, so that may go a long way to explaining sacred cow worship.

Similar in a way to the Saudis' imbibing camel pee and worshiping a big black rock.

All much of a muchness in those so enriching excrement apertures (to paraphrase Trump).

(LIEberalshate)
We are only linked together if whitey is footing the bill and donating Billions of $ to them.

(jason callio)
Working hand in hand with the worlds other greatest threat. Islam. Both united in their goal of defeating western civilization.

(Schrödinger's cat )
Apart from driving the entire West Bank during an uprising, complete with burning tyres and hurled boulders, the most dangerous road journey I must have ever undertaken was between New Delhi and Jaipur. The truck drivers are all on a suicide mission, and a number I saw succeeded in this regard, but the main obstacle was cows on the road, every 100 yards. Since they are holy, they may not be run down. Eating them is death sentence territory.

I like black peppers on mine.

(LIEberalshate)
If leaders of shi*thole Countries think something is good then it's the opposite for the rest of us. All of these non white sub humans keep trying to eliminate whitey. We must put a stop to it.

Eric Sheppard #racist valdostadailytimes.com

(Selections from a manifesto and accompanying sent to The Valdosta Daily Times by Eric Sheppard last year.)

Memorandum Ultimatum

Let me Clear the Air and Set the Record Straight once and For All on Questions Inquiries Suggestions and otherwise in regards to this Entire Ordeal. We Will Determine who Is Truly Guilty and Who is Truly Innocent Throughout the Course of this Literary Revelation. Many still question the possibility of my surrendering to the people who call themselves "authorities". To Give you a Simple Answer, No! I will Not Turn Myself Over to Any White Man and I will Ensure this With my Own Will to Self-Defend and To Annihilate those Who Come After Me. These same people who you all know as "legal officials/police officers/sheriff/detectives" or any other falsified label of 'authority' only know wickedness and devilish behavior. It SHOULD be clear by now that this is a White Supremacist Nation Owned, Operated, and Controlled by White People. Yes it is ALL white people who help to maintain this wicked nation to a greater or lesser degree given the default status aided to them by virtue or vice of White Privilege. Thus all functionalities, codes, rules, policies, curriculums, cultures and social criteria created or concocted therein are Meant to Benefit Whites ALONE AND EXCLUSIVELY!

[...]

You Seem to have Forgotten, European, that You are not indigenous to this land or ANY OTHER land on the face of the planet Earth. You Acquired this Nation and All other Nations Through Afrikan-Indigenous Genocide. Cultural Thievery, Mockery and Demonization was and still is your Concrete Methodology. You have consistently invoked a Pattern of Perverted Pyscho-Sexual behavior and Persistent Brutality in every imaginable sector of society. You All assume Your Wickedness somehow vanished and dissipated yet everything you gained and passed down was/is a Result of those actions. You have still not surrendered to Your Victims, Afrikan people, the Rightful Owners of ALL that You Have. You All, European Descendants on the Continent and Elsewhere, fit the Definition Perfectly of Devils. No, not a False Spook Devil said to live underground in a fictitious fiery pit but a Devil here on Earth subjecting Afrikan people to a Hellish (Non)Existence. It is TRUE that Afrikan people are the God Body that gave you, the devils of the planet Earth, a Heaven (Civilization) which before our Presence in Europe was Completely Non-Existent. Not Only are We your Fathers and Mothers Biologically and Genetically in MOST Regards, but we are Also the Fathers and Mothers of Law, Ethics, Morality, Agriculture, Economics, Culture, Spirituality, Art, Mathematics and Every Conceivable High Science in Existence. It was Afrikan People who Pioneered Research and Explorations into these Fields of Knowledge long Before you even began to CRAWL on All Fours Much Less walk Upright and Consume Your Own Babies just to Survive in the Barren Land of Europe.

[...]

It is 2015 on the European Gregorian Calendar and you coons & house niggas are still giving white people a pass as though they have collectively or individually done ANY good for Our race. No your "white friend"/ " white coworker"/ "white associate" is not exempt from any of the Evils that the white race has authored. No not your token Tim Wise nor Jane Elliot, those devils get no passes either! Your Liberal Alex Jones and David Icke are just as Guilty. Although they speak MILDLY against the Wickedness your Race has Authored Systematically they NEVER identify the Root of All of It as Being their Own White Race. So Yes, Alex, World War Three Is Here and It will Be the War to End All Wars.....The Final Ultimatum Between the Righteous Afrikan Martyrs and Revolutionaries and the Army of Wicked European Demons. This is What You All have Created and You Shall Eat it Whole Without Liquid and Choke on its Bitterness. There is no such thing as a "good white person". To be Good is to Be Without Sin. However Your Children are Born into Sin because They Are Inheriting a Legacy of Wickedness and Bask in its Foul Odor just as You have Always done.

[...]

??Many of you all questioned If I was a Christian? No, and for you pathetic racist devils who love to jump to ignorant conclusions, I am NOT a Muslim either. I hate All of Your (European) perverted concoctions. I could NEVER participate in the ways of my oppressor. Even the same slave/slave-master handbook which you Beat us over the Head with instructs against this (Proverbs 3:31). It is Interesting what you find in that perverted text especially once you actually READ its content Thoroughly and Completely. In another part of the bible, which again I emphasize I have absolutely no subscription to, states in Exodus 21:16 "Anyone who kidnaps someone is to be put to death, whether the victim has been sold or is still in the kidnapper's possession." You Europeans have Kidnapped us from our Land through an act of Unprovoked War, sold us to other nations and bartered amongst each other with us and we are still held captive by this wicked nation disallowed to repatriate with our Native Land (in mass numbers) and in many cases made so deaf, dumb and blind that we are convinced to believe that Afrika is what you say it is (Undesirable), but is Actually the Motherly Sustainer of All Nations on the Planet. You put forth this Blatant Lie so that you can comfortably carry on your Criminal Colonialism and Resource Exploitation there. In another part of that sick doctrine it states in Ecclesiastes 1:9: " What has been will be again, what has been done will be done again; there is nothing new under the Sun." So as You have Done so it Shall be done onto You. Every iota of every act of wickedness you have Committed; you shall be forced to re-consume back into yourselves. It will be like a gallon of Poison to an Infant Child. All things function in patterns. Just as there is a consistent and unbreakable cycle to Life, Death, and the Seasons of Nature so it is with the Rise and Fall of Nations and their People. History has shown us that No Nation has withstood its imminent Demise. You are living in the Times of the Destruction of Amerikkka. In another part of this same devilish text in Revelation 16:6 it states: " Because they have shed the blood of the Prophets (leaders) and of The Holy Ones (Afrikan People), You will be given your own blood to drink like water. They deserve it.” Europeans, due to their uncompromisingly savage behaviour, deserve the Very Worst Slaughtering and Consequent Death.

Beatrix von Storch #fundie independent.co.uk

Beatrix von Storch: German police accuse AfD politician of hate incitement over anti-Muslim tweet
‘What the hell is wrong with this country? Why is the official page of police in NRW tweeting in Arabic? Are they seeking to appease the barbaric, Muslim, rapist hordes of men?

Ms von Storch, a member of anti-immigrant Alternative for Germany (AfD) party, posted the message that was later deleted by Twitter AP

German police have asked prosecutors to investigate a far-right lawmaker for possible incitement to hatred, after she criticised a police force for tweeting in Arabic “to appease the barbaric, Muslim, rapist hordes of men”.

