Similar posts

TheCorsair00 #conspiracy godlikeproductions.com

The Satanic Faction of the Military Behind the 'Targeted Individuals/Mind Control' Phenomenon

Recently, Corey Goode has revealed testimony of the shill operation known as Personality Metamorphs, where essentially NSA/GCHQ type agents in offices full of computer monitors have hundreds of fake internet accounts for posting on forums such as GLP's competition and Project Camelot and all over Facebook and YouTube and definitely HERE as well: [link to spherebeingalliance.com]

What you probably don't know is that behind this entire operation is a rather elaborate scheme involving brain wave entrainment and EMP technologies developed out of all sequences of the MK Ultra and Montauk projects and are operated out of bases that have sequestered wireless electricity transmission technologies such as Pine Gap in Australia. A deathbed confession from a notorious Satanist reveals the name of Lt. Col. Michael Aquino in relation to the top secret facility of Pine Gap: [link to www.savethemales.ca]

So-called supersoldiers such as James Casbolt have also revealed recently that Aquino is a general of the NSA. This surveillance technology goes above and beyond merely spying on people's phones and computers. Snowden documents revealed that microwaves are beamed onto, for example, computer screens so that visual and audio information can be usurped via the laser beam and thus remote surveillance can occur WITHOUT mics or cameras. In other words, with adequate microwave beaming, an entire 3D holographic read out of an entire area, I.e. everywhere, can be tapped into. Not only that, but the visual input from the eyes into the brain and the different brain wave states can be monitored and hacked into by this modern mind control technology. If you have ever seen the movie Videodrome, you will recall a helmet that records internal hallucinatory states. Another main component in the movie involved Satanic snuff/sex rituals and pirate satellite transmissions that piggy-backed on an encrypted channel, but were essentially beamed onto the entire populace. Aspects of these movies, such as in Spielberg's 'Taken' also depict what the NSA is doing at the highest level, which includes tweaking humanity's DNA and introducing negative frequencies onto the overall human populace who are not "shielded" or endowed with mutant DNA. This is, of course, for population reduction and also apparently for a genetic mutation of the species which is also depicted in the X-Men films (directed by Bryan Singer who has been accused by numerous sources to be involved with a shadowy Hollywood elite called 'The Group' who sexually molest young boys etc).

Although I can not prove it whatsoever and had until recently thought of as a "dear friend", one of the beloved guests on Project Camelot etc, Richard Alan Miller is actually very highly connected to ALL of this - as well as to the so-called "non-lethal weaponry" of John Alexander and what has been revealed as being called 'Murder Inc.' in Steven Greer's 'Forbidden Knowledge' book. Miller actually operates the microwave weaponry and does daily Personality Metamorph posts on a specific conspiracy forum and GLP as well as Facebook etc. They will target specific individuals online with fake accounts and do things like mess with their heads by posting information that is indicative of personal knowledge of the individual's personal environment etc. These people can SEE through our eyes and interact with our household appliances (by making them pop and click), and also entrain or pulse our brains with specific frequencies utilizing microwave ray guns and satellite-based weapons connected to HAARP and/or Pine Gap. The user ryba777 on the conspiracy torrent website 'ConCen' is also Richard Alan Miller and has posted information about these microwave guns along with veiled threats.

"World War 3 is being fought on the internet"
- Richard Alan Miller

p.s. A Personal Note: I have been being pulsed regularly for the past 2 months - I can feel electrical pulsing on my right temple, as well as all over my face, in my eyes and recently in both feet at specific intervals. When I am starting to enter REM sleep I am awakened by a blast of EMP to my face or the side of my head and can often feel prickles at specific regions in my brain - [although having recently purchased and been wearing a microwave blocking skull cap, the pulsing has started to occur in my feet.] Certain forum posts in direct reply to my own have hinted at threats involving microwave blasts. Specific posts and threads over the past 3 years are archived and correspondence documented. Specifically after an 'Ask Me Anything' thread by Michael Aquino where he was locked out of his main account upon being found out by staff that he was trolling regular users to the site. Springer, the owner and administrator of a competitor conspiracy forum was also notified of this PsyOps, the logistics of which are detailed in Michael Aquino's book 'MindWar', which reveal the manipulation of brain wave states in regards to modern psychological warfare techniques and their goals for spinning intelligence/stories online and accomplishing military goals without the use of physical warfare. Shortly after notifying admin for a certain forum, I started having internet and cell phone-related issues, up to and including my phone turning off when I was outside and in need of calling somebody at a specific time, and when I was finally able to re-start my phone, the background image had been changed. The phone battery also eventually swelled up and essentially exploded, likely from being pulsed with EMP so many times. I also have experienced a myriad of internet technical difficulties, too many to list here. I have had to endure a few episodes of gang-stalking, shortly after revealing Aquino and friends to a specific forum's mods, and a close friend of mine has also been victimized by mind control games and has verified several things with me as well. There was a period of time when I was merely under NSA surveillance, but since speaking up about specific people, namely Richard Alan Miller, who turns out to be my 'handler', these issues involving microwave pulsing have increased quite dramatically.

These Satanic operatives know a lot and can do a lot of technological things, particularly to mind-fuck and irritate people - but the irony is that they are all trapped having to do surveillance on people. 24/7. In that sense, they have, by virtue of their own self-fulfilling prophesy and complete reckless disregard, created their own digital Hell that they are the managerial class operators of. They might as well be chained and hand-cuffed! And on a metaphysical/archetypal level - they are eternally trapped. Remember that scene in 'Interstellar' when the astronaut gets trapped in the "morse code library" - back in time? Time travel to the moment when their timeline bifurcated into a dead end trap. They will basically have to Quantum jump like in the show Quantum Leap to pay off all their bad karma. Their technologies will be re-purposed...

I regret to add that the NSA utilize a vast majority of their surveillance capabilities for perverse sexual voyeurism. Even though a lot of the operatives are really old and their sexuality isn't working for them any longer, others spend a lot of time preying on people who are doing sexual things.

These Satanists actually do worship sexual perversion and they do try to steer innocent civilians down that path. Sex is all that is holy to most Satanists. Bestiality, snuff, child porn, mentally and physically handicapped people, incest, scat etc. They are into all of that! It's not just a stereotype!

freedom7 #conspiracy abovetopsecret.com

I've heard various theories on the " gangstalking " theme . One such theory that could answer your question as to how to accomplish such an elaborate scheme on targeted individuals is the belief that it is all run through a supercomputer , and the spirit realms essentially use agents ( who are in human form) who are connected to them via mind control , nano chips , spells etc ... it sounds bizarre, but some people really believe this . I will attach a link to a website I read on this topic soon.

Another theory is that instead of remote control killing the targeted individual . They are keeping them alive for a certain purpose they may have not revealed yet . Some have speculated the reasons range from A-Z and almost anything you can think of . I've heard that they keep some alive and constantly harass them because their victims are a part of a giant "game show" if you will , some say that it all boils down to money and some very sick elitist individuals actually pay top dollar to have this individual watched , harassed and surveilled 24/7.

I've also heard theories that the victims of this either come from very unique bloodlines , have very unique genetic makeup , high IQ's, and have very unique creative, intuitive or psychic abilities .. and thus can be kept alive and harassed until they break and can be turned and used as a government asset .

And there could just be a sadistic reason of wanting to make someone's life agonizing before they are killed for some sick form of pleasure.
I've heard many theories and though they sound bizarre I am convinced " gangstalking" is a real thing that happens daily . With the technology to spy on people now , it makes sense that top notch targets or persons of interest would be watched by those who seek to turn them , extort them , harass them , or murder them .

Jeffrey J. Wolynski #ufo #conspiracy #crackpot vixra.org

(Emphasis original)

Extraterrestrials Have Been Visiting Earth

[contact info omitted]

Abstract: Since the U.S. Government and all branches of the U.S. Government refuse to directly state we are being visited by extraterrestrials in physical, metallic craft, I will do it. We are being visited by people from other star systems in physical, metallic craft. This paper is dedicated to the late Stanton T. Friedman.

Stanton T. Friedman was 100% correct.

Some UFOs are flying saucers that do not have origins on Earth. Their origins are from other star systems which have civilizations more technologically advanced than our own. Their reasons for visiting Earth and watching us are various, but I think it is quite straight forward. They are presenting themselves, as if to say, hi! You are not alone!
Hollywood has seriously ruined our perception of other worldly intentions. These beings are clearly more advanced than us socially, evolutionarily and technologically, so they will not be interested in war or fighting over resources like we are. Our main preoccupation per Stanton, and our own history is tribal warfare, and the civilizations that are visiting know this. They have watched us drop nuclear warheads on ourselves, murder ourselves in the millions, and even watch our youtube channels and TV shows. They monitor our radio waves, our satellite communications, and even have shut down nuclear silos and allowed jets to chase them to test out our defense capabilities. As well, military officials have recovered bodies of some of these beings, and subsequently lied their faces off to cover it up, back in 1947 at the Roswell Crash. In short, they know literally everything about us, but the public knows very little about them. The U.S. Government knows more, as they have recovered bodies and flying saucer material. Maybe a 28th Amendment to the Constitution is in order to protect our civil rights against the U.S. Government in their denial of visitation of extraterrestrial beings from other star systems. After all, they are funded by us, the taxpayers.

I, as a discoverer of the process of planet formation (planets are evolving/dead stars), without any doubt in my mind, support the conclusion of Stanton T. Friedman in that some UFOs are extraterrestrial spacecraft. The study of extraterrestrial spacecraft needs to be taken up by universities around the world, because it is of major scientific and societal importance that we understand these new, exotic individuals who are visiting us and their craft. It is humbling to say the least, as the people visiting us already know of major scientific truths that we don’t even know exist yet. It is time we acknowledge whole heartedly that we are not the biggest fish in the ocean, not even close.

Jeffrey J. Wolynski #crackpot #conspiracy vixra.org

Functional Groups in Stellar Metamorphosis

[contact info omitted]

Abstract: According to the biostellar evolution principle, as a star evolves life forms and evolves on it. This means all major organic chemical processes occur inside and on the star as it evolves, thus the vast majority of organic functional groups in the universe are formed inside stars as they evolve. Stars directly form life and all organic compounds, molecules and material as they evolve as is predicted by the general theory of stellar metamorphosis.

Per Wikipedia:

In organic chemistry, functional groups are specific substituents or moieties within molecules that are responsible for the characteristic chemical reactions of those molecules. The same functional group will undergo the same or similar chemical reaction(s) regardless of the size of the molecule it is a part of. This allows for systematic prediction of chemical reactions and behavior of chemical compounds and design of chemical syntheses. Furthermore, the reactivity of a functional group can be modified by other functional groups nearby.
image
Organic chemistry is the study of the compounds of carbon. These compounds of carbon include halogens, sulfur, hydrogen, oxygen, nitrogen and phosphorus. All of these functional groups form in extremely large quantities in the atmospheres of evolving stars, per the general theory. They form in Jupiter, Saturn, Neptune and Uranus but in different quantities per the star’s stage of metamorphosis, as well as react differently when introduced to different compounds which form as the star evolves. The essence of organic chemistry belongs inside of cooling stars (mislabeled things like planet, or brown dwarf by the dogma). As well, per the astrochemical principle of planet formation/stellar evolution according to stellar metamorphosis, it is stated that the majority of thermochemical, electrochemical and photochemical reactions take place in stars as they evolve into planets (old stars), not in the interstellar medium. https://vixra.org/pdf/1602.0309v2.pdf Not only that, but the precursor functional groups via sheer magnitude of material being mixed is what allows for the complexity principle of microbiology to hold ground. The microbiology of a star increases in complexity as it evolves. https://vixra.org/pdf/1608.0073v1.pdf
So what we have here are a series of basic principles put together in a way that breaks the mentality of astronomers in their assumptions that stars are not the source of basically all organic molecules and organic chemistry.
For readers who want to understand what is happening, astronomy is changing extremely rapidly, and working astrophysicists and astronomers are caught between a rock and a hard place. On one hand, they know of this major scientific discovery, in that it explains what happens as a star evolves into a life hosting star called, “planet”, but on the other none of them can speak of this issue for fear of retribution and blacklisting/career damage done when bringing it up. Remember, astronomers have to accept that stars are fusion reactors that are billions of years old, or else they get fired from their jobs. As well, planets have to form in disks around young planets (stars) or else they get fired. They cannot go against their peers and the people who sign their paychecks, but you can. You can tell people of this discovery, that stars are young planets.
image

Sherry Shriner #crackpot #conspiracy #fundie thewatcherfiles.com

I don't pity the wicked. They made their beds and I've been trying to warn them and wake them up for years...but for many of them it's not to late to turn from their wicked ways, repent, and seek Yahushua's salvation.
They know I'm legit. They know I am who and what I say I am. I've been under 24/7 surveillance by many different alien factions (since I was born) and federal agencies for the past 12 years that I know of, perhaps longer than that. I have heard my file with the NSA is 7 volumes, with the CIA it's 3 inches, and who knows or cares about these or others. I certainly don't lose any sleep at night thinking about them or what they're trying to do to me I leave it in Yahuah's hands and get my work done.

And they know this. They know I'm safe and extremely protected by the Most High Himself. I have sources that are astounded I'm still alive. There have been many plans, plots, and countless assassination attempts against me. They know it, I know it, and I could care less...I outrank them all.

What gets tiring to me is that Satan's minions on earth want people to think that they're special because they're rich and born into serpent seedlines. That's pretty nasty to me, not something to be proud of.

These Illuminati serpent seedline families don't even know what it really means to be alive. They have been controlled puppets and slaves, tormented, tortured and abused from the time they were born and it continues throughout their whole lives.

They call themselves the Elite. But let's break it down on what it means to be one of these Elite. From the time you are born as a Rothschild, Rockefeller, Royal family, Bush, or one of the others you are carefully crafted and controlled into a very tight Satanic community. As a toddler your sexually abused repeatedly so your brain splits and fragments into many different alter personalities becoming MPD/DID. These alters are then programmed to act in a certain way. No matter what your other alters are one is always permanent, and that's a sexual alter, one that is created and used to be used as a sex slave to others in their community.

As a child they're taught to kill animals and even other children. They're starved, beaten, tortured, and tormented so they can control your brain, thoughts, beliefs, and how you view yourself, the world, and those around you.

They are forced to participate in satanic ritual ceremonies of animal and human sacrifices, drinking blood, eating human flesh and organs, eating feces and drinking urine. As a child most of them have probably witnessed and even been the victim of beastiality. They learn weakness such as compassion (what they consider weakness) can get them killed, and so they brave through everything that's thrown at them just to survive. Their parents aren't a loving mom and dad, but the puppet masters who pimp them out to scientists, underground bases, and for sexual favors to others...and yet they grow up in love with their abusers, and to go along to get along and survive...and most importantly...how to keep their mouths shut.

Satan is their god. They know him well from a very young age. They learn they must please him or 'else.' To them he's the ultimate provider and giver as long as they do what they're told, perform the rituals, and make him happy.

One Way Out

Time is winding down for this NWO cabal and the families that have implemented it and controlled it worldwide. And those who are involved and initiated into it via directly or indirectly through secret societies, groups, and organizations. Many are in denial, but the writing is on the wall. They have been led to believe that they are special and protected by Satan himself. They are going to find out real soon how little he really thinks of them.

Satan hates humans. He doesn't care how much of his blood in them they have, what they've done for him, how hard they have worked for him or how loyal to him they have been. It will never be enough because at the end of the day, they are still human and made in the image of God.