Police in the state of North Rhine-Westphalia (NRW) posted a New Year’s Eve greeting in Arabic as well as German, English and French.

Cologne, a city where groups of mainly Arab immigrants were accused of sexual assaults at New Year’s Eve celebrations two years ago, is located in the state.

“What the hell is wrong with this country? Why is the official page of police in NRW tweeting in Arabic,” Beatrix von Storch, a member of the anti-immigrant Alternative for Germany (AfD) party, wrote in a Dec. 31 tweet that was later deleted by Twitter after receiving complaints from members of the public.

“Are they seeking to appease the barbaric, Muslim, rapist hordes of men?” she added.

Twitter suspended her account for some 12 hours after she posted the message, saying it breached the website’s rules that bar users from posting hateful content.

Social media platforms face hefty fines in Germany if they fail to remove hateful posts swiftly, and companies like Facebook and Twitter have hired extra staff to monitor such messages.

The NRW police deployed large numbers of officers to secure New Year’s street parties in large cities this year, and said celebrations were largely peaceful.
Read more

Prosecutors in NRW must first decide whether they should deal with the police complaint against von Storch, or transfer the case to Berlin authorities where her constituency is.

If prosecutors deem there is sufficient grounds to launch an official criminal investigation against von Storch, they would first have to ask parliament to suspend her immunity before proceeding with a case.

Cologne Chief Prosecutor Ulf Willuhn said prosecutors must now decide whether von Storch’s message amounted to “inciting people to commit violence against a certain section of society”.

Twitter also deleted a message by AfD member Alice Weidel, in which she said German authorities wanted Germans to live with criminal mobs of migrants.

The AfD won seats in parliament for the first time in September, riding a wave of discontent against Chancellor Angela Merkel’s decision in 2015 to open Germany’s borders to more than a million asylum-seeking migrants.

The AfD, which says Islam is incompatible with the German constitution, is the third largest party in parliament. It has upended German politics by stealing voters from Merkel’s conservatives and the centre-left Social Democrats, making coalition building more difficult.

AfD leaders reacted angrily to Twitter’s decision to delete the two postings under a new law passed by parliament in June that authorises fines of up to €50m (£44.3m) against social media networks if they don’t promptly remove hateful content.

“The censorship law of Justice Minister Heiko Maas has already showed on the first day of the year its ability to curtail freedom of expression,” said AfD co-leader Alexander Gauland.

“I call on every social media user to take action against such oppression by reposting the deleted comments again and again!”

Joe Stirling #conspiracy forum.prisonplanet.com

So now the Masons are posting lies about me
? ?
I got a good laugh when I stumbled across this recently:
http://www.masonicinfo.com/people.htm
Scroll down to the A-Z list of the 340 or so “Anti-Masons” they have named, and click on “Jim Prange.”
(Or, direct link to the entry at this link:
http://www.masonicinfo.com/others_pg2.htm#Prange

The website is a popular pro-Mason propaganda site run by Freemasons, and there is now a listing for me on that website under their category of “Anti-Masonic Examples,” a list that puts right-wing, bigoted nuts who happen to be anti-Masonic in the same company as authors who are truly exposing the organization’s dirty deeds, such as David Icke and Jim Marrs.

Here’s what they have to say about me:

Jim Prange (Pseudonym: Alex Parma) - Mr. Prange - using his credentials as a former newspaper reviewer of video games and his extensive knowledge gained through playing in a band - has concluded that the Masons are planting secret messages (from the reptile race) in crop circles while they're simultaneously poisoning the water supply. Using such impeccable sources as David Icke, Jim Marrs, and William Cooper (there's more than a bit of irony there, folks!), he has convinced himself that there's a huge conspiracy he's uncovered in Howell, Michigan. Perhaps Mr. Prange and his imaginary friend Mr. Parma have found an alternative to drinking that water.... You can find his rantings here. <- (link provided to essay)

This entry is revealing: in the one sentence they give to my essay’s central theory, they have twisted around one of the most crucial points of my theory to the opposite of what I actually say in the essay. Supposedly, I have concluded that “the Masons are planting secret messages (from the reptile race) in crop circles while they're simultaneously poisoning the water supply.”

Anyone who actually reads my essay will know that I’m clearly stating the opposite- that I think forces OPPOSED to the Masons are planting messages in crop circles, and in the case of Howell, that this anti-Masonic/anti-New World Order force created a crop formation to point out to the masses that high-level Masons are involved in the poisoning of the Howell water supply at a sacred site, and that these Masons have been brazenly indicating it by landscaping (not via crop circles, but via traditional, long-term landscaping) some of their symbolism onto the immediate area, visible from the air.

I figure, I must be pretty close to the truth if, in order to discredit me, they have to resort to such a low tactic. If my theory really is as ridiculous and off-base as they’d like you to believe, surely using my own words against me, unchanged, would have been all they needed to prove their point.

Interesting parallels to David Icke’s online debunkers, who often resort to similar tactics, such as claiming that Icke is “pro-fascist” or “anti-Semitic.” Anyone who reads a book by Icke, or even spends a little time on his website to find out if this is true, will know that his views are quite the polar opposite.

For an example of this type of disinfo-reliant debunking, check out this ridiculous exchange I had back in July ’04 with “Ben” (the administrator of the forum at alienufos.com, the “Central Online UFO Community”- a messageboard that is endorse by and partnered with UFO Magazine) and a few of his hired cyber-goons:
http://www.alien-ufos.com/forum/showthread.php?s=ad9b2a103cbf240 01d6e7066cb57a891&t=2162
At one point, he even resorts to saying that “when Icke says ‘lizards,’ he means ‘Jews.’” I had to give up on this forum and stop posting, as I couldn’t waste any more time lowering myself to their level any longer, already having discredited their debunking enough for anyone with a brain to catch on.

It’s interesting how often online debunkers of David Icke resort to these tactics to try to discredit him. After all, if David Icke’s theory is so off-base, wouldn’t it be far more effective for his debunkers to discredit him by using his own actual words, in full context, against him?

Interesting how Icke’s debunkers’ “Talking Points” are repeated almost verbatim from website to website, even though all it takes is a few minutes of reading Icke’s actual words to realize that they are misstating some of his main points as the opposite of what he actually says. I guess if you repeat a lie often enough, many people assume it’s the truth…

Now that I see similar tactics being used on me, I truly feel a warm, renewed sense of accomplishment for what I accomplished in decoding the Howell formation.

I wonder how many of the other people debunked on their “Anti-Masonic Examples” list are misquoted in their entry?

The Thunderbird Wheel has been activated; the dawn is here. Wise serpents will know it's time to either leave or join the side of light; any serpents who stay where they are will be burned by the sun.


Part 2.......

So now the Masons are posting lies about me
? ?
Here's further evidence from the ridiculous masonicinfo.com website that proves without a doubt that organized Freemasonry is an elaborately compartmentalized, crumbling pyramid of lies run by professional liars.

This is the last paragraph of their disclaimer page, where the author of the website attempts to absolve the Masonic organization from any accountability for the lies told on this website:

"And just to clarify: this website is a PERSONAL endeavor. Lest there be any misunderstanding, the concept was that of Ed King, solely and independently. There were no discussions with Grand Lodges nor, in fact, was there even a discussion with any other Mason! It was conceived and released without any suggestions from any Masonic source whatsoever. And to reiterate: no one person speaks for Freemasonry! Ergo, whether you like this site or you hate it, it is NOT an "official" Masonic site nor does it pretend to be...."