And when he successfully uses the Galactic Federation or whatever name they use to take over the world, he will attempt to kill and murder ALL humans, eliminating them off this planet completely. And what about the Queen? The matriarch of the NWO and the Rothschilds, and all the other top ranking families? He will kill them to. The entire cabal will be wiped out and eliminated while the new regime takes over earth. How is that for all your wasted time and effort Satanists?? You were used...puppets on a string...useful idiots to be used until no longer needed.

And those who think they took the safe route by working for both agendas? The same fate awaits them to.

It is not to late right now for any of them to repent of their deeds, renounce Satan, and accept Yahushua's salvation (www.sherryshriner.com/salvation.htm ) Whether they are directly or indirectly involved with the Illuminati or initiated into Satanism, Freemasonry or any one of their many groups and organizations...the door is still open but that time is closing fast.

Yahushua has told me that many of them are relying on 'death bed confessions' to escape Hell. Yes they all know Hell exists and that that's where they're going for serving Satan. They dread death and fear it very much despite the outward appearance of boldness they display to others while they live for Satan.

Many of them are relying on the "thief on the cross" story (yes they know the Bible better than most Christians) where Yahushua granted eternal life in heaven with Him as they were about to die on the cross. What they don't realize is the reason WHY Yahushua did it...because the thief humbled himself to Yahushua and was truly repentant for the wrong things he had done and acknowledged the righteousness of Yahushua. It was because of the intent of his heart, his sincerity, and belief in Yahushua that saved him. Yahushua is the ultimate judge, and he knows what the intent of a person is and has told me that for those relying on death bed confessions simply to escape Hell, He would not honor them.

The time is NOW to show real sincerity in turning away from evil and renounce Satan and the works of darkness while they are alive and can prove they are sincere in their repentance and love for Yahushua. And to those reading or hearing this who are satanists, is your greed greater or more important than your soul? Is it really worth it to gain the world and lose your soul? You can be forgiven if you seek Him. But you must seek Him before He closes the Door! Seek Him now don't wait!

The blood of Yahushua can break all contracts, oaths and agreements you have made with Lucifer.

He does not and cannot own your soul until your physical death. No matter how much he tries to lie and trick you that he does.

If you have made contracts, oaths, and/or agreements with Lucifer you can renounce him and your affiliation with him.

Say this prayer to the Most High God:

Dear Heavenly Father the Most High,

I acknowledge and accept your gift of redemption, your salvation through Yahushua your Son.

I renounce my involvement with Lucifer, I ask that the blood of Yahushua will break my oaths, contracts, agreements, bribes, and participation with him. I renounce any and all involvement I have had with Satan, and I ask forgiveness for the wicked things that I have done against you and others and your creation. And I ask to be delivered from evil and Satan's control over me.

Forgive me Father. I truly am repentant and I proclaim you as my Saviour and I renounce my former loyalty to Lucifer to now become a child of yours and a daughter/son of yours.

Heal me and cleanse me of evil. Fill me with your Holy Spirit and use the fire and cleansing of your Holy Spirit to burn out all evil beings and anything not of you from the top of my head to the bottom of my feet and fill all the empty places with your Holy Spirit. Lead me into and teach me your ways, the Most High.

Father I ask you for your peace and joy. Thank you for saving me, for writing my name in your book of Life.

In Yahushua's Name, Amen.

Preston James, Ph.D #conspiracy veteranstoday.com

( Response to "Sandy Hook Elementary School: closed in 2008, a stage in 2012" )

Another grand-slam home-run for Professor Fetzer and his research team. These folks just never quit and are like bloodhounds that track the scent until they get their prey which is the unadulterated TRUTH. This blockbuster article cuts through the Controlled Major Mass Media lies klike a red hot knife through butter. The whole State govt and police are up to their eyeballs in this criminal fraud called Sandy hoax. No dead kids, no dead teacher, no dead Lanzas, no Lanzas at all–all virtual computer creations and one big DHS/FEMA exercise in an abandoned school. All parties must be charged, arrested and tried under various criminal statutes and all of the many millions clawed back. Vance the liar who made terrorist threats must be charged under numerous state and federal criminal statutes and tried publicly on TV.

We must demand the exhumation of every casket filled with these virtual dead kids and adults and keep all cemeteries under 24/7 real time video surveillance. DNA must be extracted from all so called victim families that split millions and got free homes bough for them, all registered on Christmas day, supposedly. Lets’ ID these virtual victims families and see who they really are and trace them all the way back to childhood and scour all OB/GYN offices and hospitals and doctors related to their claimed births of these virtual children were supposedly born. Betcha there are NO as in ZERO supporting pediatric health care records either.

Christopher Leonid #sexist returnofkings.com

The Mainstream Embrace Of #MeToo Puts Us One Step Closer Towards The Enslavement Of Men

Defining male agency during the collapse of the Sexual Revolution.

The progenitors of the #MeToo meme have been elevated to that dubious plinth of social endorsement, the cover of Time magazine.

image
#Iwouldnt

These women did not “launch a movement.” However, the current wreaths-to-laurels victimhood craze does bear out the completion of an important cultural cycle.

Free Love Wasn’t Free

A core premise of our sexual dystopia is:

‘My body my choice.’

Within the bounds of legality, we are supposed to believe that neither sex is more damaged by their coital decisions than the other. The retro-active outrage now mounted by women at men on account of mutually consensual sexual intercourse (and calls for the bounds of legality to be shifted accordingly), reiterates that this is not actually the case.

The struggle of many a post-prime girl for exclusivity with a series of increasingly inferior suitors, must be a brutal way to discover that it is still impossible to raise a joyridden car back to its factory-new price.

Men are checking out of monogamous commitment, leaving two generations of women wandering a widening bimbo-limbo between settled life either as a housewife or denizen of the increasingly cash-strapped welfare state (the overwhelmingly administrative sector jobs provided to ‘career women’ being a manifestation of the latter).

As an institution, marriage is only debased further by social and legal efforts to enforce commitment from men to polygamous women who spent their bloom years in promiscuity. Although such an iniquitous contract could be excused by a myriad of exceptional circumstances, the unprecedented glut of women beneath the male investment threshold turn the exceptions into clichés.

The Gynocentric Interpretation

A defining characteristic of corporate and clickbait discourse is the effort to sublimate readers’ frustration into outrage while bypassing the question of accountability. Time and others are now under huge pressure to find mythologies to both explain the dissatisfaction of their female readership and serve as the basis for corrective political action. Someone must be to blame for their problems; anyone but themselves.

What Time has produced is a fairy tail without a prince. It begins:

‘Movie stars are more like you and me than we ever knew.’

We are then introduced to a wide range of women who were:

‘brought together by a common experience.’

They were actually brought together by Time, at great expense, to confirm the biased premise of their leading article. Time then chews over each of these women’s testimonies, droning on and on and on in a tantric, mantric, incuntation of its utterly banal and predictable conclusion:

image
Time have revealed their straw man – and he’s called Donald Trump.

I suspect that the feminist Trump-tantrum is not caused by Trump per se, but by the part of American society which voted him into office. It’s an important distinction because it means that, as a political instrument, Trump is needed the most by the very people who like him least. Without Trump, the outrage would be revealed for what it truly is: a million personal vendettas against a million brash, powerful and wealthy American men who these women consentingly gave their bodies to.

Trump’s appeal to the free market and private capital (as well as the string of hot women who have let him ‘grab ‘em by the poosy’), is more than just a refusal to push the envelope on welfare policies which enable sexual liberation—it is an exposition of the gulf between what is conventionally true and what is actually true about modern female sexual opportunism.

The self-deception may be genuine, but was revealed nonetheless when #metoo was triggered by the loss of societal contingency plans to ensure female sexual freedom (alpha fucks and beta bucks), by constraining that of men. The fat child screams not while it is happily eating itself to death but when the cookies are taken away.

[Video titled "Satan leaves a woman's soul as Trump is sworn in"]

Feminism’s Finale

The premise of #metoo has now been twisted by various degrees to its own complete inversion. Nearly a year ago, I was told by a County Court in Britain that I owed money to a woman whose sexual advances I had gently rebuffed some years before. Neither I nor the court had any idea why I owed her money or what her claim was, but I still had to defend myself.

A case that would never have come to trial twenty years ago dragged out for months as she gradually patched together a claim (without evidence), which gradually escalated to an allegation of sexual abuse.

My trial was the direct result of her assumption that society would stand behind her in extracting resources from the man of her choosing. I was lucky that she had a legal history of ‘choosing’ other men before me, and the judge sent her howling from the courtroom.

But what if I had been her first shot? What if she’d gone to the Crown Prosecution Service?

I add, for the sake of completeness, that I am a strict adherent of pre-marital abstinence and, in the case of this particular woman, had never kissed, hit on, made a pass at, nor been in any form of romantic relationship with her. #Iwouldnt—and that is precisely what enraged her.

Let the irony of this case serve as an illustration of the extent to which feminine imperatives can now be exercised to strong-arm men into compliance. If you have earned a #metoo assertion like I did, you’re probably doing something right.

What for men in 2018?

The dregs of women will always preen their sexual worthiness in a sensational light by announcing that a man once made an unwanted pass at them, just as feminist Phrynes like Emma Watson will always lend a pretty face to their ugly cause (phoney outrage is her profession’s prerogative. I bear her no grudge).

Our toxic tributary of sexual realism to the mainstream discussion sees the feminist victimbragging for what it really is: another attempt to circumvent rational analysis and keep society plugging the feminist narrative. Soon, #metoo will become as passé as ‘Trump Bedroom Backlash,’ but these phenomena are mere symptoms of a deeper social condition.

As private debt piles up and resources cease to flow, society will have to find new ways of demanding that men judiciously restrain their own behaviour on behalf of the unfettered dualistic sexual strategy of women—sexy badboys and stable providers stepping up and down as and when women demand it. The contradictory messages that this sends to men are now compounded by the constant possibility of being criminalised for making a faux pas.

Today, as trials move from the courtroom to the press and to Twitter and Facebook, the degree of kafkaesque reassurance that I had—the basic certainty that I was on trial—is starting to ebb away. A lot of men who don’t grasp the underlying biomechanics behind the sexual victimhood phenomenon are doomed to be spirited on a windowless train of THOT thought from false premise to final solution: their enslavement to women, either directly or via the state.

The chaotic disconnect between the claim and the truth is not a means to an end but the end itself. This climate of fear is the West’s way of forcing the marriage of mankind to womankind, joylessly mandating social responsibilities without providing any privilege. The carrot has gone from the sexual contract and only the stick remains.

image
It can still be a beautiful life for men who don’t answer to society. Careful though, the beta version of this man is Smeagol Gollum.

The harder men try to opt out of commitment to women, the stronger the social effort will be to drive them back, until escape from women will turn into escape from society itself.

Peter Koenig #conspiracy globalresearch.ca

Paris under Attack: Was it a False Flag? A Pretext for NATO to Intervene in Syria and the Middle East?

France is at war! – Exclaimed President Hollande several times in each of his three what appeared like scripted speeches he gave within 12 hours after the attack. He knew the names of the attackers and where they were from, while police was still struggling to put the puzzles together, and news reporting was sketchy, confusing and chaotic. He accused Daesch (the Islamic State) as the perpetrator before anyone claimed responsibility for the attack. That supposed ‘claim’ from ISIS came much later in the course of Saturday morning, the morning after.

France is at war – words reminiscent of George Bush and his clan after 9/11. President Hollande declared a state of emergency not unlike Bush’s state of emergency after 9/11 – and the new Homeland Security / Patriot Act, waiting in the drawers to be quickly ratified after 9/11. Hollande also decreed three days of national mourning.

Similar rules are in place in France since this blood-soaked Saturday morning – a swat of civil rights suspensions, including searches without warrants, curfew, government control of media, increased surveillance, strict border controls, road blocks and traffic control, suppression of protests and manifestations – and more.

Early Saturday afternoon, the media reported that a Syrian passport was found at one of the shooting places. This was a false flag give-away. As people started making the connection with the ‘lost ID’ of one of the ‘terrorists’ in the Charlie Hebdo get-away car, and the intact Saudi passport in the rubbles of the 9/11 twin-towers, and in an attempt to save some of the credibility of these made-up stories, the Syrian passport trove was downgraded as having been found on the body of a Syrian refugee.

Later in the evening, the police also suitably traced three of the 7 killed terrorists to cells in Belgium. Similarly, Charlie Hebdo ‘terrorists’ also had apparently connections to Belgian Jihadists; later the links even stretched further north to Denmark, another right wing, neoliberally managed country. The European Union with the non-transparent, secretive European Commission is headquartered in Brussels, where a clamp-down of liberties and people’s demonstrations, especially anti-TTIP protests, will soon be needed. Let’s see where the next links to Saturday’s attacks will suddenly appear.

Hollande called for revenge. France is strong. France may be hurt, but never conquered. France will fight back even stronger than before. Hollande at his best, blood revenge.

The western world is living in a blood cult. Killing is the order of the day. Blood must flow.

Is the French President seriously hoping that blood revenge will bring peace? That it will increase security in France, or throughout the world for that matter? –

Revenge is but business for the war industry – never mind innocent human lives lost, and human misery caused by the seeded wars and conflicts, all for greed and power – and paradoxically under the pretext of seeking peace. How brainwashed must people be to believe it and go along with it.

[...]

This act of terror of 13 November could be a precursor to NATO intervening in Syria and the Middle-East at large, leading to a confrontation with Russia.

It might be the beginning of WWIII – being played out primarily in the Middle-East, to spare Europe from a third devastation in the span of 100 years, though that is an illusion in the age of nuclear arms.

Europe is needed by the Washington-Wall Street led financial and industrial empire as a trading partner – TTIP – and as a stooge for promoting the master’s agenda around the world. The suddenly ‘found’ Syrian passport clearly indicates the target for a possible NATO intervention.

[...]

No wonder, with so much demonstrated aggression by France towards Syria, and now also Iraq – and certainly everywhere the Washington masters point their blood-finger – that people in the Middle-East are getting angry – and, according to Washington, Jihadists take it a step further, namely to retaliate on innocent French people. Innocent are also the bombarded populations in the Middle-East – in Syria, Iraq, Libya, Sudan, Yemen, Somalia, Afghanistan, Lebanon, Palestine – and the list is almost endless, who are mercilessly slaughtered and their livelihoods destroyed by the criminal alliance within which French Rafale and Mirage fighters combat.

[...]

Nevertheless, when such well organized and superbly coordinated terror attacks occur, one should first ask, whom do they serve and why. Cui Bono?

Of course, it could be a blowback by Jihadist warriors for France’s continuous aggression in the Middle East. France was first along with the UK in allying with Washington in fighting the Assad regime in Syria – and shortly after the Charlie Hebdo attack in January 2015, the French air force was joining the US and the Brits in Iraq. Earlier France had sent troops to Mali and Central Africa – responsible for killing hundreds if not thousands of innocent people.

In the meantime, it has become known that at least since mid-August there were warnings that a public place, like a music hall, might be singled out for a terrorist attack. Early October this year, Paris Match repeatedly warned from a 9/11 French-style [Link removed].

This leads to conclude that the French authorities were at least warned. Now, the police say some of the dead terrorists were known to them, had a police record – but not necessarily linked to jihadism. The father and brother of one of the dead had been arrested. What for? – How phony does this sound? – People wake up! – Please!

They are brainwashing us into fear – ‘if we don’t protect you by increased control over your movements, you’ll risk more attacks, more bloodshed.’ – That’s what they are saying. And People go along – worse, they are even grateful for more ‘protection’. It’s the typical ‘Shock Doctrine’ moment, when authorities can do whatever they want, taking people’s civil rights away, even their human rights – and when finally we discover that there are almost none left – it’s too late. Such shocks are often provoked (false flags) so that civil rights infringing measures can be easily implemented without popular resistance. The Patriot Act and its various updates since 9/11 have erased some 90% of citizen’s civil rights in the United States.

And why is that necessary in Europe? – Because much worse may be coming. People may wake up, take to the streets, making implementation of dictatorial measures more complicated, like the secretly negotiated TTIP (Trans-Atlantic Trade and Investment Pact) – which would turn Europe into a wasteland of educated serfs for the corporate and financial elite, directed by Zionist-Washington, surveyed and enforced by its army and NATO. A European Patriot Act might prevent such troubles.

MelloStein #conspiracy narutobase.net

I just HAD to make an account to agree that both Naruto and Naruto Shippuden (most anime) contain Illuminati/Freemasonic symbolism. I use the terms Illuminati/Freemason in reference to those who control our world, for they have no name.

I've watched a great deal of anime and the single eye (AKA the Eye of Horus/Ra, which represents the Illuminati watching over all) was present during them all, as well as other occult symbolism with hidden meanings.

It's funny how people completely disregard the conveniently placed 'tomoe' as nothing but abstract shapes because of a Wikipedia entry on their origin. This proves very little as the Illuminati usually have well-thought-out excuses for including their subliminal messaging so when they get caught plastering 6's all over your favourite anime character they can say "You're paranoid. That isn't six sixes, it's six tomoe aligned side by side to look like a magatama. Section this insane conspiracy theorist!" These people are highly intelligent. Blatant Satanic propaganda without a cover story isn't their style.

I mean, think about what I'm implying here. These Devil-worshipping psychopaths have infiltrated governments worldwide, mainstream media etc. They didn't reach these positions of power they're in now by making mistakes and getting caught.

Now, I'm not saying Kishimoto is a Satanist (although it is a possibility) but that doesn't mean he wasn't paid/pressured into including a few Satanic symbols into his works. I'm sure he'd much rather cooperate with the higher-ups than turn against them and face the consequences.

Conclusion:
A 'tomoe' looks strikingly similar to the number six, a fact that can be taken advantage of.

The words 'Japanese mythology' are a great method of explaining away any questionable material in your anime series. (See: this thread)

Pyramids were around before this nameless secret society, of course. The group have merely adopted the pyramid shape/symbol as their own.

The majority of human beings ITT are ignorant/brainwashed. Do your research before attempting to reply to this comment.

Namaste.

Lady Gaga, Jay Z and Kanye West are all either Illuminati members/pawns. Also Kony2012 was government funded pro-war propaganda, promoted by celebrities to gain support for the invasion of the resource-rich Uganda.

bsutansalt #sexist #crackpot reddit.com

[Repost] Women Do Not Have A “Sex Drive”

tl;dr Red Pill Theory focuses on inducing and maintaining female sexual attraction, but the applied theory (e.g. dread) is missing the underlying connective tissue - women have an attention drive, not a sex drive. If you want to maintain sexual attraction, learn to give the right type of attention (but not too much!).
________________

What Makes a Woman Feel "Sexual"?

Anyone who reads the sidebar understands that the Game is all about FEELINGS. How you make her FEEL is the key to unwrapping every other aspect of attraction.

"Feelings" are temporary emotional states. They are also overwhelming, meaning at sufficient levels they take priority over the rest of the cognitive processes.

Female sexuality is REACTIVE - it's not the dull aching horniness that men experience. It is rapid-onset response to desirable male attention.

The price of male attention is sex. Sex is the glue that holds male attraction firmly in place. 1

Ipso facto women are willing to pay the sex price and a natural feedback loop is created; male attention makes her "sexual", the sex engenders more attention from the male, the attention makes her FEEL "sexual", and so on.

They fuck because they want to FEEL sexual. Not because they want sex.

What Do Women THINK Makes Them Feel Sexual?

Who cares. Ask 10 of them once a day for a week and get 19182 different responses. Listen to their advice and get 0 sex.
________________

What Motivates Women vs. Men to Play This Game?

I don't buy the line that "women are natural Machiavellians/She's always planning the next branch swing/etc.".

Her goal is to maximally exploit her youth (in other words beauty) for maximal desirable male attention.

Can this take the form of a conniving woman, ready to trade up at the next possible chance? Sure. But that is a SYMPTOM and not a CAUSE.

Men want to fuck for fucking's sake. Some trade resources and their dignity for this (gradually rarer) privilege - we call them beta males. Others learn to exploit the desire for their attention. Be the latter guy.

Men's goal is sexual variety.
________________

The Breakdown - Why Women Leave

Ultimately, whether through fault of the man or woman, the cycle of attention stops.

Men who break the cycle generally stop giving the girl "sexy" attention. This can be the result of him becoming unattractive physically 2, but more often the man fails to make her FEEL seduced.

His attention shifts from "sexy" to "expecting" - this makes the girl FEEL...at best nothing, at worst like she is doing work. What used to be motivating attention has been replaced by a demand for service. Wrong kind of attention.

Cheating happens when some other guy steps in and gives her that seductive attention again, making her FEEL sexy. She might fuck him then, she might not. BUT the relationship enters Stage 4 Terminal Cancer at that point.

You may hear "I love you but I'm not IN LOVE with you" at this point 3. Scrap it and move on.
________________

Attention in Context of TRP Terms

Let's re-frame a few core concepts from applied (things you do) to theory (abstract thought that creates broader understanding).

* Dread is reminding a woman your "sexy" attention is always for sale, not overtly stating you will fuck other women

* The 3/2 rule is meant to stifle inappropriate outflows of your time and resources aka limitation creates mystery, it is not a math equation

* Pre-selection and social proof are when other women competing for YOUR attention increases its perceived value

I could go on - the point is the underpinning theme is provisioning and framing of attention.
________________

Conclusions

* Women do not have a sex drive - they respond sexually to desirable male attention

* Never rely on a woman to tell you what makes her FEEL sexual - especially not one you are fucking

* Males desire sexual variety, women desire maximal exploitation of their youth and beauty for attention

* Women cheat when they stop getting the sexy kind of attention - this PERMANENTLY prevents your attention from being "sexy" ever again
________________

Footnotes

Throughout the post there are footnotes of side observations. Each references a specific problem in the modern SMP. Here they are in order.

1. Men giving away attention for free in never before seen quantities - Remember how I said the price for male attention is sex? This dynamic is fucking that up - attention is available in mass quantity without the old cost.

2. There's a reason our advice starts at "lift" - there's no excuse to be physically unattractive - Don't lose the game because you didn't learn the basics. Keep it simple.

3. Reinvesting in a dying or dead relationship - Don't go looking in the dumpster. You'll only find trash. Roll around in there and that smell will be stuck on your for awhile.

universallyabhorred #sexist incelocalypse.ru

Here is my vision of the ideal society for an incel. In this glorious world, females are strictly controlled they have no rights, educating them is banned and they are utilized to cook clean and provide pleasure as necessary. The government takes on an active role in regulating degenerate sexuality, in order to redress historical wrongs a system similar to affirmative action is devised for ugly incel males. The government gives ugly incels cushy high paying jobs in a variety of different administrative departments, which involves managing and controlling the people, all of these agents will work for at least 1 month at the department for the promotion of purity and will have 24/7 access to its female reserves.

What the department does is it regulates sexuality, censors porn, along with stones both adulterers and those who display lustful affections in public, which will be monitored by surveillance. How it regulates sexuality is by ensuring all females are made to wear chastity belts 24/7 from the age of 5, random inspections are done to ensure compliance, also neither the female nor her family would be able to remove the belt easily since the key would be held by the department. Females are also required to wear a shock collar from birth to which both the male members of the family and the government has control over to ensure its submissiveness.

Once a marriage has been arranged to a female it can get its belt removed by obtaining a marriage permit and then a sexual permit. For this the female will need to visit a department office branch accompanied by a male, wait for their turn then be interrogated for legalizing their marriage. Once they have received their marriage permit, the female is escorted to a room where the inspector removes the belt. He then takes both the female's anal and vaginal virginities if the female resists it will be shot beaten or shocked and denied the sexual permit. If the female is in the top 20% of attractiveness, the female will be knocked out and transported to the department's female reserves, and be denied the permit. Otherwise it will simply be returned to the male with a sexual permit.

Under this system ugly males have complete access to the female reserves consequently they gain pleasure from the hottest females, finally the lives of ugly males will be worthwhile we will be given the sexual rights we deserve.

Normie and attractive males also get submissive compliant females that cannot divorce rape their male masters. They may also take multiple wives which are not held in the female reserves. This program will be extremely effective if females are bred in high numbers in relation to males at a ratio similar to 10:1, so every normie or chad male can get multiple females and dispose of their wives freely once aged and hideous, while at the same time ugly incels are able to secure a portion of females in the reserves for their permanent pleasure.

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.

CH #fundie heartiste.wordpress.com

In plainspeak, the dangerously scaled-up and decadent postmodern West has lost the ability (and the willpower) to cleanse itself of toxic people who have bad DNA mojo and even worse character, and the resulting sludge will build up to the level where the West will collapse under the weight of its welfare state-supported genetic sewage (insert visual of those Ethiopians buried alive by a garbage heap avalanche (true story)).

The paper (according to second-hand sources….I wasn’t able to access the full text) has data that the IQ of Western nations is falling some 0.8 points per generation, and the blame for it is apportioned mostly to dysgenic patterns of fertility, which it explains as consequences of modern post-industrial societies easing up the cultural selection pressures on their populations. The study authors finger the source of the problem as postmodern marriage and childbirth trends; more dumb people (specifically, women) than smart people are having kids, and more people (specifically, women) are waiting until later in life to have kids and therefore passing on more genetic mutations that have accumulated with age in the parents.

The cock carousel is birthing the moron merry-go-round. Sex and the City is being remade as IVF and the Refugees.

Modern, indulgent society — which in reality is the modern sexual market, since society is an emergent property of reproductive dynamics — creates massive, positively reinforcing feedback loops that essentially reward degeneracy and corruption by allowing it to run wild and unopposed, instead of snuffing it out in the crib. Free-riders at first slowly increase in number in a prosperous, proto-declining society, and if their growth isn’t halted early a rapid, exponential decline metastasizes until free-riding becomes the norm. When that happens, social collapse is guaranteed and maybe even necessary for the rebirth that can only occur after the free-riders are washed out of the system (usually in not-so-nice ways….think fire hoses and flamethrowers or, if we’re lucky, the humane option of welfare contingent on mandatory birth control).

There’s a lot going on in this paper, which draws Calhoun’s rat experiments and group selection (a controversial subject) into its theory of dysgenic breeding enabled by a soft, feminized, virtue signaling West. Urban density and anonymity are increasing within the population a lot of weird sexual paraphilias and psychological problems, and as discussed in the previous CH post the severing of the sexual market from the marriage market is delaying family formation and childbirth and contributing to the dysgenic reproductive skew. That, coupled with the pathological altruism that has run amok among White Westerners who basically want the West to be an enormous safety net and catch basin for the world’s 7 billion poors, are pushing White societies close to complete collapse — a cosmic own-goal so amazingly self-destructive that Darwinian selection is practically guaranteed to work swiftly and mercilessly at the task of culling the White West of its low fitness leftoid freaks.

In the end, as always, Diversity + Proximity = War, and as the study authors note, if a group isn’t bothering to defend itself, other groups will be more than willing to fill the power vacuum.

I’m warning shitlibs, get on board the Trump Train. Because if he fails to stop the Sewer World inflow and Globohomo one market dystopia, you libs are NOT gonna like what has to follow.

“You have to be cruel to be kind, in the right measure.” The West needs to relearn the value of this timeless lesson.

***

Readers wonder about suggestions to stem the idiocratic tide. I have offered many within these hallowed Chateau halls. For instance, there’s the CH BOSSS system; let’s break the back of the FemKunt KKKollective and get our HSMV men paired off with young, feminine secretaries less interested in careers than in mothering so the good genes can spread around more evenly to the whole of the White tribe. Close the borders. Kick out the illegals and anchor babies. End wage-gutting cheat codes like the H-1B visa program. Destroy the anti-White propaganda mills (many tools for this, including anti-trust and defunding leftoid institutions). As a last resort, allow the blue states committed to their suicidal ideation to secede from the union.

We in the West are on the precipice of annihilation and a complete repudiation of our past greatness. The good news: there’s still time to fix this. The bad news: there’s not much time left, and there’s a lot to fix.

Mike #racist webcache.googleusercontent.com

Whites are the least racist and most generous ethnic group in all of human history. Consider the following.

Slavery: Only white countries abolished slavery for moral reasons (in some cases, anyway).

Colonialism: Only white countries surrendered the lands they conquered for moral reasons (in some cases, anyway).

White guilt: Only white people reject their own heritage as irredeemably racist and oppressive.

Immigration: Only white people are surrendering their majority status to unassimilable foreigners who bear historical grudges against them.

Welfare: Only white countries offer generous public benefits to minority groups who pay little or no taxes, makes lots of babies they can’t afford, and commit a disproportionate amount of violent crime (often against whites).

Crime: Only white people think it’s racist to complain about being victimized by hostile ethnic groups.

Crime 2: Despite being 74 percent of the population, whites commit only 10 percent of interracial crimes.

Culture: Only white people downplay their ancestors’ accomplishments (Western civilization) while glorifying the accomplishments of other races (rap music).

Charity: Only white people pair unceasing concern for poor minorities (“at-risk youth”) with contempt or hatred for poor members of their own race (“white trash”).

Internationalism: Only white people agonize over the problems of complete strangers on the other side of the world, spend hundreds of billions of dollars to alleviate their suffering, and welcome them into their homelands as “refugees” and “migrants.”

Environmentalism: Only white people gallivant around the world trying to save rare species and natural habitats in developing countries.

Legislation: White countries were the first to outlaw racial discrimination. Only white countries have special laws and penalties for “hate crimes” and “Holocaust denial.”

Affirmative action: Only white countries have laws and policies that put the majority ethnic group at a competitive disadvantage to minority ethnic groups.

Culture: Only white people feel guilty about their success and complain about their cultural dominance (“white privilege”).

Ideology: Only white people define their nations in terms of abstract ideals rather than culture, ethnicity, and religion.

Manners: White people are nice.

Political correctness: Only white people have a pathological fear of offending people.

Anti-racism: Only white countries engage in cathargic orgies of moral outrage over any hint of prejudice—no matter how small, isolated, imagined, or harmless.

Individualism/Universalism: Only white people reject the concepts of racial identity and racial solidarity.

Multiculturalism: Only white countries welcome the arrival and persistence of alien cultures, religions, and languages.

Diversity: Only white people feel guilty about a lack of diversity in their neighborhoods, schools, businesses, social circles, and entertainment choices.

Extinction: Only whites have allowed their birthrate to fall below replacement level; only whites glorify miscegenation; and only whites see their demographic decline as a sign of social progress.