Here's the direct link:
http://www.masonicinfo.com/leader.htm

Hmm-- so, according to the author of the site, Ed King, masonicinfo.com is "not an official Masonic site nor does it pretend to be."

OK, so what IS the official website endorsed by organized Freemasonry for information on Anti-Masons? Let's find out:

1)Go to the OFFICIAL Freemasonry homepage on the internet, which is http://freemasonry.org.

2)From there, click on "Links." The direct link to the Links page is:
https://freemasonry.org/index.php?option=com_wrapper&Itemid= 83

3)From there, click on "Informational Sites." The direct link is: http://links.hiram.net/Informational_Sites/

(Before going to the next link, notice the caption for the 4th link on this page, titled "Anti-Masonry: FAQ." The caption to this link reads:
"This Anti-Masonry FAQ details the maliciously mendacious and willfully ignorant attacks on Freemasonry; with reasoned and factual responses.")

4)From the "Informational Sites" link of step 3, click on "Anti-Masonry: Points Of View." Direct link:
http://links.hiram.net/cgi-bin/links/jump.cgi?ID=32

T he above link will automatically redirect you to:
http://www.masonicinfo.com

5)From there, click on "Those who oppose Masons and Masonry." The direct link to this is:
http://www.masonicinfo.com/objectors.htm

6)Next, click on the word "people" on the line that reads "And specific people that oppose Freemasonry." Direct link:
http://www.masonicinfo.com/people.htm

7)From the A-Z list on their page, scroll down to my listing under "P." -> "Jim Prange (pseud: Alex Parma)" Direct link:
http://www.masonicinfo.com/others_pg2.htm#Prange

Inte resting... So the only website endorsed by the official Freemasonry home page for information on specific "Anti-Masons" is: (drum roll, please)
www.MASONICINFO.COM!

Yet, according to the author of www.masonicinfo.com, his site is not officially endorsed by Freemasonry.

See how it's done? With tricky wording, the Masons have created an illusion that seems to erase any accountability the Masonic organization should have for the blatant, provable lies told on their officially endorsed website for information on Anti-Masons.

Once again, this proves that one of the the main reason "masonicinfo.com" exists is to simply prevent average, unthinking people from reading any material by the "Anti-Masons" who are on to the truth, using the reprehensble method of reversing of the words of said "Anti-Masons," knowing that the majority of the readers of the website will not bother to read the work of the "Anti-Masons" misrepresented on the site, and that those that do actually read the work of the "Anti-Masons" are past the point of no return anyway, having been turned on to the truth through hard facts.

Knowing this, the Masonic organization then seemingly avoids accountability for their numerous bald-faced, traceable lies on the website by having the author of the website claim that it is not an official Masonic site, even though it is the ONLY website for information on specific "Anti-Masons" endorsed by the official website of Freemasonry!!!

How many people will see through this figure-eight of doublethink and realize that Freemasonry is built on a foundation of lies?

Hopefully more will see through the blatant BS peddled by these con artists, now that I've posted this "smoking gun" that proves, beyond a doubt, the fundamental dishonesty that comprises the backbone of organized Freemasonry.

Over the next few weeks, I will repeat versions of this post on any internet forum I can find where some anonymous Freemason messageboard poster name-drops "masonicinfo.com" in defense of Freemasonry. I've really got my work cut out for me-- seemingly, this is the website to which defenders of Freemasonry seem to always refer when defending their organization from truth attacks by "Anti-Masons" on the internet.

The Thunderbird Wheel has been activated; the dawn is here. Wise serpents will know it's time to either leave or join the side of light; any serpents who stay where they are will be burned by the sun.

by Jim Prange

Chrisy58 #racist chrisy58.wordpress.com

John Derbyshire has rather pointedly described the fate of those who would criticize Jews in a remarkable exchange with Joey Kurtzman, a Jewish editor of the website Jewcy.com:

“So far as the consequences of ticking off Jews are concerned: … I was making particular reference to respectable rightwing journalism, most especially in the U.S. I can absolutely assure you that anyone who made general, mildly negative, remarks about Jews would NOT — not ever again — be published in the Wall Street Journal opinion pages, The Weekly Standard, National Review, The New York Sun, The New York Post, or The Washington Times. I know the actual people, the editors, involved here, and I can assert this confidently.”

I thought about this when reading Peter Brimelow’s speech at Michael Hart’s Preserving Western Civilization conference in early February. Brimelow runs the excellent racial realism site VDARE.com, an immigration reform site that champions the interests of the American majority — European-Americans.

For this, Brimelow and his writers have drawn the wrath of the mainstream and liberal left, particularly the SPLC — routinely referred to as the $PLC at VDARE. [Editorial note: The Occidental Observer announces that from now on it will shamelessly copy this wonderfully accurate designation.)

He has also been shunned by mainstream conservative publications such as National Review where he was once Senior Editor. Jonah Goldberg, who personifies the changing of the guard at NR after Brimelow left, referred to Brimelow as “a once-respected conservative voice.” As Brimelow notes, NR is “a once-conservative, now respected, magazine.” I’m sure that the $PLC couldn’t be happier that Jonah Goldberg and his ilk are ensconced at NR. Brimelow introduces the problem he sees the West facing, delivered in the form of an observation followed by a question:

This is a problem which we see throughout the Western world—an unprecedentedly huge influx of non-traditional immigration. The result of this is that every major Western nation will be a minority in its homeland in the foreseeable future. It takes less time in some places and more time in others, but the calculations can easily be made. . . .

What’s so amazing about this transformation is that it has no economic benefit for the traditional people of the Western nations that are voluntarily giving up their identity — and their political power. As Brimelow phrases it, the question then becomes “Why are these countries doing this to themselves if they are not benefiting their native-born — their own people?”

Photo: Peter Brimelow debating immigration, 10-2-2008.
We at TOO have little doubt about the main force behind these transformations: The organized Jewish community. These transformations have nothing to do with economics but everything to do with ethnic activism and identity politics.

There are hints of this in Brimelow’s talk, although it was probably impolitic for him to mention it given the strong participation of Jews at the conference. As noted by The Searchlight (an $PLC-like outfit in the UK that is now running a “Hope not hate” campaign against the BNP), the conference was “an attempt to create a new ideological pole friendlier to Jewish participation, but within the broader white nationalist movement. They would bind Islamophobia and nativism with scientific racism.” Not quite the way I’d say it, but you get the idea.

Brimelow points to the growing Jewish support for Democratic politics in America — despite their relative prosperity. Jews are an economic elite but their voting patterns much more resemble non-white minorities — they “earn like Episcopalians and vote like Puerto Ricans,” as Milton Himmelfarb phrased it.

Indeed, Brimelow notes that higher percentages of Jews voted for Obama than the average for other minorities (83% to 79%). Why this is so “is a good question and in some ways the most important question in the immigration debate. And I recommend it to you for further discussion.”

Never one to pass up an invitation like that, I would point out that from the time they came to the US in large numbers, Jews have had a very negative view of traditional Americans and their culture. As Elliott Abrams put it, the mainstream Jewish community “clings to what is at bottom a dark vision of America, as a land permeated with anti-Semitism and always on the verge of anti-Semitic outbursts.” As portrayed by the Jewish media, “Western civilization is … a failing, dying culture, but at worst it is … sick and evil compared to other cultures.” It’s all about identity politics.

Brimelow gets right down to brass tacks about one side of the equation—he discusses and defends the interests of whites.