Feel free to paste this list in the comment sections of anti-white articles on liberal and mainstream sites. Consider closing with the following: “I now fully expect other whites to attack me for saying good things about whites—which only proves my point! Whites don’t hate other races. Whites hate themselves.”

Shar #fundie groups.yahoo.com

The FBI said in internal emails that they would stop Trump and if he is elected, they have plans to oust him literally. Their aim was to upend a duly elected American president.

They allowed Hillary's dossier they knew was fake from Russians to spy on her opponent.

Another problem, they withheld information from judges to get FISA warrants which is illegal. And they used a dossier they knew was unverified (illegal) and salacious to use a fake reason to spy on him.

Ironically they used Russian lies And propaganda to do so.

Opposition research is fine...what is not fine is for the FBI to use it to help one candidate over another. Also look into the Ohr's and Fusion GPS.

It is so complicated, hard to address all the corruption in one email.

On top of it all, Rosenstein actually signed at least one of the warrants which makes him a witness and a part of the law breaking...so that is why they are hiding emails and information from us.

Then you have Clapper who actually told the press about this in order to hurt Trump. He set it up for Comey to tell Trump so it was the. Released to the public.

Rosenstein also wrote the letter to fire Comey of which Trump is being accused of interference. So Rosenstein is the acting attorney general while helping Mueller make his case against Trump for what he himself did.

Another problem, they may have started spying long before they are admitting it. Looks like they did. So they may hVe started even before getting warrants.

Also, they should have told the person running for president immediately. When they did tell him, he said get to the bottom of it and get rid of whomever is doing this.

Who was doing it? No one...it was all fabrication on the part of Hillary with Russian fake dossier that Comey admitted was not true, colluding with our own FBI.

It is even worse than this. So much they did.

Did you hear about Feinstein's driver who was also her Ofc manager.

She let him retire with a pension and how he is a huge profile character making Chinese propaganda speeches in SF AND ALL over the world.

He needs to be tried and convicted for treason.

And she knew and swept it under the rug and the FBI went along. She should be tried for aiding and abetting treason...which is treason in itself..

When the Obama IG found out about Clinton's classified info server, Feinstein bullied him and he dropped it. And when it was found out that Brennan was spying on foreign intelligence. Omitted, in which she is chairman, he denied it but was caught so had to admit it to senate Intel. She said oh well...we're not going to prosecute.

The corruption of obama's White House is mind boggling.

Sharona

PLEASUREMAN #racist mypostingcareer.com


Naturally this will ruffle all the right feathers. Such a finding has considerable implications, but also verifies something I knew anecdotally: the infusion of women into the male workplace has led to the rise of an effeminate corporate culture which downplays achievement (a source of pride) and replaces honorable, ethical conduct with pathological manipulating. Similarly, the influx of women into politics has led to the rise of a particularly stupid and unworthy political culture, refracted through a media dominated by women, gay men, Jews, and other low test parasites.

...

The more we learn about sex differences, the more we seem to verify age-old truths that justified sex roles and helped people live normal, happy lives (before the Jew and his diversity/equality poison). Add this to the list.

Dave Blount #fundie moonbattery.com

[Emphasis added.]

Gary Sconce and the Liberal War on Choice

The recent liberal obsession with promoting transsexuals is not about disfigured sexuality, and far less about “intolerance”; it is about attacking the mindset that makes us capable of exercising free will. For example, take a characteristically obsequious piece in the local media on a teacher in Oakhurst, California who is subjecting himself (and his students) to a sex change:

After spring break, 24-year Yosemite High School science and multimedia teacher Gary Sconce will return to teach as [his] true self, [he] says: Karen Adell Scot.

The 56-year-old husband, father and award-winning teacher came out to family in April that since early childhood, [he]'s felt like a female trapped in a male body. Since then, Sconce has been undergoing hormone replacement therapy and transitioning into Scot.

Sconce calls the person he will pretend to be after he has finished getting medically transfigured into a horrific parody of a woman his “authentic self.” In the progressive funhouse, words mean their opposite.

A thought criminal made this astute observation in a letter to the editor of the Sierra Star:

“I see this as an assault on the minds and morals of our children. It blurs the lines of what is right and wrong.”

The word “assault” is well chosen. Sconce is obviously a very troubled guy; the worst you can accuse him of is a solipsistic disregard for how his bizarre behavior will affect children’s development. But the motives of the government/media establishment that goes out of its way to promote this pathology can only be malign.

This gets at the heart of the deeper sickness that liberals mislabel “tolerance”:

“Being transgender is not a choice,” [Sconce] wrote in a letter to Yosemite High employees earlier this week.

He literally believes that he has no choice but to medically disfigure the body God gave him, and to present himself to children dressed in women’s clothes. Likewise, we are encouraged — or rather required — to believe that people have no choice but to indulge in politically approved sexual perversions, no matter how deleterious they may be to public health.

If we have no choice about the way we behave, we are not humans. We are a lower order of being, fit only to be controlled from above, like farm animals. There is no virtue, no heroism, no internal triumph of right over wrong. If we have no choice, we are slaves.

Small wonder authoritarians hate Christianity so much. Christianity insists that you acknowledge that you do have a choice, and you are responsible for making it, not the government or media. In contrast, liberalism lets you take the herded animal’s path of least resistance — the low road leading downward, which we wind up on by default if we declare ourselves victims and don’t exert any effort.

Sconce’s attempt to prove that he has no choice proves only that his disease is the last thing a decent person would wish to encourage in others:

“Consider: I have lost my marriage of 35 years to a magnificent, brilliant woman, am going to lose my house, and am spending (money) on serious and painful physical changes — including both medical and psychological services.

“I have been shunned by those who used to be my friends, have been shunned by family, have had people try to cast demons out of me, have left my church of nearly 30 years, and have been scorned and laughed at by those who had for decades said they were my friends. Who would choose that?”

Likewise, you could ruin your life by drinking, by drugs, by gambling, by chasing after women. The resulting devastation would hardly prove that you had no choice.

Kudos to Fox News for not following the disgusting media practice of referring to men who pretend they are women with feminine pronouns. It is cruel to encourage the mentally ill in their delusions, rather than try to help them back to sanity.

But to the “mainstream” left-wing media, Sconce is just a pawn. Like the children whose innocence will be unnecessarily tainted by the grotesque spectacle he making of his illness, his fate is irrelevant in the grand struggle to destroy our conception of ourselves as capable of choice.

niqaabi_nusrat #fundie ummah.com

Good question, which was covered in an Islamic parenting lecture I attended a while back. Insha'Allah my notes from this below will be of some assistance.

The basic principle is that we must never ever forget that the vast majority of the disbelievers have at least been made aware of Islam but have decided for whatever reason to reject it (although there will always be some that have not yet been told about Islam). By rejecting Islam they have chosen a path that, if not rectified, will lead to a very difficult time on the Day of Judgement, as set out in the Qu'ran.

They do not share our beliefs, such as the oneness of God and the supremecy of His laws, which makes us very different to them, and so we should teach our kids never ever invest any trust in them.

However, although they may even be hostile to Islam, each and every one of them is a potential revert insha'Allah (I fitted that description myself alhumdulillah), therefore we should try to represent our religion favourably, through our good manners, kindness, humility and peacefulness. We should teach our kids not dislike the disbelievers, rather, we should dislike their disbelief.

On a practical level, we must teach them to keep interactions businesslike and avoid close friendships. Things like laughing, joking, idle chit chat and gossip should be avoided, and of course inappropriate gender interaction is a big no-no and should be disciplined. But telling the disbelievers about Islam is incumbent upon all Muslims and should be a big focal point of our lives.

The Islamic dress code plays an important part in all this by identifying ourselves as Muslims, setting out a sort of barrier that lets them know we are different and that our priority is obedience to Allah subhanahu wa ta'alaa rather than consumerism or whatever moral code they follow. Therefore, introduce hijab at a young age, insist on Sunnah clothing and, as in all matters, set a good example yourself.

Always encourage children to keep the company of good young Muslim kids and constantly remind them to be aware of our very different beliefs. If you feel at all uncomfortable about relations that have developed with non-believing kids then insist that they are cut off - don't accept any whining about this. Only if you feel that they are open to Islam should you let relationships get a bit closer, for example by inviting them into your home.

Never ever forget the differences that exist and the dangers of falling into their corrupted way of thinking.

Insha'Allah this is of some help.

DoctorDoom #racist libertydwells.com

Horseshit!That fascist son of a bitch hasn't spent a day governing since 1/20/2009. He has been in campaign mode since 2006, on a 24/7 war against his own policies for the benefit of the unfathomably stupid assholes who blindly elected him because he's a nigga. He's a wannabe third-world dictator, not a leader.

IMO, the US cannot possibly survive three more years of that treasonous, tyrannical, psychopathic cocksucker. If he is not deposed ASAP, America will die as a nation.

Bryce Lockwood #fundie returnofkings.com

A Guide To Weimerica

Bryce Lockwood is a straight white male who works at a university in a blue state and thus cannot use his real name. He writes, he lifts, he has skin in the game, and he lives at Ground Zero for Weimerica. He possess an ever-present sense of humor that would have seen him quip, “Merry Christmas, ya filthy animal!” had he been the SEAL that capped Bin Laden. He also has a masochistic streak that has expressed itself by climbing Mt. Tammany in the rain and reading the citation sections of various history books. He recently had to buy a new wardrobe as his waist shrunk from his workout and he just passed day 60 of the NF challenge. Friendly to stray dogs, hostile to stray thots.

“Weimerica,” an amalgam of Germany’s pre-Nazi era Weimar Republic, is a term you’ve probably heard in the past year if you’ve been active in the ongoing political maelstrom that is social media. Some alternatively call it “Clown World.” I prefer “Weimerica” as it more specific to what the United States has become recently and hints at a cataclysm yet to be.

This “guide” to Weimerica was written on the fly in-between back-to-back New England snowstorms, originally for an audience of one person. The genesis of this guide was the impending first-time visit to the US of a friend of mine from Lebanon. I wrote it not to show how bad things are, but instead to show how ugly things are. Not to frighten, but to inform on the many unpleasant realities that are all too quickly (and conveniently) forgotten about on a day-to-day basis. How indifference is the order of day despite the ever-tightening noose around the necks of most people.

So what is Weimerica, you ask? Read on and find out.

What is Weimerica?

Weimerica is….

…homicides being up 20% from 2014 (equivalent in raw numbers to more than the September 11th attacks).

…the 17,250 confirmed homicides of 2016 being more than any other year since 1997 (when there were 18,208).

…66,324 drug overdose deaths in a 12-month period (the Vietnam War saw 47,434 hostile deaths over 15+ years).

…44,193 suicides in 2015, with suicides being at 30-year highs in 2016, and suicide being one of the top ten causes of death in Weimerica.

…23,000,000,000 views on Pornhub in 2016 (729 per second every single day non-stop for the whole year) with there being only 7,466,964,000 people on Earth.

…70% of Weimerica being on prescription medication with 20% being on more than five medications at once (and life expectancy still dropping).

…real income showing little to no gains for decades on end.

…being worse off financially than your parents.

…a decrease in the average household income in New Jersey from 2005 to 2015.

…everything being fleetingly temporary, you won’t have that long lasting job, house, car, marriage, etc., like your parents and grandparents did.

…nearly half of all pregnancies being unintended.

…Weimerica is a colossal, dystopian shopping mall filled with 325 million atomized, rootless individuals with no common culture, cause, language, religion or background, united only by their shared consumerism (“Did you see the Giants game last night?” “Oh my Gawd, Stranger Thingssss!”).

The Motto for Weimerica: “NO LIVES MATTER”

A seven-time convicted felon and five-time deportee fatally shoots an innocent passerby in the back with a stolen 40-caliber Glock handgun on a public pier? Acquitted.

A crying father begging for his life shot to death crawling on his hands and knees towards a SWAT team aiming AR-15s and screaming at him? Acquitted.

A bride-to-be gunned down in front of her house in her pajamas when a police officer sitting in his squad car suddenly draws and fires pointblank into her face? No charges.

22,000 attend a country music festival surrounded by high walls and patrolled by security guards and police officers in the most heavily surveilled city in the Western hemisphere? Gunned down by the score with total impunity in the biggest mass shooting of all time.

926,190 abortions in 2014, with an estimated 98.3% being elective (meaning unrelated to rape/incest and medical complications).
Everything Is Fake

Zillow.com and other real estate websites photoshop clouds, grass, and trees around properties and present them in a way that makes them appear much larger and more modern than they actually are.

These two pictures are of the same person:
[pictures omited]

Wall Street rating agencies graded $400 billion worth of subprime mortgage bonds without knowing what was in them, giving many of them the highest “AAA” rating (effectively making them rating agencies in name only).

The 5-star Mandalay Bay hotel in Las Vegas employed an unregistered, unlicensed illegal immigrant as a security guard.

Love To Hate

Everything being either “awesome,” “insanely good,” or “the best ______ ever,” or “shit,” “shitty,” or “the worst _______ ever,” with little to no middle ground and/or reasoned opinions. For example, the discrepancy in reviews for The Last Jedi and nearly every one of the 100+ reviews I read for the Ford Fusion being either “BEST CAR EVER” or “Should be recalled, WORST CAR EVER.”

Every piece of media being heavily and ridiculously scrutinized down to the last detail for any inane reason to hate it. For instance, one of the top comments on a YouTube video for “Shout” by the Isley Brothers accused the video’s author of not including enough black people dancing in his/her photo montage and further asserting that this lack of inclusion was deliberate.

Hating something because it is successful/popular just to go against the grain. For instance, actual “professional” reviews of Dunkirk being “Yeah, yeah, it was great, but why weren’t women the main characters?” and “Yeah, it’s good, but Christopher Nolan and his Nolaniods….”

The hate-watching of TV shows (Keeping up with the Kardashians, Jersey Shore, etc.) propelling them to ultimate success.

Insane Anti-Social Atrocities Are The New Norm

4 out of the 5 worst mass shootings in Weimerican history took place in the past five years.

The worst mass shooting in US history (600+ gunned down) disappears from the news and thus collective consciousness in the space of a week.

The Sutherland Springs massacre (which featured babies being executed at pointblank range by rifle fire) disappears from the headlines within a day or two. This shooting would have ranked as the worst in Weimerican history as recently as 2007.

The mass shooting body count record for Weimerica was broken in 2017 a mere 15 months after the now-second worst mass shooting in Weimerican history occurred.

The firearms technology used in recent mass shootings has been around for decades, and gun laws as a whole have never been stricter and mental health resources have never been more available (remember 70% of the population is on prescription medication), so why is this happening now?

War Is The Default State

After 16+ years in Afghanistan and 14+ years in Iraq (and 6,935 total US deaths), war is the default state of Weimerica and no longer afforded special or notable status (in contrast, the major combat phase of the generation-defining Vietnam War was seven years).

0.4% of the population is active-duty military, meaning ~95% of the population most likely is not emotionally invested and/or cares minimally about whatever combat is/was taking place (or will take place).

The Everyday Absurdisms Of Weimerica

Prescription medication used to combat anxiety, depression, and suicidal/homicidal thoughts and actions causes anxiety, depression, and suicidal/homicidal thoughts and actions as a side effect.

A Rutgers University professor lamenting the Sandy Hook massacre so much that he made a YouTube video about it, but still believing in infanticide up to one year of age.

New Jersey has the highest paid police officers in the nation with an average salary of $100,000/year, but also has three cities in the top ten for “worst homicide rate” and those officers still have the right to shoot you to death if you don’t follow their conflicting orders to the letter while having a gun pointed at your head.