Obama doesn’t have 43% of his appointees white Protestants, in fact I don’t think even 4% are white Protestants. So you have to ask yourself what’s going on here. How can the founding stock of the country have so completely lost control? They could reasonably regard the Obama administration as kind of an occupation government: a coalition of united minorities that succeeded inuniting the minoritiesand dividing the majority.

As fate would have it, this observation resonated with something I had just read about the way Bolsheviks had assumed power in 1917 at the beginning of the Soviet era. A shadowy Executive Committee ruled, and among those with power “more than half were Jewish socialists.” Native Russians did not even make up a quarter. One participant noted that “the most striking thing about the composition of the EC was the number of foreign elements.” The deaths of tens of millions of underrepresented white non-Jews followed. (The details of this genocide come from Nobel laureate Aleksandr Solzhenitsyn’s two-volume study of Russian-Jewish relations, Two Hundred Years Together. Still lacking an English translation after seven years, Occidental Quarterly contributor F. Roger Devlin has worked from the French translation to provide a superb overview of Solzhenitsyn’s work. See The Occidental Quarterly Fall 2008 and Winter 2008-2009. Order here.)

Brimelow offered further room for discussion when last month he published Kevin MacDonald’s VDARE.com piece Memories Of Madison—My Life In The New Left. There MacDonald reiterated his argument that radical Jews of the 1960s “had destructive fantasies in which the revolution would result in ‘humiliation, dispossession, imprisonment or execution of the oppressors.’”

In particular, the dispossession component is being accomplished by support for massive non-traditional immigration. MacDonald argued that “Jewish activism on behalf of non-white immigration can be directly traced back to Jewish activists on the left.” Indeed, “Massive non-white immigration into Western societies has been a project of the Jewish left for pretty much the entire last century. The Jewish left has been the most influential component of the organized Jewish community. And even when a significant number of Jews defected from the left, giving rise to the neoconservative movement, they retained the traditional Jewish attitudes on immigration.” (Read MacDonald’s chapter on this phenomenon here).

As with Solzhenitsyn above, MacDonald connected such displacement of a native population with the genocide that occurred in the 1920s and 1930s in the Soviet Union. After the success of the Bolshevik Revolution, “Jewish radicals were able to actually carry out in the USSR the fantasies of the New Left Jewish radicals in the US—i.e., the ‘humiliation, dispossession, imprisonment or execution of the oppressors.’”

MacDonald is proposing that a substantial component of the Jewish activism in the area of immigration is motivated by aggressive hostility toward the European American majority. Another, more defensive explanation of why Jews have led immigration reform movements that favor non-whites is the belief that a less homogeneously white America will be less likely to give rise to a powerful anti-Semitic movement. In an oft-cited passage, Jewish activist Earl Raab wrote:

The Census Bureau has just reported that about half of the American population will soon be non-white or non-European. And they will all be American citizens. We have tipped beyond the point where a Nazi-Aryan party will be able to prevail in this country.

We [Jews] have been nourishing the American climate of opposition to bigotry for about half a century. That climate has not yet been perfected, but the heterogeneous nature of our population tends to make it irreversible— and makes our constitutional constraints against bigotry more practical than ever.

It seems likely that Raab’s wish to protect Jews is assured. After all, Jews are now famously dominant in media, government, academia and finance (for better or for worse).

Meanwhile, the rest of us Americans are left with many of the less pleasant aspects of diversity and non-white immigration, as last weekend’s news yet again drove home. As reported by CNN, a man wearing body armor used his car to block the rear door of an immigration services center, then entered the building and proceeded to murder thirteen people. “A federal law enforcement source identified the suspected gunman as Jiverly Wong. [The spokesman] said Wong, who was from Vietnam, was 41 and had changed his last name to Voong.”

I’m sure I’m not the only one who breathed a sigh of relief when it turned out that the shooter was not a white male. As VDARE’s Steve Sailer explained “You can imagine how the Mainstream Media was itching to start typing denunciations of hate-filled white male anti-immigration rednecks when the news came in today that 13 people had been shot dead at an immigration center.” Brimelow is even more pointed on this issue: “If the killer in the Binghamton immigration center massacre had been a white American, I have no doubt that much of the VDARE.COM Editorial Collective would be in police custody right now.”

What has thus far been left unexplained is why there is any immigration to a region that has been devastated economically since at least the 1970s. Even the New York Times recognized this in a story about an area where “the number of 25-to-34-year-old residents in the 52 counties north of Rockland and Putnam declined by more than 25 percent. In 13 counties that include cities like Buffalo, Syracuse and Binghamton, the population of young adults fell by more than 30 percent.” In a perverse side note, The Times adds that “population growth upstate might have lagged even more but for the influx of 21,000 prison inmates, who accounted for 30 percent of new residents.” Is this the kind of place that needs legions of new immigrants?

VDARE.com’s Brenda Walker today made the broader point clear:

The problem of rampaging immigrants is not guns or unfriendly Americans or conservative radio programs or VDARE.com. The problem is the strangely persistent myth among elites and the media that millions from Somalia and Iraq and Red China can be plunked into our unique society and be expected to get along like they were putting on a different coat. . . . Immigration as a marker of the imaginary one-worlder multicultural paradise has been a screaming failure. The symptoms are everywhere, from ethnic gangs to mass murder.

Someday someone might look into this phenomenon, for it seems to fit the pattern of dispossession of traditional Americans. According to one blog, the US State Department has adopted a policy to spread refugees out to small and middle-sized American cities and away from the traditional “gateway cities.” Research found that “eleven top cities that had the largest refugee populations as a percentage of the foreign born in the city” were:

Utica-Rome, NY
Fargo-Moorhead, ND-MN
Erie, PA
Binghamton, NY
Spokane, WA
Portland, ME
Lincoln, NE
Waterloo-Cedar Falls, IA
Burlington, VT
Manchester, NH
Des Moines, IA

Odd that all eleven of these cities are overwhelmingly white gentile locales.

When considering this crazy jumble of immigration situations I’ve described, casual observers may mutter that the system sure seems to be broken. But as I’ve stressed before, the problem is not that the system is broken; rather, the problem is that it is working as intended. Whereas Ms. Walker notes that “a homogenous nation evokes loyalty, stability and harmony,” the sad fact is that Jews in general detest these qualities in others. For Jews, homogeneous masses of white people reminds them of marching storm troopers with swastikas on their uniforms. As I wrote last year, “Jews instinctively fear and feel threatened by nationalistic, particularistic societies.”

To me the lesson seems clear: Majority white Americans need to develop a sense of solidarity and then act on their interests. This too was the lesson Solzhenitsyn drew from his experience in the Soviet gulag: “More compact or tribally-minded peoples managed to look out for one another in the harsh conditions of camp life, and so stood a better chance of survival.” Time is not on the side of traditional Americans, so let this be a minor wake up call. Are you willing to allow the Powers That Be to elect a new people and replace you? I know I’m not.

ww2truth #conspiracy #racist ww2truth.com

ILYA EHRENBERG – THE MAN WHO INVENTED THE ‘SIX MILLION’

But Ehrenburg was perhaps most notorious for his viciously anti-German hate propaganda in World War II. In it, he exhorted Soviet troops to kill all Germans they encountered without pity.