Parents working and saving money for twenty years to send their kids to college only for them to return home after graduation hating them, their country, and themselves in addition to being tens of thousands in debt.

One-fourth of graduates leaving college with a four year degree in hand are no better off than if they did not go to college at all from a wage perspective.

The maintenance staff at a college making more than most of the graduates of that college because they are unionized.

Consensual sex (“fuck me in the butt!!!”) being redefined as “rape” with such concepts as “enthusiastic consent” (Yes.=Rape, YES!=not rape), “continuing consent” (“ask every ten minutes if it’s okay to keep going”), and “affirmative consent” (“Can I hold your hand? Stroke your thigh? Whisper into your ear?”).

The wife of “American Sniper” Chris Kyle saying she married him because “he was a nice guy.”

“I do not care, I am a millionaire, I do not give AF.”

Some Classic Weimerican Quotes

“I was naked underneath my clothes.” ~A woman explaining her #metoo moment.

“CRAWL TOWARDS ME! IF YOU FALL, YOU BETTER FALL ON YOUR FACE!” ~A police officer’s reasonable and coherent order that must be obeyed upon penalty of death.

“He was turning his life around!” ~The classic family/friend lament of a dead victim/perpetrator with a less than stellar background.

“He changed into something he wasn’t.” ~The pathetic attempt of a high school chum of a mass shooter to cover up for the fact that he somehow missed what a psycho his friend was.

“Russian interference!” ~A viable excuse for anything and everything.

“The hoes are laughin’? YEP!” ~An exchange between a confused TV doctor and a 14-year-old aspiring female rap artist.

“He was COMPED!” ~The humblebrag of the coked up brother of a mass shooter/pasty.

“Stay in the car.”~A plea to do nothing and ignore the situation, whatever it may be.

When Did America Become Weimerica?

No firm answer, I first noticed it in the spring of 2009 when there was a constant stream of family murder-suicides and mass shootings, some of them recession related. Afghanistan also escalated that year (with death tolls doubling for both Britain and the US from the year prior) under the election promise of “I’ll get us out of Afghanistan, take that to the bank!”

Things really picked up steam in 2012 when large public mass shootings began occurring with increasing regularity, labor force participation hit a three decade low (meaning there was no economic recovery), and drug overdose deaths had already jumped 211% (in the Northeast) in comparison with 2010.

Admin #transphobia #kinkshaming feministwiki.org

The word TERF (or terf) is a slur that is used predominantly by transgender activists and their allies against people who criticize the transgender movement on the basis of feminist concerns. Since the slur is used for people with feminist concerns, the main target tend to be women. As such, it's usually understood to be an anti-feminist, sexist and misogynist slur.

The word was invented as an acronym for Trans-Exclusionary Radical Feminist, where the "trans-exclusionary" part referred to those holding roughly the position that transwomen should not be included under a feminist definition of womanhood, and the "radical feminist" part was meant neutrally, i.e. for people who would indeed describe themselves as radical feminists in the true sense. Over time, the acronym pretty much became a four-letter word. Nowadays the capitalization is frequently omitted, and the already ambiguous original meaning ignored entirely. Still, users of the term tend to claim that it's a neutral description. The "trans-exclusionary" part may now refer to anyone who thinks transwomen should not have unfettered access to all female-only spaces (e.g. changing rooms), should not partake in women's sports where they have unfair advantages, should not be considered a natural part of the lesbian dating pool, etc. Although most members of the public would see these as rather sensible positions, considering a "transwoman" may have intact male anatomy, transgender activists nevertheless see all of these types of "exclusion" as unacceptable.

A closely associated term is SWERF, which is supposed to stand for Sex-Worker-Exclusionary Radical Feminist and is used for those who see the sex industry (prostitution, pornography, etc.) as highly exploitative and sexist. Like TERF, the term is almost always applied as a slur, and to misrepresent the political position of the person it's used against. Ironically, some of those who have to face the term most commonly are women who worked in prostitution and became anti-prostitution activists as a result of their own experiences as so-called sex workers.

micha der Gerechte #fundie #conspiracy truth.getweb4all.com

Baphomet on IDENTITY card1 and 666 on prescription paper

Category: FRG Finance Agency LTD, Freemasons, New World Order, State Terror, Stasi v3.0

Baphomet on IDENTITY card, Stasi, Terror, Germany, Satanism, NWO

Baphomet on identity card, terror, Germany, Satanism, Inquisition, Freemasons,
New World Order, Illuminati, NWO, Surveilance, BKA2, Stasi 3.0, BND3

imageimage(Header: [upside down] “Chick ☏ [telephone number] www.chick.com/de”
Panel 1: Chick Tract illustration of Baphomet: “Compare pages 9+10 in the booklet”
(Panel 2: “Abstract ID, compare lower half of the image, left. Symbolism of the picture: 1 Bow of Power 2 Phallus 3 Female genitals 4 Pubes - TWO Baphomets on every ID card!
Panel 3: [upside down] “German ID. Compare with yours, and with the partial image. Despite being hidden well, Baphomet can be recognised.”)

There are some more SATANIC symbolisms against the slaves administrated by the “O”ccupied4R”epublic of “Germany”, e.g:
666 the Number of the Devil (Beast) on prescription papers in the “O”ccupied “R”epublic of “G”ermany

image(“The 666 and the Throne of Satan”)

image(“Baphomet God of the Illuminati
is the Adversary of Light, of Love and Harmony”)

1 The ALL-CAPS part of the German word, “Personalausweis”, is “Personal”.
2 Bundeskriminalamt, Germany’s federal police agency
3 Bundesnachrichtendienst, Germany’s internal intelligence service.
4 The German word, “Besetzte”, begins with the same letter as “Bundes-”, “Federal”

Original GermanBaphomet auf PERSONALausweis und 666 auf Kassenrezept

Category: BRD Finanzagentur GmbH, Freimaurer, New World Order, Staatsterror, Stasi v3.0

Baphomet auf PERSONALausweis, Stasi, Terror, Deutschland, Satanismus, NWO

Baphomet auf Personalausweis, Terror, Deutschland, Satanismus, Inquisition, Freimaurer,
Neue Weltordnung, Illuminati, NWO, Ueberwachung, BKA, Stasi 3.0, BND

Gegen die von der „B“esetzten „R“epublik „D“eutschland verwalteten Sklaven gibt es noch einige weitere SATANISCHE Symboliken wie z.B.:
666 die Zahl des Teufels (Tieres) auf Rezept in der „B“esetzten „R“epublik „D“eutschland

RCQ_92130 #fundie barbwire.com

would think first and foremost the gay pedophiles who invaded the Priesthood - all for unfettered access to underage boys - should first be prosecuted, given THEY, not the church, are the rapists. I know - you disagree, claiming the little boys were recipients of man-boy love, not rape.

The church should be prosecuted for COMPLICITY, given it knew of the gay pedophile Priests and did nothing, or, worse yet, took steps to preserve it's own reputation at the expense of the child victims.

BTW - the "gay" community is doing the exact same thing. Pedophilia is rampant in your sub-culture ... occurring at rates many times higher than among normal people. And the reaction of the "gay" community? "Oh, still more pedophiles are straight!", or, "Pedophilia is different than homosexuality", or "there is no problem with pedophilia in the "gay" subculture!". All these lies, distortions and diversions are designed for one thing only ~~ to protect the 'image' of the "gay" community, the welfare of the child victims be damned.

CJ Hopkins #conspiracy counterpunch.org

The Dawning of the Age of Non-Terrorist Terrorism

by CJ Hopkins

shutterstock_339441194

Frederic Legrand – COMEO | Shutterstock.com

Berlin.

Of all the types of terrorist threats we are being conditioned to live in a more or less constant state of low-level fear of, the most terrifying of all has got to be the type we’ve witnessed throughout the Summer — a Summer so terrifying The Guardian is now officially calling it “The Summer of Fear.” Orlando, Nice, Würzberg, Munich, Reutlingen, Ansbach, Saint-Étienne-du-Rouvray … the Terror just keeps coming, and coming, like the monster in some blockbuster Hollywood movie. The most terrifying part of it is that these are no ordinary terrorist attacks carried out by ordinary terrorists at the behest of ordinary terrorist groups, but, rather, the work of a new breed of terrorist … a terrorist who has no connection to any type of terrorist groups, is not primarily motivated by Terrorism, and, basically, has nothing to do with Terrorism. Let’s go ahead and call him the “non-terrorist terrorist.”

According to the official narrative being propagated by the Western media, non-terrorist Terrorism officially began in late September 2014 with a statement by Abu Muhammad al-Adnani, a terrorist spokesman for ISIS, ISIL, Daesh, or whatever we’re calling it this week. This statement, which has since been quoted as often as humanly possible by the press, exhorted decentralized terrorist cells, aspiring terrorists, and other random individuals, to launch attacks against innocent Westerners, to wit, to “mash his head with a rock, or slaughter him with a knife, or run him over with a car, or throw him down from a high place …” and so on.

According to the same official narrative, the first attack by a non-terrorist terrorist was carried out in Dijon, France — yes, the place the mustard comes from — in late December 2014, three months after the al-Adnani statement. (The 2013 Boston Marathon bomb attack apparently doesn’t count anymore, as it occurred before the al-Adnani statement and thus doesn’t fit the official narrative.) The prosecutor in the case — the French case, of course — described the perpetrator as a “barely coherent,” mentally unbalanced, middle-aged man who used his car to mow down over a dozen innocent French pedestrians while shouting Islamic stuff out the window.

This, we are learning, is part of the cunning modus operandi of the non-terrorist terrorists, the way they are able to extensively plan and carry out terrifying terrorist attacks while posing as mentally disturbed individuals, or as sexually confused or alienated loners, who have absolutely nothing to do with Terrorism. This ruse was deployed again in Orlando, where the non-terrorist terrorist went as far as to pose as a closeted homosexual; and in Nice, where the attacker maintained his cover for years as a wife-beating petty criminal; and in Würzberg, where apparently the teenage terrorist had been masquerading as an orphaned refugee, but in fact was an insidious sleeper agent sent by ISIS to attack some random train in the middle of the German countryside.

According to knowledgeable Terrorism experts, Western governments, and the mainstream media, we’re going to be seeing more and more of this — these seemingly uncoordinated attacks, both on targets like Nice, which fit the narrative, but also on targets that make no sense, and that terrorists like ISIS have never even heard of, but to which they have nonetheless dispatched their agents to attack Asian tourists with kitchen knives and hatchets while shouting “Allahu Akbar” at the top of their lungs. Who knows where the next attack will take place? Vossevangen, Norway? Demming, New Mexico? Menomonie, Wisconsin? The Outer Hebrides? Your guess is as good as mine.

The point is, as the War on Terror — which, as you probably remember, President Obama officially ended in 2013 — enters this new and more terrifying phase, we will need to prepare ourselves, both logistically and emotionally, for the dramatically heightened level of Terror engendered by the non-terrorist terrorist threat, as well as the invasive “security measures” that will be required to pretend to combat it. Fear, as ever, will be the watchword. Everyone will need to do their part to assist the authorities in identifying, indefinitely detaining, and enhanced-interrogating potential non-terrorist terrorist suspects, and anyone else who looks kind of fishy. Let’s take a look at how that will work.

How to Spot a Non-Terrorist Terrorist

The non-terrorist terrorist is difficult to identify and place on a secret government watch-list as he exhibits few — and sometimes none — of the characteristics of the conventional terrorist. Whereas the conventional terrorist is typically a devout Muslim, and a member of some notorious terrorist group, like ISIS, Al-Qaeda, or Al-Nusra Front (although the latter may not be terrorists, currently, depending on what’s going on in Syria), the non-terrorist terrorist is usually not at all religious, is not a member of any terrorist group, and has absolutely no connection to Terrorism. This lack of any type of terrorist background, or any other ties to actual Terrorism, given the current restrictive limits imposed on anti-Terror professionals by laws, national constitutions, and the like, effectively renders the non-terrorist terrorist undetainable in advance by government agents, anti-Terror police units, and corporate mercenaries, at least in developed Western countries, so they’re going to need all the help they can get in terms of surveilling and profiling everyone. With that in mind, here are some tips for identifying potential non-terrorist terrorists.

The most important thing to remember is that the non-terrorist terrorist is definitely a Muslim, or at least is vaguely Muslim-looking, or has a Muslim-sounding name. White supremacists, neo-Nazis, heavily-armed fundamentalist Christians, and garden-variety white-skinned criminals, unattractive and dangerous though they may be, do not fall into the Terror category, unless, that is, they blow up something like the Alfred P. Murrah Federal Building, but even that might not count anymore, as it happened before the War on Terror, and … well, once you start calling white people “terrorists,” the distinctions between things get really confusing.

In spite of the fact that he is definitely a Muslim, the non-terrorist terrorist exhibits any or all of an assortment of “non-Muslim behaviors.” He drinks, smokes, abuses drugs, is sexually promiscuous (or aspires to promiscuity), does not attend mosque, rarely prays, and otherwise appears to be just another stressed-out, debt-burdened Western consumer struggling to make sense of late-capitalist society, and to support himself — and, in some cases, his family — with some soul-crushing job at the foreign subsidiary of some global corporation he isn’t even aware of, or as an Uber-driver, or temporary security guard, or with some other type of micro-entrepreneurial activity that’s making his life a living hell, which feeds right into his other cover.

The non-terrorist terrorist often goes to great lengths to create the appearance of having had a long history of psychological and emotional problems. This cover (which the non-terrorist terrorist may begin constructing as early as his late-adolescence) may involve the feigning of a series of nervous breakdowns, or episodes of clinical depression, or suicide attempts, or other such symptoms. Don’t let this “emotionally unstable” act fool you by playing on your empathy for other human beings. If ever in doubt about a disturbed individual, or anyone expressing extremist views, or acting in any way unusual, best to just go ahead and report him, and let the authorities sort it out. You could be dealing with a non-terrorist terrorist in the process of “sudden self-radicalization.”

The “Suddenly Self-Radicalized” Non-Terrorist Terrorist

Unlike the conventional, or “actual” terrorist, the non-terrorist terrorist is often radicalized shortly before the time of his attack, or during his attack, or shortly thereafter. “Radicalization” is a tricky process, which can occur in any number of ways, e.g., over time, in structured settings, but also in purely imaginary ways that only exist in the minds of the terrorists, or the media, or anti-Terrorism experts. In any event, it’s not like the old days, when aspiring terrorists were forced to attend those terrorist training camps out in the desert, and actually get involved with Terrorism. Nowadays all it takes is the Internet, and sincere desire to radicalize yourself.

“Self-radicalization” is a growing problem, and not just among Islamic terrorists. “Radicalism” in any form that opposes or questions global Capitalism, Neoliberalism, and other Western values, is spreading like a mass psychological disorder (see Jonathan Rauch’s recent article in The Atlantic, where he diagnoses the American public’s pathological resentment of the political class). Like the child with Oppositional Defiant Disorder, sometimes even the non-terrorist terrorist — or whatever type of “self-radicalized” person — doesn’t even realize he’s becoming a terrorist, or a non-terrorist terrorist, until it’s too late.

“Self-radicalization” often begins with irrational and inappropriate resentment, which is typically projected onto affluent individuals, major corporations, investment banks, politicians, billionaires, members of the media, or the populations of other countries that happen to be invading or bombing the country of the “self-radicalizing” person in question. This misdirected pathological resentment, if allowed to fester, inevitably leads to the thinking of extremist or terrorist thoughts, which leads to the tweeting of terrorist tweets, and to terrorist Facebook posts, and so on. In no time at all, the self-radicalizing person has transformed into a full-blown non-terrorist terrorist, and is snorting up lines of pulverized Captagon, drawing half-assed ISIS flags on the walls of his apartment with indelible markers, and loading up on weapons at Walmart, or whatever passes for Walmart in his country.

This is just a preliminary check-list of the hallmark features of the non-terrorist terrorist, which the mainstream media will be adding to as The Summer of Fear approaches its climax, and presumably throughout the indefinite future, as the Age of Non-Terrorist Terrorism continues, possibly until the end of Time.

A Word of Warning Regarding Terminology

All right, I know what you’re probably thinking … you’re thinking we’ve finally reached some level of absurdity with this calling people “terrorists” thing where the term completely loses its meaning, and its ability to scare the bejesus out of people. Fortunately, this is not the case. In fact, it’s almost exactly the obverse — the more nonsensical, oxymoronic and utterly meaningless the terms we use to describe the heinous, subhuman enemies (who want to slaughter us because of our freedom) are, the more meaningful, effective and terrifying they are. This is crucial when distinguishing between, for example, our friends in Saudi Arabia and barbarous mad-dog terrorists like ISIS, both of whom chop off people’s heads for crimes like apostasy, idolatry, and adultery … but, of course, the Saudis are not savage terrorists, despite their involvement with the terrorist attacks of September 11, 2001, and … well, you can see the danger here, when you start to actually think about things.

The point is, our new “non-terrorist terrorist” designation should not in any way call into question the widely-acknowledged definition, and constant repetition, of the terms “terrorist,” “Terror,” and “Terrorism,” when applied to terrorists, whether of the “non-terrorist” or “terrorist” type. Terrorism is not a word game, or some specious semiotic construct, or an essentially arbitrary made-up label that can be slapped onto any type of violent activity or ideology we want to demonize. Terrorism is Terrorism. The word means exactly what it means … whatever that might be at this point. You can look it up on the Internet, on Google, or Wikipedia, or whatever.

And as for the “non-terrorist terrorist” designation, let’s not get all freaked out about it and make it any more confusing than it is. We can sit around and argue forever over whether the “non-terrorist terrorist” is a terrorist, but, honestly, where is that going to get us? The simple fact of the matter is, as the adjectival in the term denotes, the non-terrorist terrorist is not a terrorist … nevertheless he is a terrorist, and the fact that he is and is not a terrorist simultaneously defines what he is and makes absolutely no difference at all, at least not within the official narrative.

No, despite what terrorist apologists will tell you, calling some terrorists “non-terrorist terrorists” doesn’t mean they aren’t terrorists, or that there isn’t any such thing as “Terrorism,” except within the simulation of “reality” the global capitalist ruling classes need to maintain to keep the masses entertained and borderline paranoid, as they — i.e., the capitalists, not the masses — transform the rest of the entire planet into a combination shopping mall/labor camp.

If that were true, the “War on Terror” would be nothing but an elaborate farce, a simulacrum that was there to distract us from the sociopolitical and economic dynamics of the historical period we were actually living through … which dynamics might have something to do with something a bit more complex than “Terror,” “Evil,” “Hate,” and other empty but terror-inspiring words like that.

As stressful as things are at the moment, imagine how exhausting that would be … having to think about all that stuff, transnational Capitalism’s ideology, the manufacturing of consensus reality, all the childish narratives we would be being fed moment by moment by the corporate-owned media, and the amount of mental energy it would take to try to resist it on a daily basis … but then, seeing as you’ve made it to the end of this piece, I’m pretty sure you already have.

Anonymous Coward #fundie godlikeproductions.com

For a couple years now, I have been trying to focus on following Christ and really get my walk right. I have been trying to keep focused on God while also being wholly aware of how warped our reality is and the direction that it is heading. Especially around the 2012-2014ish time when it seemed that the occult and Satanism was everywhere and totally in your face 24/7 with music, movies, TV, awards shows, fashion, etc.

Around that time, while also trying to be filled with the Holy Spirit, I noticed that whenever I would go out in society, there would be at least one random stranger giving this weird knowing, creepy and hate filled eyeball roll/stare type thing while passing by on the street. Different races, cultures, genders, ages, etc. It would be the exact same look and actions. It almost seemed like the same spirit or spirits were coming through all of these random people that I had never seen before.

I started to feel paranoid at first and even started to get worked up about the whole "gang stalking" thing and this and that, but I realized that it is just demons pouring out into people and trying to rob peace and joy from people filled with the Holy Spirit. Since they can't do anything directly to attack and harm us, unless God allowed it for some reason, all they can do is try to launch petty little passive aggressive attacks to make us irritated or lose peace.

Does any other Christian have this happen to them?? For me it started around the 2012 time and has continued. I really think that we are super close to prophecies being fulfilled and the Lord coming for us. This world seems totally locked and loaded, primed and ready to be handed over to the Antichrist and the demons for a short season before it is time to baptize it all with fire and start from scratch!

Michael Folmer #pedo attorneygeneral.gov

HARRISBURG- Attorney General Josh Shapiro tonight announced charges against Pennsylvania State Senator Michael Folmer for possession of child pornography. The investigation began as a result of a CyberTip reporting that an electronic service provider, Tumblr, discovered that a user had uploaded an image of child pornography using their application. The investigation led to the home of Michael Folmer in Lebanon, PA. The Office of Attorney General ‘s Child Predator Section, Lebanon City Police Department, and U.S. Department of Homeland Security executed a search warrant on Tuesday and found images of child pornography on the defendant’s phone. The defendant was charged Tuesday evening with Sexual Abuse of Children, Possession of Child Pornography, and Criminal Use of a Communication Facility.
“This defendant serves as a state Senator and was entrusted to honor and represent his community in the Pennsylvania Capitol,” said Attorney General Josh Shapiro. “Tonight, our Office arrested Mr. Folmer for possession of child pornography and charged him with Sexual Abuse of Children, Possession of Child Pornography, and Criminal Use of a Communication Facility. I will continue to say it—no one is above the law, no matter what position of power they hold. I will continue to work to protect children and hold those who abuse them accountable.”
The case will be prosecuted by Senior Deputy Attorney General Christopher Jones. All charges discussed are accusations. The defendant is presumed innocent unless and until proven guilty.

luna404 #psycho reddit.com

[keep in mind that this person identifies as an irl yandere themselves ]

I wonder...

Why is it that people think it is "cool" to fake being a "yandere"? I simply cannot fathom. Have they ever been truly stalked? Have they stalked before? It's a time consuming effort on the stalkers part. And, if you are a stalkee, why seek out such self-destruct behavioral habits?

On a flip note, do the people who purposely seek out a "yandere" to date genuinely believe the "yandere" they found is legitimate? If you found them over a "Yandere Dating Discord/Site/Forum/Ect" - are you honestly in belief that they are real?

As a stalker (with consent), I can tell you with 100% positivity in my words that they would not pursue you the way a "yandere" who chose you on his/her own would.

*Note: I mean no offense, I am simply in disbelief. If this can be rationalized, please help me understand.

Because people are dorks who like to imitate anime?

Hnn. Imitating it is one thing, but some lines should not be crossed. I believe some delude themselves into believing they are truly a "yandere"
The difference, IMO, is the line of reality. If you do such behaviors in real life, you will surely end up in prison eventually.

Gail Horalek #fundie dailymail.co.uk

A Michigan parent wants parts of Anne Frank's prolific diary banned from her daughter's classroom.

Gail Horalek of Northville is upset over Frank's references to her own genitalia in the diary. She says the passages made her daughter uncomfortable and that the school should have requested parental permission before assigning it to students, Patch.com reported.

'It's pretty graphic, and it's pretty pornographic for seventh-grade boys and girls to be reading,' Horalek told the Detroit's Fox affiliate. 'It's inappropriate for a teacher to be giving this material out to the kids when its really the parents' job to give the students this information.'

Horalek is referring to an unabridged version of the diary titled 'Anne Frank: The Diary of Young Girl (The Definitive Edition).'

The version includes passages which had been omitted by Frank's father, Otto Frank, in the first version of the diary that was published in 1947.

The specific passages that upset Horalek's daughter involve Frank's discovery of her vagina.

'There are little folds of skin all over the place, you can hardly find it,' the passage reads. 'The little hole underneath is so terribly small that I simply can't imagine how a man can get in there, let alone how a whole baby can get out!'

Badfish #fundie christianforums.com

[On efforts at tolerance of gay people]

According to the bible homosexuality is an abomination. And as such Christians should oppose any pro gay propaganda or promotion.

There are other orginaztions that can help gays with their problems, and teach them not to flaunt their abomination. Thus reducing hate crimes against gays.

Besides is there enough gay bashing around to warrant gays to produce this kind of unholy propaganda?

As a Christian, we love them, but we do not have to condone or buy into their abominable ungodlike lifestyles.

It is a choice, maybe it's best if they stay in the closet. Their propaganda alone will cause more strife than just letting it be. IMO

luvdemboomers #conspiracy shroomery.org

You would know it if you were a gang stalking target. It's a lot more than just being under surveillance-- that's the tip of the iceburg. Theres a lot of people on youtube that have videos of people at the grocery store saying they are poisoning food, or people yelling at cars, just people acting crazy in general. The people that do the stalking put these videos out there to discredit the legit claims of people being harassed 24/7. When you move, people in the area you move to continue the stalking. This stuff happens everywhere in the country and most of the world. They use slander campaigns and tell lies about the target, but the target is never given an opprotunity to tell his/her side of the story. They will break into your house and move stuff. Cars driving near you will constantly flash their high beams at you. Cars will drive by your house honking several times per day. They do stuff that they think will get to you, but will make you sound crazy if you explain to someone what is happening.

It's damn hard to catch them this is the closest thing to "proof" I have found

Daniel Gollus & Alian Caraang, Beyond Today #fundie #homophobia ucg.org

Daniel Gollus: The rapture doctrine was invented primarily because it wasn’t “popular” to speak of a time when the church would endure such troubles. We are in the last days, nobody disputes that and scripture bares it out. The church today is described as in Revelation, the Laodician church. I have opportunity to visit many churches and we are “clothed in filthy rags” My indictment includes abortion, homosexual marriage and many other atrocities. We as the church body could have prevented all wickedness if we had stood as one voice and voted for right each time these came up. We have not loved one another and walked holy but rather have let wickedness slip in and divide us. The tribulation is for our good. It is because God loves us and is not willing that any should perish. Before HE brings this world to an end HE is going to give us a clear-cut choice. A time of tribulation will purge us as in fire and bring us ALL to a place of repentance and unity. IT IS BECAUSE HE LOVES US! He is most interested in us all making it home. His bride right now is clothed in filthy rags and unable or unwilling to change. God’s very nature is described throughout the whole bible and if studied you can see it.

Allie Vhorn: Hello, Can I add my 2 cents to this debate or argument? First off, without nitpicking the bible/scripture apart, God says that we should not argue amongst each other over these things, and how relevant to our salvation is it? It isn’t. Secondly, I have observed many differences in ‘religious’ beliefs in my years to know that RELIGIOUS beliefs are not of God what so ever. The Catholics believe they are correct in their understandings, the Pentecostals believe this to be true with their interpretations of scripture, and so on and so forth. Have you ever wondered why they’re are so many religions and how they came to be? And what purpose to have so many of they, do they serve anyone other then to cause dissension between men and separate us from God. Not intentionally, but that’s what religion has done, don’t ya know.
Tell me something: what does it matter if the RAPTURE happens or is doesn’t? God has promised us salvation and an eternal place in His kingdom if we believe in His son, believe He died on the cross, and resurrected and is sitting at His Father’s side. People and their religions complicate what is very simple, and miss the point of His dying for us.

Alain Caraang: If its written in the bible it will happen..Don’t mislead people sayin that its a ”false doctrine” this event will happen(Rapture)before the great tribulation otherwise even the believer will suffer from this event. My point exactly, if God added it will Happen wether people believe it or not.

TabooTPEFatherA320 #psycho reddit.com

Cruelty and sadism are things she has to supress very hard in everyday life rather than attributes that she has to force. I learnt very early on in our relationship to never check her browsing history as it's like something out of a slasher movie. I never even knew that "gore porn" was a thing until I met her and I very much wish it was something I didn't know existed. And yes, this is all very weird but it's also the reason she chose me as her life partner. I'm the only person who can moderate her and keep her steady. Over the years I've been slapped, hit, kicked, scratched and worse. It follows a simple pattern. She tells me to do something and if I object or even hesitate for too long then she'll hurt me physically. Usually something quick and sharp like a slap or hard pinch. If I still refuse or, even worse, get angry with her then she'll hurt me so badly I'll be on the floor.If she's feeling particularly forgiving then she'll let me rub myself on her foot or leg to pleasure myself as long as I don't get anything on her if I do manage to get off. This is also the only circumstance where I'm allowed to get pleasure, too, which is her particularly sadistic way of ensuring I allow her to continue this behaviour.

This sounds like something more closely resembling a 24/7 TPE (Total Power Exchange) relationship to me... With the cuckold/ hotwife facet of the relationship simply being an implication/ consequence of such. Unfortunately... I suspect you'll get lots off guidance to "wake up", "leave", etc... Anything but continuing at your/ her present course/ speed, "organically". I suspect you would get more... Relevant advice within reddits such as r/totalpowerexchange (not as active as it should be, IMO) , r/femdomcommunity (expect majority of feedback will be in her favor), and/or r/bdsmcommunity. Best of Success to you... However you choose to define such for yourself (what I suspect is the difficult bit at the moment)... :-)

Carl Herman #conspiracy washingtonsblog.com

The Huffington Post Bloggers Club is offering up to $25,000 for hard evidence that the June 12 Orlando massacre was staged (consider here, here).

The attack fits the same pattern observed dozens of times over the last several years; in particulars, the summary execution of the suspect and disbelief of those who knew him best, including his family.

Yet again, the timing of the attack combined with the demographic of the alleged victims and the demographic of the alleged gunman, dovetail too well with the domestic and geopolitical agendas in Washington. The Orlando shooting is simply perfect for at least six top priorities of the Obama regime:

?push the Gay agenda,
?repeal the Second Amendment,
?justify Orwellian surveillance,

?embolden the police state,
?fan hatred of Muslims,
?intervene on behalf of terrorists in Syria while pretending to fight them,
?distract from the most influential American Muslim of all time: Muhammad Ali.

CH #sexist heartiste.wordpress.com

Single moms produce soyboys and pussyhat sluts.

Single fathers produce warriors and tradwombs for the West.

Don’t you love when science affirms your gut instinct? It’s like, why bother with painstaking methodology and securing grant money when you can just open your door and step outside for a front row view of the world?

THAT MEN HAVE HIGHER AVERAGE LEVELS of social dominance orientation and group-based anti-egalitarianism than women is one of the most thoroughly and consistently validated research findings in contemporary social and political psychology…

…the relative influence of male and female parental figures should influence the general group-based anti-egalitarianism of their children. Specifically, because of the relatively higher level of social dominance orientation and group-based anti-egalitarianism found among men, the greater the overall relative influences of male versus female parental figures, the higher the average level of group-based anti-egalitarianism children would have.