In one leaflet entitled “Kill,” Ehrenburg incited the simple Russian soldier to treat the Germans as subhuman. The final paragraph concludes:

“The Germans are not human beings. From now on, the word ‘German’ is the most horrible curse. From now on, the word ‘German’ strikes us to the quick. We have nothing to discuss. We will not get excited. We will kill. If you have not killed at least one German a day, you have wasted that day … If you cannot kill a German with a bullet, then kill him with your bayonet. If your part of the front is quiet and there is no fighting, then kill a German in the meantime … If you have already killed a German, then kill another one — there is nothing more amusing to us than a heap of German corpses. Don’t count the days, don’t count the kilometers. Count only one thing: the number of Germans you have killed. Kill the Germans! … — Kill the Germans! Kill!”

mass-rape-in-germany-by-soviets
And in another leaflet: “The Germans must be killed. One must kill them … Do you feel sick? Do you feel a nightmare in your breast? … Kill a German! If you are a righteous an conscientious man — kill a German! … Kill!”

This is typical of the steady diet of pathological hate fed to millions of Soviet troops by this Jew, safely ensconced far from the front.

Ehrenburg in the 1960’s, living out his life NOT as a war criminal, but as a hero is Israel.
But it wasn’t only the ordinary German soldier Ehrenburg was talking about, whom he accused of the very atrocities the Communists were themselves committing. Ehrenburg’s incendiary writings were, in fact, a prime motivating factor in the orgy of murder and rape against the civilian population that took place as Soviet troops rampaged into the heart of Europe. Appealing to the lowest, most subhuman instincts of this Bolshevik horde, he reiterated his genocidal message:


“Kill! Kill! In the German race there is nothing but evil; not one among the living, not one among the yet unborn but is evil! Follow the precepts of Comrade Stalin. Stamp out the fascist beast once and for all in its lair! Use force and break the racial pride of these German women. Take them as your lawful booty. Kill! As you storm onward, kill, you gallant soldiers of the Red Army.”

The crowning achievement of Ehrenburg’s career came on December 17, 1944, when this hate-crazed fiend became the first person to mention the kabbalistic figure of Six Million alleged Jewish victims of National Socialism, and then proceeded to introduce that figure into Soviet propaganda.

After the war he joined with co-racial and fellow propagandist Vasily (Iosif Solomonovich) Grossman to produce a fictitious “Black Book” and lay the foundation for what has come to be known as “The Holocaust.” The rest is history.

Ehrenburg never forgot his Jewish roots, and before his death he arranged for the transfer of his private archives to the tribal cult center at Yad Vashem in Jerusalem.

And so, it is altogether fitting that the birthday of this psychopathic lie-master should have been chosen as a day on which to remember the hoax which he concocted and of which he was the original inventor.

What was the result of this hateful propaganda?

Between the months of April and May, the German capital Berlin saw more than 100,000 rape cases according to hospital reports, while East Prussia, Pomerania and Silesia saw more than 1.4 million rape cases.

Between the months of January and August of 1945, Germany saw the largest incident of mass rape known in history, where an estimated two million German women were raped by the Soviet Red Army soldiers, as written by Walter Zapotoczny Jr. in his book, ‘Beyond Duty: The Reason Some Soldiers Commit Atrocities’.

Hospital reports also stated that abortion operations were being carried out daily across all German hospitals.

Natalya Gesse, who was a Soviet war correspondent at the time, said that the Soviets didn’t care about the ages of their victims. “The Russian soldiers were raping every German female from eight to eighty. It was an army of rapists,” she said.

This caused the deaths of no less than 200,000 girls and women due to the spread of diseases, especially that many eyewitnesses recounted victims being raped as much as 70 times in that period.

Red Army soldiers would mass rape German women as a kind of revenge against their enemy: The German army. They felt that it was their earned right to do so as the German army had ‘violated’ their motherland by invading it. In addition to not being in contact with women for long periods causing their animal instinct to be heightened.

In his book, Zapotoczny said that even female Russian soldiers did not disapprove of the rapes, some finding it amusing.

“Our fellows were so sex-starved,” a Soviet major told a British journalist at the time, “that they often raped old women of sixty, seventy or even eighty – much to these grandmothers’ surprise, if not downright delight.”

In 1948, rape cases decreased vastly after Soviet troops were ordered back to their camps in Russia and left residential areas in Germany.

sources:

https://rense.com/general75/ehr.htm

https://dailyarchives.org/index.php/history/1939-how-german-women-suffered-largest-mass-rape-in-history-by-soviets

Here is the original article by Ilya Ehrenburg called “To Remember” from Pravda, December 17, 1944:

Die Pommersche Zeitung writes “Our struggle was honest from the very beginning; we did not cross our borders in blind madness intending to subjugate other nations. On the contrary, needing to leave our borders behind us, we went as the messengers for a new order and a new justice. Not one German ever dreamed of annihilating Englishmen or punishing Frenchmen or enslaving the Dutch or any other peoples, in order to live by the blood and sweat of other nations. On the contrary, our victories emitted tranquility.”

Poor dears, apparently they were forced to go to the Caucasus and to Egypt in order to emit tranquility and now when they were allowed to return to Cologne and to Eastern Prussia, they meekly say “whoever we hurt, we don’t hold it against them.”

What were their intentions when they crossed their borders? This question can be answered by the maps they published between 1939 and 1942. This is an atlas of “blind madness:” “Greater Germany” included Lille and Kiev, Riga and Nancy.

They did not want to enslave other nations and live by others’ blood and sweat? Not long ago didn’t Grupenfuhrer Gasse declare to the newspaper Hamburger Fren den blatt: “The former Russia will be colonized by Stormtroopers and their childen”? And the Danzigger Fortpost was estimating “Every German colonizer will be served by eight to ten families.” Yes, at that time they were not overly modest. And the German firm Bremen was promising stockholders cotton from Turkmenistan. At that time they declared that “a nation of merchants, Englishmen, do not deserve a place on Earth.” (Felkisher Beobachter) At that time they were threatening: “Shooting hostages will show the French that nothing will stop us.” (Parizer Tzeitung) Shipping off the Dutch to the Ukraine, they declared “Only history books will remember Holland as a state.” (Antriff)

Where did they “emit tranquility”? In the “desert zone” or perhaps stoking the ovens of Majdanek or Treblinka?

Isn’t it too early for them to renounce themselves? They are still shooting and already starting to whimper. They are still tearing children’s bodies apart and already starting to wash their bloodied hands.

We have a saying “To remember is to live.” Indeed, a man who loses his memory loses half his life and starts to fade away. But to remember means not only to live, it also means to save a life, to save future generations, to preserve the idea of what it means to be human.

There occur historical events which confound wise men. Hitler’s Germany is not a sphinx. It is typhus-bearing lice. Now everyone understands what fascism is but not everyone wants to remember what they understood. To forget means to forgive. And to forgive the stokers of Majdanek means to bring up children for even more efficient future ovens. I am not a politician but in my work I deal with human feelings because every writer is a psychologist. Every writer is also a moralist even if he does not think about morality. As a writer I want to remind you about the sources of fascism.

For many years the Nazis brainwashed German youth. What were they conveying to the little fascists? A feeling of superiority. Now the world knows what racial or national arrogance means. If every nation decided that they are first in the world and therefore have the right to order others about, we will see new Majdaneks in the 20th century.

So where is the foundation of this German feeling of superiority? In the past, some will say. There is no doubt that in the past Germany had remarkable philosophers, musicians, poets, and scientists. No anti-fascist thinks about putting down Goethe or Beethoven, but you cannot live off the legacy of culture. Culture is a continuing process of creation. And in fascist Germany nothing is left from the glorious past. We laugh at the degenerate who tries to replace a lack of wisdom and knowledge with an impressive past. It is ridiculous and despicable for a nation to burn museums and libraries while at the same time pointing to Schiller and Kant.