“Social dominance orientation” = a great trait for players and pappies alike.

But how exactly was social dominance orientation measured in this study? This way (fyi left unmentioned but safe to assume: most of the test subjects were White):

This [anti-egalitarian/social dominance orietnation] scale assesses the degree to which one supports or rejects social equality. Because two of these four items specifically refer to race and were also embedded in a series of other questions referring to race and social class (see Sidanius, 1976), this scale has a distinctly group-based flavor. The respondents were asked to indicate the degree to which they agreed or disagreed with each of the following four stimuli: (a) White superiority, (b) racial equality, (c) increased social equality, and (d) social equality. Each response was given on a 7-point scale ranging from 1 (strongly agree) to 7 (strongly disagree). All responses were then coded into the direction of anti-egalitarianism.

That first stimuli goes right for the id, eh? I’ll guess that, paraphrasing, the responses broke down to “men invade, women invite“.

...

Will it be single fatherhood that saves European Christendom? Or will it be single mommyhood that destroys it? The race, so far, is a losing one for Team Patriarchy, but that last lap is where the warriors show their mettle.

Naturally, this paper being the product of social scientists, genetic influence is given no quarter. It could simply be that the issue of single moms inherit their pathological pussyhattery, while the issue of single fathers inherit their tribal protective instincts, and these inheritances get confused for attitudes resulting from the “gendered nature of the family in which one is raised”. Nevertheless, it confirms for everyone who doesn’t have their senses numbed by SJW screeching that there is something intuitively dangerous about ordering one’s society around matriarchy at the expense of patriarchy. You simply can’t entrust your nation and its posterity to the political preferences of women or feminized men.

...

How about we play it safe and orient our society around discouraging single mommery and encouraging Father Knows Best?

Cindy #fundie fresh-hope.com

I have to admit that I was shocked and saddened when watching the Waltons the other night. I just couldn't believe what I was hearing, and it showed me just how far back this push for "tolerance" started.

In this show, Jason Walton was dating a Jewish girl. The girl was confused about her religion and wasn't even sure what it meant to be Jewish. She winds up being all upset and emotional and running off to talk to the new minister at the baptist church the Walton family goes to. (I know I called her a "girl" but she was a woman, full grown and in the army) What shocked me so much was what the minister did. He listened to her (good) and let her get everything off her chest and then proceeded to explain all about Judaism to her and gave her a book that had been given to him by a Jewish Rabbi about Judaism. He then told her that he'd find out where the nearest Temple was so she could start attending there! In the next scene the minister is giving his Sunday sermon which, believe it or not is all about tolerance. He says very proudly that they are "baptists" and the most important thing to remember is that their founder (can't remember the name) had said that any good baptist was tolerant of other religions! Next was a scene of the Waltons at lunch and one of them paraphrases the minister saying that and indicate that as good baptists they should have been proud to help a Jewish person discover their beliefs.

By then I was wavering between anger, disbelief and tears! That minister alone actually picked that girl up out of our Lord's hands and forced her back into a false religion! I'm not at all against helping her understand her roots mind you, but instead of pushing her out the door and into a Temple, why not take the time to explain to her what her Jewish roots are and how wonderful it is and how God entrusted to her people His laws etc and take her from there and show her how God then sent His Son and how she could be saved??? That way she could have understood her roots AND been saved!!!

Instead though, they tossed her to the wolves so she can spend eternity in hell while they all pat themselves on the back for being "good baptists!"

I know...it's only a story, but I'm also sure that it actually happens every day. Hell will be filled with folks because of "good Christians" who were being tolerant.

Laura Wood #racist thinkinghousewife.com

Part of a larger essay on Philp Chism, a black student accused of murdering his high school math teacher:

I have not seen any news reports which include information about Chism’s grades in the class. It seems such an obvious issue. I’m not even sure what kind of math Ritzer was teaching. Was it algebra? Probably. Algebra is typically introduced in ninth grade and it usually separates those who have higher math skills from those who do not. I do not know anything about Chism’s abilities, but the average black is not capable of learning algebra. It involves a level of abstraction that he cannot grasp, through no fault of his own. A major problem with high schools today is that they force blacks to try to learn algebra when they have not yet mastered basic computational skills. This only alienates them and does them absolutely no good. It’s a form of educational malpractice. You can see why black students become angry and drop out in large numbers in ninth grade. The world disregards who they are.

If it was possible to admit this reality, to acknowledge black limitations, Chism might never have been in that class to begin with and never have been enraged by being publicly humiliated by a sweet, conscientious and naive teacher who had no sense of the egotism, pride and aggression lurking in a failing black student in a mostly white school.

righteousdude2 #racist #wingnut baptistboard.com


POOR, poor Ms. Raggedy Top. She believes that the President "put her life at risk?!" I sure hate to break it to little Ms. Omar but the truth of the matter is, her loose lips, and brain dead, half-baked ideas have painted a political target on her back. Her front. Her sides. And every other angle available.​

What the freshman Congressperson needs to learn is to keep her little mouth shut as she observes and gleans from those on all sides of her who have years of valuable experience. By doing this, her native head wrap will one day be full of wisdom, not empty hot air, and in turn she just may become a valuable fixture in Congress, and back home in the district/regain she was elected and entrusted to serve with dignity and hard work.

However, because Ms. Raggedy top has chosen to come out of the gates blasting the President and every other Republican she comes across on her path to Congress, her fate and hopes for a second term may be all but swallowed up by her propensity, to spout sarcastic remarks and half-baked theories meant only to divide and hopefully gain her instant recognition as the greatest thing to come along since the age-old Tootsie Pop sucker. You know the sucker with a soft caramel-chocolate goo in the center of the hardened sucker candy shell. About the only resemblance between Ms. Omar and a Tootsie Pop is her resemblance to the hard-shell candy shell portion of the sucker. You see; many of her constituents are about now feeling like that Tootsie Pop. In that Ms. Omar "suckered" them to vote for her.

However, like that old .................. song, "Time" still could be on her side if she repented of her puffed-up egotistical self, and humbled herself by rolling up her sleeves and working to make her seat in DC

atana #conspiracy dailykos.com

I think PTSD is an example of pathologizing normal human variation and normal responses that happen to be inconvenient or undesirable to TPTB.

PTSD looks like a perfectly sensible Darwinian adaptation conferring hypervigilance on animals who have escaped predators. And human society contains many sorts of predators. Those who have been victimized by human predators and have developed a normal, natural brain response are seen as the "disordered" and "disturbed" ones. The human predators who caused this "disturbance" are neatly off the hook: all the focus is on the "mentally ill" victims, not of human predators, but of this abstract condition called "PTSD".

It sounds to me exactly like rape culture at work: blame the victim and exculpate the rapist/predator.

Memento Moron Award

Dara Horn #sexist nytimes.com

The Men Who Want to Live Forever

Would you like to live forever? Some billionaires, already invincible in every other way, have decided that they also deserve not to die. Today several biotech companies, fueled by Silicon Valley fortunes, are devoted to “life extension” — or as some put it, to solving “the problem of death.”

It’s a cause championed by the tech billionaire Peter Thiel, the TED Talk darling Aubrey de Gray, Google’s billion-dollar Calico longevity lab and investment by Amazon’s Jeff Bezos. The National Academy of Medicine, an independent group, recently dedicated funding to “end aging forever.”

As the longevity entrepreneur Arram Sabeti told The New Yorker: “The proposition that we can live forever is obvious. It doesn’t violate the laws of physics, so we can achieve it.” Of all the slightly creepy aspects to this trend, the strangest is the least noticed: The people publicly championing life extension are mainly men.

Not all of them, of course. In 2009, Elizabeth Blackburn received the Nobel Prize for her work on telomeres, protein caps on chromosomes that may be a key to understanding aging. Cynthia Kenyon, the vice president for aging research at Calico, studied life extension long before it was cool; her former protégée, Laura Deming, now runs a venture capital fund for the cause. But these women are focused on curbing age-related pathology, a concept about as controversial as cancer research. They do not appear thirsty for the Fountain of Youth.

Professor Blackburn’s new book on telomeres couldn’t be clearer. “Does our research show that by maintaining your telomeres you will live into your hundreds?” it says. “No. Everyone’s cells become old and eventually we die.” Ms. Kenyon once described her research’s goal as “to just have a healthy life and then turn out the lights.” Even Ms. Deming, a 23-year-old prodigy who worked in Ms. Kenyon’s lab at age 12, points out that “aging is innately important to us.”

What an immense waste of resources, which will only widen the already huge inequality gap. I sure don't want rich, power-hungry, abusive men...

Few of these experts come close to matching the gaudy statements of the longevity investor and “biohacker” Dave Asprey, who has told journalists, “I decided that I was just not going to die.” Or those of Brian Hanley, a microbiologist who has tested an anti-aging gene therapy he developed on himself, who claimed: “There’s a bunch of things that will need to be done to achieve life spans into at least hundreds of years. But we’ll get there.” Or of the 74-year-old fashion mogul Peter Nygard, who during a promotional clip receives injections of his own stem cells to reverse his aging while declaring: “Ponce de León had the right idea. He was just too early. That was then. This is now.”

I came across Mr. Nygard’s ode to human endurance three years ago while beginning research on a novel about a woman who can’t die, and watching that video allowed me to experience something close to life extension. As Mr. Nygard compared himself to Leonardo da Vinci and Benjamin Franklin while dancing with a bevy of models — or as a voice-over explained, “living a life most can only dream of” — nine minutes of YouTube expanded into a vapid eternity, where time melted into a vortex of solipsism.

At that time I was immersed in caring for my four young children, and this paean to everlasting youth seemed especially stupid. I recall thinking that if this was eternal life, death didn’t seem that bad.

But now, as powerful men have begun falling like dominoes under accusations of sexual assault, that video with its young women clustered around an elderly multimillionaire has haunted me anew. As I recall my discomfort with the proclamations of longevity-driven men who hope to achieve “escape velocity,” I think of the astonishing hubris of the Harvey Weinsteins of the world, those who saw young women’s bodies as theirs for the taking.

Much has been said about why we allowed such behavior to go unchecked. What has remained unsaid, because it is so obvious, is what would make someone so shameless in the first place: These people believed they were invincible. They saw their own bodies as entirely theirs and other people’s bodies as at their disposal; apparently nothing in their lives led them to believe otherwise.

Historically, this is a mistake that few women would make, because until very recently, the physical experience of being a woman entailed exactly the opposite — and not only because women have to hold their keys in self-defense while walking through parking lots at night. It’s only very recently that women have widely participated in public life, but it’s even more recently that men have been welcome, or even expected, to provide physical care for vulnerable people.

Only for a nanosecond of human history have men even slightly shared what was once exclusively a woman’s burden: the relentless daily labor of caring for another person’s body, the life-preserving work of cleaning feces and vomit, the constant cycle of cooking and feeding and blanketing and bathing, whether for the young, the ill or the old. For nearly as long as there have been humans, being a female human has meant a daily nonoptional immersion in the fragility of human life and the endless effort required to sustain it.

Obviously not everyone who provides care for others is a saint. But engaging in that daily devotion, or even living with its expectation, has enormous potential to change a person. It forces one to constantly imagine the world from someone else’s point of view: Is he hungry? Maybe she’s tired. Is his back hurting him? What is she trying to say?

The most obvious cure for today’s gender inequities is to put more women in power. But if we really hope to create an equal society, we will also need more men to care for the powerless — more women in the boardroom, but also more men at the nurses’ station and the changing table, immersed in daily physical empathy. If that sounds like an evolutionary impossibility, well, it doesn’t violate the laws of physics, so we can achieve it. It is surely worth at least as much investment as defeating death.

Perhaps it takes the promise of immortality to inspire the self-absorbed to invest in unsexy work like Alzheimer’s research. If so, we may all one day bless the inane death-defiance as a means to a worthy end.

But men who hope to live forever might pause on their eternal journey to consider the frightening void at invincibility’s core. Death is the ultimate vulnerability. It is the moment when all of us must confront exactly what so many women have known all too well: You are a body, only a body, and nothing more.

Brian Tomasik #fundie reducing-suffering.org

Is There Suffering in Fundamental Physics?

This essay explores the speculative possibility that fundamental physical operations -- atomic movements, electron orbits, photon collisions, etc. -- could collectively deserve significant moral weight

...

As an example, even a metal ball -- like an animal -- could be said to take in inputs (various forces acting on it, conveyed via gauge bosons and gravitons), integrate those inputs (compute the net force magnitude), and act in response (move in the direction of the force). Information integration, feedback loops, and (at least implicit) optimization among choices are seemingly relevant attributes of agent-like minds but are also rampant throughout mundane physics. An electron often "chooses" the path of least resistance, based on integrating signals about the physical landscape where it lies.
A maglev train initially falls downward due to gravity, but then is pushed back up by magnets, leading to a "happy" equilibrium (dare we say "homeostasis"?) position.

The remainder of this essay takes a more abstract view and proposes general reasons why it's plausible that basic physics could be seen to contain suffering -- perhaps enormous amounts of suffering. It then elaborates on how much I care and whether there are practical ways we could ameliorate the situation.

Dr. Thor Templar/IGOS Success Tech #magick #ufo #crackpot #mammon igossuccesstech.org

REBIRTH INTO A NEW LIFE BASED IN GNOSIS & ASCENSION!

CHRIST BUDDHA CONSCIOUSNESS REALIZED!

​SECRET HEALING METHODS & IMMORTALITY!

Want to know all the secrets of mankind and the universe?

Want to master this reality and know what is beyond?

Want to reach the highest state a human can reach?

Want to know everything there is to know?

Want to ascend to the realm above human?

Want to stop the reincarnation process and start future lives
​as a being of pure consciousness?

Want control over this physical world and everything in it?
You have the rare opportunity to learn from Gnosis Master Dr. Thor Templar himself, the wisest human on the planet by audio, in a manner like you are being personally taught by the Gnosis Master himself. In this unique audio format, the Grand Master guides you step-by-step through all the secrets of the ages as well as intergalactic knowledge ONLY he understands and shares in an easy-to-absorb manner. The Gnosis Master is known for taking complicated ideas and wisdom and making them easily comprehensible by all.

​These audios also comes with Next Level Super Sigils to activate the inner abilities you are meant to use for control of the earth plane. This Sigil is printed on the CD and also on the insert that accompanies the CD. The CD is further "masked" with a secret coding system that contacts your higher self to train it directly and empowers you in a short period of time. When used with the Sound Gate Home Model player, you environment can be fulled with Gnosis energy 24/7. This method is only known to the Gnosis Master and comes from Intergalactic Masters that serve as the Gnosis Master's guides.

It is not what you hear and think about; these are common teaching methods left to the fools of the common world. The Gnosis Master speaks to your Soul, your true higher being. Words and thoughts do not matter, it is what you understand and what becomes part of you that matters. This knowledge is carried with you from lifetime to lifetime. Regular knowledge is lost as it should be.

You will learn ALL THE SECRETS OF THE AGES and how it relates to Gnosis, Ascension and the mastering of earth reality both the physical and spiritual. Those that follow the complete teachings manifest ANYTHING they desire! When you KNOW the secrets manifestation is easy and fast! Knowing and Doing can often times be difficult because the lower self/mind blocks you from your true destiny. Each individual must FIGHT for their right to achieve Gnosis and complete control of the physical reality we live in. The process is easier than you think if you are guided by a Gnosis Master of The Intergalactic School of Ultimate Wisdom. The only teacher of this on this plane now and the wisest man alive is Gnosis Master Thor. An opportunity like this only comes ONCE in several lifetimes and often is GONE soon after it appears! Do not delay your opportunity to achieve the highest state of consciousness available to you, taught by one that has achieved it and is living now and teaching others!