Others would argue that Germans are proud of their present. What is there to be proud of? A money-grubbing Goering? A lascivious Goebbels? Ignorant and lewd ministers? A hardworking Himmler? Or are they perhaps boastful of their sophisticated technology, well-kept cities, and comfortable houses? But the fascists did not create any of this: Hitler only ravaged Germany. It is also good to recall that American technology is higher, that Dutch cities are cleaner, and Swedish housing is more comfortable. Besides, technology alone cannot be the pride of a people unless the strength of a nation is connected to its higher aspirations. And in fascist Germany civilization serves only the lowest aspirations. So the gas chambers for the mass murder of children became a natural expression of German technology.

No, the feeling of superiority that the fascists instill in their children is based neither on the past nor on the present. German superiority is steeped in prejudice, in the belief in the magic properties of German blood, a conviction that everything German is better than anything non-German. . . .

The origins of rivers of blood appear to be seemingly innocent swamps of human stupidity. Children sometimes make fun of things they are not familiar with; then mothers reproach them and the child, as he grows up, learns that the world does not end at the corner of his street. Each person and each nation loves what they grew up with. What Russian would be indifferent to a white birch tree? But we have never claimed and never will claim that a birch tree is more noble or more worthy than a cypress tree or a cedar tree. Your mother may be smarter than your neighbor, but you do not love her for that, you love her because she is your mother. Genuine patriotism is modest and has nothing to do with nationalism: patriotism—is brotherhood; nationalism—is carnage and death. . . .

In the countries they captured, the Germans killed all the Jews: the elderly and nursing babies. Ask a captured German why did your compatriots annihilate six million innocent people. And he will say: “They are Jews. They are black (or red) haired. They have different blood.” This began with vulgar jokes, with name-calling by hoodlums, with graffiti, and all this led to Majdanek, Babi Yar, Treblinka, to ditches filled with children’s corpses. If before Treblinka antisemitism could appear to be a common, ugly outburst, now it is a word soaked with blood; the Polish poet Julian Tuwim says “Antisemitism is the international language of fascists.”

The whole world now sees the consequences of racial and national arrogance. The ovens of Majdanek, where the Germans consumed people of thirty nationalities because they were—Russians, French, Poles, or Jews—these frightening ovens did not emerge right away. They grew out of an upbringing based on the hatred of whole nations. People all over the world need to remember that nationalism is the road to Majdanek. If a nation builds its freedom on the oppression of another, if a state restricts the rights of citizens of a different color, if a society persecutes a man because the shape of his nose or the way he speaks differs from that of his neighbors, so that nation, that state, that society is in danger. . . .

We must remember: fascism was born out of the greed and stupidity of some, and the perfidy and cowardice of others. If mankind wants to put an end to the bloody nightmare of these years, it must put an end to fascism. Half measures will not do here. If fascism is left somewhere to breed, then in ten or twenty years we will again see rivers of blood. A nail drives out a nail, but you cannot drive out fascism with fascism. You cannot liberate nations of one brand of fascism and deliver them into the hands of fascists of a different brand. Fascism—a terrifying cancerous tumor. It cannot be treated at mineral spas. It needs to be removed. I do not believe in good-hearted people who cry over executioners: these alleged do-gooders are preparing the death of innocent millions. The nations of Europe fought courageously against the invaders; and nations are not Moors who could leave after finishing their work. The French have a good saying: in his house, the collier is a master. Not only the French understand this saying. The Red Army has demonstrated what it means to liberate: the Poles, Norwegians, Serbs and Slovaks understand this. We do not install half-fascists in place of fascists: we liberate without quotation marks. We know that democracy is the daughter of a nation and not a glamorous lady whom you could only adore from a distance. . . .

Nations who experienced the fascist tyranny will understand us without any lengthy explanation: this is a time of nations and not diplomats. The courageous people of France will understand us. Our allies will understand us. There was a time when the British believed in the magical properties of the English Channel. Now they understand that the Channel is not a barrier against fascism. For a long time, the British prohibited the entry of dogs into the country: this is how they try to protect their country from rabies. But rabid, two-legged creatures in contrast to four-legged ones possess different “Fau.” And only complete destruction of fascism—from Warsaw to La Linea—can protect England from a new disaster.

When Die Pommersche Zeitung dares to claim that the Germans crossed their borders as the most peaceful missionaries, it means that the fascists now have only one hope: the loss of memory. After a severe injury, doctors sometimes diagnose a condition called amnesia. The injuries to the world are immense but nations do not suffer from amnesia. They will remember everything in the days of judgment. Even after the victory, they will not forget these terrible years. We must remember: this is our obligation to the dead heroes and to the children.

These cruel visions must remain before our eyes: this is the price for saving our world. I know that it is easier to forget but we will not forget. We solemnly swear: remember, remember, remember!

Source: https://www.facinghistory.org/holocaust-human-behavior/to-remember-ilya-ehrenburg

Jim #fundie blog.jim.com

Trump’s CIA director, Pompeo, tells us that Julian Assange, the leader of wikileaks is “on the wrong side of history.”

That is commie language, commie thinking. To say that history has a side in earthly political struggles is history reified and personified as the Jewish God.

Probably he is a cultural Marxist rather than an old style Marxist, since old style Marxists are mighty thin on the ground these days.

Personifying “History” is characteristic of Jewish descended leftism via Marx. Puritan descended leftism via Harvard immanentizes salvation, rather the immanentizing the deity.

This ideology puts one on a course that necessarily results in the murder of very large number of people. Pompeo is ticked with Julian Assange for exposing, and thus disrupting, various color revolutions, but the biggest color revolution that is cooking right now is in America itself, which revolution, if it goes through, will likely result in the deaths of Trump and all his family, and probably most republicans in office. If you favor color revolutions, you favor antifa, you favor killing Trump, his family, and Trump supporters.

The Marxist does not think of himself as intending to murder the peasants, and the cultural Marxist does not think of himself as planning to send all hetero males to the Gulag. Rather he thinks that if it was not for “bullying” all nine year old boys would be gay and they would all be fucking in the classroom a great big pile. When a great big pile fails to ensue in the classroom, escalates the war on “bullying”, until it eventually starts to look remarkably like sending all cisgender males to the Gulag.

The original Marxists were going to emancipate the peasants from the landlords, and utopia and abundance would ensue. Utopia and abundance failed to ensue. Obviously invisible intangible landlord oppression. Therefore, war on kulaks, which liberation of the peasants looked curiously similar to war on the peasants. And thus, today, instead of war on kulaks, war on cis hetero patriarchal oppressors. They are liberating us from being “bullied”. They are indignant at our lack of gratitude. And the war on bullying inevitably escalates.

“ohh mai gosh, people like you, cishet white privileged DUDEBROS, are the reason women and POCs are oppressed, wow just wow, the white race must be abolished (don’t worry, only as a social construct, I have nothing sinister in mind *rubs hands*), so listen now, fratboyrapist microaggressor douchenozzle, we’re sending you and your associates to the gulag – k bye!”

The Czar failed to support Pyotr Stolypin, and appointed a bunch of lefties to the council of ministers, who, when the Czar was away at the front, refrained from any serious effort to restrain revolutionaries who intended to kill the Czar and his family, and who when trouble broke out, resigned in favor of the revolutionaries. Giving Pompeo power and taking power away from Bannon is a similar error. Politics is war by other means, and for the past couple of decades has been drifting closer to war by the usual means.

drkresearch #conspiracy nodisinfo.com

EgyptAir Crash is a Total Fake Islamopphobic Fearmongering Hoax

It is not difficult to tell that the supposed crash of an EgyptAir airliner over the Mediterranean is a fake. See the narrative. Supposedly, 66 people died. That alone demonstrates the nature of the scam. Moreover, right away the so-deemed Islamic boogeymen are blamed, the various ISIS (Israeli Secret Intelligence Services) agents: that is ‘ISIS did it until proven otherwise.’ Thus, through the arch-Zionist-controlled Telegraph the following imagery and narrative are seen, with the fear mongering and Islamophobia being clearly evident, below:

...

NOTE: clearly, the oboe photo is a PhotoShop manipulation where both the images were brought into the background. The use of the blur tool and brush tool is clearly seen on the woman’s faked in strands of hair.

***

In all these fakes there are plenty of smirking people caught among the fake grievers and, of course, numerous camera-persons on-site to capture the phony fake show.

Even so, it is clear that it is a fake and all the players are merely actors:

Clearly, the people represented as actors are all about being casual, all about feigning grief before the cameras. Yet, despite acting as if crying and grieving not a tear is seen flowing anywhere. There are plenty of dark-colored sunglasses, though.

The purported relatives clearly prove it is a fake by acting as if they are crying but they are not doing so at all:

Why fake the crying if it is real? Why act like a person is wiping away tears when there are no tears anywhere to be seen?

Rudy Martinez #racist sybiljournal.com

Your DNA is an Abomination

“Now I am become white, the destroyer of worlds.” I hate white people.White people should hate white people.

In fact, when I think of all the white people I have ever encountered, whether they’ve been professors, peers, lovers, friends, police officers, etc.---there are perhaps a dozen I would consider “decent.”

Though my colleague, Tafari Robertson, in his brilliant column “Debunking the Myth of White Majority”, has already exposed whiteness in the United States as a cultural lie used to perpetuate a system of racist power, I will define whiteness to place this column within a certain framework. To be white in the United States is to be a descendent of those Europeans who long ago chose to abandon their identity in search of something “new”: stolen land.

Racial categories, white, black, brown, red, etc., are used to subjugate non-white people the world over. This bending of semantics upholds a white supremacist society. As someone “white”, whether you know it or not, and regardless of your socio-economic standing, you benefit from a privilege. In Texas, a bizarre state I have now inhabited for four years, I continuously meet individuals that either deny the existence of “white” privilege or fail to acknowledge or do something productive with it.

A lot of you tell me, upon my insistence that whites should have a more active role within activist circles, that you “didn’t choose to be white.” You weren’t born white, you became white. You actively remain white. You are estranged from yourself, and in that absence, have been instilled with an allegiance to a country that was never great, but instead has continuously attempted to push non-whites into non-existence through crusades that have, at times, been defended by the law. In your whiteness, you are granted the heavenly luxury of not having to think about race daily, your heartbeat doesn’t speed up when you’ve been pulled over and find yourself staring blankly at the red and blue lights of the fascist foot soldiers we call police; you don’t leave your home wondering if you’ll ever come back--no, you don’t give a damn.

However, I wield enough optimism to claim that you are at death’s door. Do not interpret my words on a superficial level, no one is threatening you with physical harm, though we, the non-white victims of your crumbling narrative, reserve the right to self-defense. Rather, the oppressive world you have built, through the exploitation of millions and the waging of barbaric wars against one another, is coming apart at the seams. Though the current political climate, in which a white supremacist inhabits the White House and those of his ilk freely demonstrate all around the country, would prove otherwise, I see them as an aberration. Through a constant, not daily, but hourly, ideological struggle in which we aim to deconstruct “whiteness” and everything attached to it, we will win.

Whiteness will be over because we want it to be. And when it dies, there will be millions of cultural zombies aimlessly wandering across a vastly changed landscape.

Ontologically speaking, white death will mean liberation for all. To you goodhearted liberals, apathetic nihilists, and right-wing extremists: accept this death as the first step toward defining yourself as something other than the oppressor.

Until then, remember this: I hate you because you shouldn’t exist; you are both the dominant apparatus on the planet and the void in which all other cultures, upon meeting you, die.

Matt Forney #fundie mattforney.com

If you’re a girl pursuing anything more than a high school degree, you’re in all likelihood wasting your time.

Encouraging girls to go to college and grad school en masse is one of the biggest mistakes America has ever made. The flood of girls into universities is not only in part responsible for the current economic crisis, it’s made it increasingly difficult—if not impossible—for both girls and men to fulfill their natural roles. At the same time higher education has been degraded by so many unqualified girls getting accepted into college, those girls have seen their egos unjustifiably boosted by their degrees, making them unsuitable to be wives and mothers.

In order for society to be cured, this has to be fixed.

Here are my reasons why girls should be discouraged from going to college.
1. Going to college makes girls less attractive.

Girls, in their socially sanctioned solipsism, assume that men are turned on by the same things that they are. Because girls crave high status men, they assume that men similarly find their high status attractive, which couldn’t be further from the truth. No man alive has ever said, “God DAMN, I love the master’s degree on that girl!” It’s usually “God DAMN, she’s got a rack that could stop a runaway train!” or “God DAMN, this girl’s cooking is to die for!”

As a result, four plus years of college more often than not ruins a girl.

For starters, the extended adolescence that is college encourages sluttiness, which wrecks a girl all on its own. All those hunks splooging in her vagina make it more likely that she’ll end up divorcing the man she does end up marrying. Sluts are emotionally broken, incapable of loving and serving men, squandering their gifts of femininity and beauty, constantly trying to trade up for a bigger, better deal that never comes.

Marrying a slut is like paying full price for a beat-up old clunker.

Additionally, college is problematic because it gives girls the illusion of knowledge. Outside of STEM degrees (which are deficient in their own way), few majors actually impart useful information to girls, yet they still think they’re entitled to respect for having the degree; credentialism at its finest. Girls come out of college without being able to cook, sew, balance a checkbook or perform any of the necessary tasks of modern living, yet they still think they’re smart and independent and don’t you dare suggest otherwise. Don’t forget the massive amounts of student loan debt that these girls rack up, which you become in part responsible for if you’re dumb enough to put a ring on it.

Woman is not a learning animal.

The two most fulfilling relationships I’ve ever had were with girls who hadn’t yet graduated from college—one was midway through her degree and the other had not started yet—because they hadn’t had their minds poisoned by the lies of academia. They were fun to be around, girly, and eager to please. They hadn’t had their hearts broken through countless drunken hookups. When I explained something to them that they didn’t understand, they actually listened to me and did what I told them instead of accusing me of “mansplaining.”

If girls are like gold coins, sending them to college is like dunking them in nitric acid.
1a. Girls who go to college are extremely likely to get sexually assaulted.

Given the massive rape epidemic on college campuses, universities are massively unsafe places for girls. As feminists love reminding us, universities are ground zero for rape culture; one in four girls will be raped before the end of her college tenure. Given this information, why would anyone who cares about their daughter’s well-being let her do something as reckless as going to college?

You might as well parachute her into the worst part of Detroit with a “FREE FUCKTOY” sign taped to her back.
2. Most girls major in useless subjects that contribute nothing to the world.

Feminists love bragging about how girls are now earning the majority of college degrees, but they never bring up the fact that the majority of girls’ degrees are worthless in every way. Girls predominantly major in subjects like ethnic studies, women’s studies, English, communications and the like that require no work of any kind and give them no job prospects. As Aaron Clarey shows in this video, the majority of useful (STEM) degrees are still going to men.

What career prospects does a 22-year old girl with a bachelor’s in Arachnid Sexuality have? Dim ones.

If they’re lucky, they’ll end up becoming lawyers, civil servants or HR commissars, careers whose economic and social value is less than zero; those fields exist solely to employ the unemployable and leech off the productive. A select few might hit the jackpot and enter politics, where they can do an even better job of sucking our blood; Clarey showed in his book Worthless that the majority of American politicians have degrees in useless, parasitical subjects like law (Democrats more so than Republicans). But the vast majority of girls will end up living at home when they graduate, struggling to make their monthly student loan payments on a Starbucks salary.

Clearly, slaving away for minimum wage is way more fulfilling than being a wife and mother.

Furthermore, having all these girls “earning” these pointless degrees has lessened the value of a degree period. It’s common knowledge that the rarer something is, the more valuable it is. When our parents were our age, college degrees were uncommon enough that merely having one guaranteed you a good job, and you could secure most jobs with a one-hour interview. Now that everyone and their mother has a degree, employers cross-examine you like you’re on the witness stand, scrutinizing your GPA, your extracurriculars and making you complete stupid questionnaires that analyze how good of a “team player” you are, none of which has any bearing on how well you can do the job.

In their childish quest for “independence,” girls have made it more difficult for everyone—including themselves—to get a good-paying job.
3. Having girls working makes it more difficult for anyone to earn high wages.

It astounds me how so many feminists have absolutely no knowledge of economics. Here’s a hard lesson for you girls: labor is a commodity. And like all other commodities, labor is subject to the laws of supply and demand. When the supply of a commodity outpaces demand, its price (in this case, wages) goes down; when demand outpaces supply, the price goes up. This basic law is why a Walmart in Canton, Ohio is holding canned food drives for its own employees while the Walmart in Williston, North Dakota has to pay its workers $21 an hour and give them free hotel rooms; labor is plentiful in Ohio and scarce in North Dakota.

Leftists lament how wages have stagnated since the seventies and how the gap between the rich and poor has never been wider, but they can’t admit that feminism is a big reason why Americans are getting poorer by the day. The mass entry of girls into the workforce that began in the seventies conveniently coincides with the stagnation and decline of American wages, as well as the decline of unions. Whereas a man could comfortably support his family on his own back in the fifties and sixties, it takes both parents working to raise a family today, assuming the couple can even afford to buy a house and have children to begin with.

Additionally, the presence of girls in the labor force has feminized the economy and made it less productive as a whole. Because girls are unable and/or unwilling to actually take useful positions in the trades, manufacturing or other blue-collar fields (“Eww, I can’t mine coal! I might break a nail!”), the American economy had to be reconfigured to employ them somehow. The solution was to demonize the trades and create new useless white-collar positions such as “human resources.” Corporations used feminists as pawns to help promote outsourcing and free trade in the eighties/early nineties and push pointless office jobs as the new middle-class ideal. And all of those coveted white-collar jobs conveniently required a four-year degree, enriching the (leftist) universities as well.

As a result, we live in a country where a girl who makes $30,000 a year at a nonprofit is more highly regarded than an electrician who makes three times that.

Not only that, girls have altered the workplace itself for the worst. Government bureaucracies and other female-run institutions are governed by rules both written (e.g. sexual harassment laws) and unwritten that make it impossible to be frank, encouraging cattiness and backstabbing. And with few exceptions, female employees all act as volunteer commissars, ready to blow you in to the bossman the minute you upset their feeeeelings. You can’t be direct or honest because you never know what your co-workers will find offensive, making it difficult to get any work done.

But it gets worse than that: feminism is in part responsible for the current economic crisis.

It was girls’ desire for a never-ending supply of cheap crap (more than 80 percent of consumer spending is controlled by women) that resulted in the outsourcing of American manufacturing to China and the rise of big box stores like Walmart that squash local businesses and pay their workers the bare minimum allowed by law. It’s girls fornicating with wild abandon and divorcing their husbands on a whim that has lead to the epidemic of single moms and the subsequent strain on social services. It’s girls going to the doctor every time they get a boo-boo that has resulted in hard-working, healthy men like me having our insurance premiums skyrocket under Obamacare.

And it’s girls being unable to pay off their student loans that will lead to the next economic collapse.
4. Education (and work) are bad for girls’ physical and mental health.

It makes me laugh to see how effectively corporate America has made feminists into their most favored pets. Whenever feminists crow about the “end of men,” what they’re really saying is “Ha ha, we girls make WAY better slaves than you loser guys!” Jezebel and Gawker Media exemplify this contradiction best; all the girls writing there eagerly sound the gospel of female empowerment to make money for a man—Nick Denton—who pays them barely above minimum wage. “Yes Massa, Pax Dickinson is a misogynist racist asshat! Can I pretty please have a cookie, Massa?”

But beneath this you-go-grrl facade is a well of pain and suffering.

Despite all the feminists telling them that they should be happy to be “liberated,” female unhappiness is higher now than it’s ever been. Far more girls than men are suffering from mental illness, and antidepressant use among girls has gotten so bad that the drinking water of major cities like London is turning into a toxic soup. Every Strong, Independent Woman™ knows in her heart that her life is hell on Earth; it’s only her pride that keeps her from admitting the truth.

Recently, a friend of mine who quit her job to become a homemaker and returned to the workforce when her children grew older admitted to me that she preferred being a housewife. Why? It was less stressful. When she didn’t work, all she had to worry about was taking care of her kids, cooking and keeping the house clean. While she and her husband are wealthier now that they have two incomes, her life is never-ending misery. Her (female) boss constantly belittles and abuses her; her co-workers are gossipy do-nothings who refuse to pull their weight, making her pick up the slack; her health has deteriorated to the point where she’s developed stress-related carpal tunnel.

From the kitchen to the cubicle; isn’t freedom grand?

The reality is that girls always submit to men. It’s unavoidable. The only question is what kind of man she submits to. Will it be to a husband who protects her, provides for her and will love her until death do them part? Or will it be to a CEO like Nick Denton or some other corporate manager who views her as a tool to enrich himself, who will kick her to the curb as soon as she’s no longer useful? Even feminism itself is an invention of men, specifically Rousseau and the philosophers of the Enlightenment; Mary Wollstonecraft and other female “thinkers” were never more than sideshow freaks.

Deep inside, girls know what they want; they just need authoritative men to give it to them.

If you’re a girl, you should only go to college if you can meet one or more of these criteria:

Major in something useful. Here’s a pointer to figuring out if a degree is useful; does it involve math? If not, you’re wasting your time. I recommend Aaron Clarey’s Worthless if you want more info.
Go to a quality school. If you can’t make it into the Ivy League or another high-quality institution such as UVM or Binghamton, you have no business going to college.
Have your parents pay for it. I don’t mean co-signing your student loans, I mean having daddy take his wallet out and cover your costs in full. If you’re rich enough that your parents can afford college without any loans, it doesn’t much matter what you do.

The rest of you girls? We’re here to take you back to the place you secretly long to be, the place where you belong: the kitchen.

Now, on your knees!