This training is the ultimate and seen as a great danger to the negative forces of the universe. They wish to destroy your ability to achieve your highest state of being. As such everything is being done that can be done to stop Gnosis Master Thor, I.G.O.S. and these teachings from reaching the public. Obtain these teachings while you still can! The future of great wisdom has always been endangered, as are those that offer it. ACT NOW! START TODAY ON YOUR GREAT PATH TO ULTIMATE GALACTIC WISDOM AND THE MASTERY OF THE EARTH PLANE!

Gedaliah Braun #racist halcyoninitiative.wordpress.com

[Part 1]

Morality and Abstract Thinking – How Africans may differ from Westerners from Amren.com

I am an American who taught philosophy in several African universities from 1976 to 1988, and have lived since that time in South Africa. When I first came to Africa, I knew virtually nothing about the continent or its people, but I began learning quickly. I noticed, for example, that Africans rarely kept promises and saw no need to apologize when they broke them. It was as if they were unaware they had done anything that called for an apology.

It took many years for me to understand why Africans behaved this way but I think I can now explain this and other behavior that characterizes Africa. I believe that morality requires abstract thinking—as does planning for the future—and that a relative deficiency in abstract thinking may explain many things that are typically African.

What follow are not scientific findings. There could be alternative explanations for what I have observed, but my conclusions are drawn from more than 30 years of living among Africans.

My first inklings about what may be a deficiency in abstract thinking came from what I began to learn about African languages. In a conversation with students in Nigeria I asked how you would say that a coconut is about halfway up the tree in their local language. “You can’t say that,” they explained. “All you can say is that it is ‘up’.” “How about right at the top?” “Nope; just ‘up’.” In other words, there appeared to be no way to express gradations.

A few years later, in Nairobi, I learned something else about African languages when two women expressed surprise at my English dictionary. “Isn’t English your language?” they asked. “Yes,” I said. “It’s my only language.” “Then why do you need a dictionary?”

They were puzzled that I needed a dictionary, and I was puzzled by their puzzlement. I explained that there are times when you hear a word you’re not sure about and so you look it up. “But if English is your language,” they asked, “how can there be words you don’t know?” “What?” I said. “No one knows all the words of his language.”

I have concluded that a relative deficiency in abstract thinking may explain many things that are typically African.

“But we know all the words of Kikuyu; every Kikuyu does,” they replied. I was even more surprised, but gradually it dawned on me that since their language is entirely oral, it exists only in the minds of Kikuyu speakers. Since there is a limit to what the human brain can retain, the overall size of the language remains more or less constant. A written language, on the other hand, existing as it does partly in the millions of pages of the written word, grows far beyond the capacity of anyone to know it in its entirety. But if the size of a language is limited, it follows that the number of concepts it contains will also be limited and hence that both language and thinking will be impoverished.

African languages were, of necessity, sufficient in their pre-colonial context. They are impoverished only by contrast to Western languages and in an Africa trying to emulate the West. While numerous dictionaries have been compiled between Euro­pean and African languages, there are few dictionaries within a single African language, precisely because native speakers have no need for them. I did find a Zulu-Zulu dictionary, but it was a small-format paperback of 252 pages.

My queries into Zulu began when I rang the African Language Department at the University of Witwatersrand in Johannesburg and spoke to a white guy. Did “precision” exist in the Zulu language prior to European contact? “Oh,” he said, “that’s a very Eurocentric question!” and simply wouldn’t answer. I rang again, spoke to another white guy, and got a virtually identical response.

So I called the University of South Africa, a large correspondence university in Pretoria, and spoke to a young black guy. As has so often been my experience in Africa, we hit it off from the start. He understood my interest in Zulu and found my questions of great interest. He explained that the Zulu word for “precision” means “to make like a straight line.” Was this part of indigenous Zulu? No; this was added by the compilers of the dictionary.

But, he assured me, it was otherwise for “promise.” I was skeptical. How about “obligation?” We both had the same dictionary (English-Zulu, Zulu-English Dictionary, published by Witwatersrand University Press in 1958), and looked it up. The Zulu entry means “as if to bind one’s feet.” He said that was not indigenous but was added by the compilers. But if Zulu didn’t have the concept of obligation, how could it have the concept of a promise, since a promise is simply the oral undertaking of an obligation? I was interested in this, I said, because Africans often failed to keep promises and never apologized—as if this didn’t warrant an apology.

A light bulb seemed to go on in his mind. Yes, he said; in fact, the Zulu word for promise—isithembiso—is not the correct word. When a black person “promises” he means “maybe I will and maybe I won’t.” But, I said, this makes nonsense of promising, the very purpose of which is to bind one to a course of action. When one is not sure he can do something he may say, “I will try but I can’t promise.” He said he’d heard whites say that and had never understood it till now. As a young Romanian friend so aptly summed it up, when a black person “promises” he means “I’ll try.”

The failure to keep promises is therefore not a language problem. It is hard to believe that after living with whites for so long they would not learn the correct meaning, and it is too much of a coincidence that the same phenomenon is found in Nigeria, Kenya and Papua New Guinea, where I have also lived. It is much more likely that Africans generally lack the very concept and hence cannot give the word its correct meaning. This would seem to indicate some difference in intellectual capacity.

Note the Zulu entry for obligation: “as if to bind one’s feet.” An obligation binds you, but it does so morally, not physically. It is an abstract concept, which is why there is no word for it in Zulu. So what did the authors of the dictionary do? They took this abstract concept and made it concrete. Feet, rope, and tying are all tangible and observable, and therefore things all blacks will understand, whereas many will not understand what an obligation is. The fact that they had to define it in this way is, by itself, compelling evidence for my conclusion that Zulu thought has few abstract concepts and indirect evidence for the view that Africans may be deficient in abstract thinking.

Abstract thinking

Abstract entities do not exist in space or time; they are typically intangible and can’t be perceived by the senses. They are often things that do not exist. “What would happen if everyone threw rubbish everywhere?” refers to something we hope will not happen, but we can still think about it.

Everything we observe with our senses occurs in time and everything we see exists in space; yet we can perceive neither time nor space with our senses, but only with the mind. Precision is also abstract; while we can see and touch things made with precision, precision itself can only be perceived by the mind.

How do we acquire abstract concepts? Is it enough to make things with precision in order to have the concept of precision? Africans make excellent carvings, made with precision, so why isn’t the concept in their language? To have this concept we must not only do things with precision but must be aware of this phenomenon and then give it a name.

How, for example, do we acquire such concepts as belief and doubt? We all have beliefs; even animals do. When a dog wags its tail on hearing his master’s footsteps, it believes he is coming. But it has no concept of belief because it has no awareness that it has this belief and so no awareness of belief per se. In short, it has no self-consciousness, and thus is not aware of its own mental states.

It has long seemed to me that blacks tend to lack self-awareness. If such awareness is necessary for developing abstract concepts it is not surprising that African languages have so few abstract terms. A lack of self-awareness—or introspection—has advantages. In my experience neurotic behavior, characterized by excessive and unhealthy self-consciousness, is uncommon among blacks. I am also confident that sexual dysfunction, which is characterized by excessive self-consciousness, is less common among blacks than whites.

Time is another abstract concept with which Africans seem to have difficulties. I began to wonder about this in 1998. Several Africans drove up in a car and parked right in front of mine, blocking it. “Hey,” I said, “you can’t park here.” “Oh, are you about to leave?” they asked in a perfectly polite and friendly way. “No,” I said, “but I might later. Park over there”—and they did.

While the possibility that I might want to leave later was obvious to me, their thinking seemed to encompass only the here and now: “If you’re leaving right now we understand, but otherwise, what’s the problem?” I had other such encounters and the key question always seemed to be, “Are you leaving now?” The future, after all, does not exist. It will exist, but doesn’t exist now. People who have difficulty thinking of things that do not exist will ipso facto have difficulty thinking about the future.

It appears that the Zulu word for “future”—isikhati—is the same as the word for time, as well as for space. Realistically, this means that these concepts probably do not exist in Zulu thought. It also appears that there is no word for the past—meaning, the time preceding the present. The past did exist, but no longer exists. Hence, people who may have problems thinking of things that do not exist will have trouble thinking of the past as well as the future.

This has an obvious bearing on such sentiments as gratitude and loyalty, which I have long noticed are uncommon among Africans. We feel gratitude for things that happened in the past, but for those with little sense of the past such feelings are less likely to arise.

Why did it take me more than 20 years to notice all of this? I think it is because our assumptions about time are so deeply rooted that we are not even aware of making them and hence the possibility that others may not share them simply does not occur to us. And so we don’t see it, even when the evidence is staring us in the face.

911 Truth #conspiracy 911truth.org

[Hyperlinks removed]

THE TOP 40
REASONS TO DOUBT THE OFFICIAL STORY OF SEPTEMBER 11th, 2001

… An outline in simple talking points …

We are continuing to compile the best documentation links for every single point on this page, and intend to post the updated version as soon as possible, and create teaching tools and more from the info. This is a significant and time-consuming process–if you have useful links, please send them to janice[at]911truth[dot]org. Thanks for your help!
If you use the search function with title key words, you will discover that 911Truth.org is home to articles backing virtually every point made below. Much of the basic research is available at the Complete 9/11 Timeline (hosted by cooperativeresearch.org), the 9/11 Reading Room (911readingroom.org), and the NY Attorney General Spitzer petition and complaint (Justicefor911.org). For physical evidence discussion, see Point 7.

THE DAY ITSELF – EVIDENCE OF COMPLICITY

1) AWOL Chain of Command
a. It is well documented that the officials topping the chain of command for response to a domestic attack – George W. Bush, Donald Rumsfeld, Richard Myers, Montague Winfield, Ralph Eberhart – all found reason to do something else during the actual attacks, other than assuming their duties as decision-makers.
b. Who was actually in charge? Dick Cheney, Richard Clarke, Norman Mineta and the 9/11 Commission directly conflict in their accounts of top-level response to the unfolding events, such that several (or all) of them must be lying.

2) Air Defense Failures
a. The US air defense system failed to follow standard procedures for responding to diverted passenger flights.
b. Timelines: The various responsible agencies – NORAD, FAA, Pentagon, USAF, as well as the 9/11 Commission – gave radically different explanations for the failure (in some cases upheld for years), such that several officials must have lied; but none were held accountable.
c. Was there an air defense standdown?

3) Pentagon Strike
How was it possible the Pentagon was hit 1 hour and 20 minutes after the attacks began? Why was there no response from Andrews Air Force Base, just 10 miles away and home to Air National Guard units charged with defending the skies above the nation”s capital? How did Hani Hanjour, a man who failed as a Cessna pilot on his first flight in a Boeing, execute a difficult aerobatic maneuver to strike the Pentagon? Why did the attack strike the just-renovated side, which was largely empty and opposite from the high command?

4) Wargames
a. US military and other authorities planned or actually rehearsed defensive response to all elements of the 9/11 scenario during the year prior to the attack – including multiple hijackings, suicide crashbombings, and a strike on the Pentagon.
b. The multiple military wargames planned long in advance and held on the morning of September 11th included scenarios of a domestic air crisis, a plane crashing into a government building, and a large-scale emergency in New York. If this was only an incredible series of coincidences, why did the official investigations avoid the issue? There is evidence that the wargames created confusion as to whether the unfolding events were “real world or exercise.” Did wargames serve as the cover for air defense sabotage, and/or the execution of an “inside job”?

5) Flight 93
Did the Shanksville crash occur at 10:06 (according to a seismic report) or 10:03 (according to the 9/11 Commission)? Does the Commission wish to hide what happened in the last three minutes of the flight, and if so, why? Was Flight 93 shot down, as indicated by the scattering of debris over a trail of several miles?

THE DAY – POSSIBLE SMOKING GUNS

6) Did cell phones work at 30,000 feet in 2001? How many hijackings were attempted? How many flights were diverted?

7) Demolition Hypothesis
What caused the collapse of a third skyscraper, WTC 7, which was not hit by a plane? Were the Twin Towers and WTC 7 brought down by explosives? (See “The Case for Demolitions,” the websites wtc7.net and 911research.wtc7.net, and the influential article by physicist Steven Jones. See also items no. 16 and 24, below.)

FOREKNOWLEDGE & THE ALLEGED HIJACKERS

8) What did officials know? How did they know it?
a. Multiple allied foreign agencies informed the US government of a coming attack in detail, including the manner and likely targets of the attack, the name of the operation (the “Big Wedding”), and the names of certain men later identified as being among the perpetrators.
b. Various individuals came into possession of specific advance knowledge, and some of them tried to warn the US prior to September 11th.
c. Certain prominent persons received warnings not to fly on the week or on the day of September 11th.

9) Able Danger, Plus – Surveillance of Alleged Hijackers
a. The men identified as the 9/11 ringleaders were under surveillance for years beforehand, on the suspicion they were terrorists, by a variety of US and allied authorities – including the CIA, the US military”s “Able Danger” program, the German authorities, Israeli intelligence and others.
b.Two of the alleged ringleaders who were known to be under surveillance by the CIA also lived with an FBI asset in San Diego, but this is supposed to be yet another coincidence.

10) Obstruction of FBI Investigations prior to 9/11
A group of FBI officials in New York systematically suppressed field investigations of potential terrorists that might have uncovered the alleged hijackers – as the Moussaoui case once again showed. The stories of Sibel Edmonds, Robert Wright, Coleen Rowley and Harry Samit, the “Phoenix Memo,” David Schippers, the 199i orders restricting investigations, the Bush administration”s order to back off the Bin Ladin family, the reaction to the “Bojinka” plot, and John O”Neil do not, when considered in sum, indicate mere incompetence, but high-level corruption and protection of criminal networks, including the network of the alleged 9/11 conspirators. (Nearly all of these examples were omitted from or relegated to fleeting footnotes in /11 Commission Report.)

11) Insider Trading
a. Unknown speculators allegedly used foreknowledge of the Sept. 11th events to profiteer on many markets internationally – including but not limited to “put options” placed to short-sell the two airlines, WTC tenants, and WTC re-insurance companies in Chicago and London. See Billions in Pre-911 Insider Trading Profits Leaves a Hot Trail and Criminal Insider Trading leads directly to CIA.
b. Initial reports on these trades, such as Profiting from Disaster and Suspicious Trading, were suppressed and forgotten, and only years later did the 9/11 Commission and SEC provide a partial, but untenable explanation for only a small number of transactions (covering only the airline put options through the Chicago Board of Exchange).
c. In addition, suspicious monetary transactions worth hundreds of millions were conducted through offices at the Twin Towers during the actual attacks. The German firm, Convar, recovered financial data from hard drives recovered from Ground Zero although the Commission published this FBI briefing on trading in which agents expressed a lack of knowledge and doubt about the data recovery long after the data was transmitted to the FBI. Here is an update on Oh the places you go (when you follow the money).
d. See this interview with Bill Bergman who worked at the Chicago Federal Reserve for over 13 years as an economist and financial markets policy analyst. He was fired when he raised concerns about unusual currency transactions pre- 9-11.

12) Who were the perpetrators?
a. Much of the evidence establishing who did the crime is dubious and miraculous: bags full of incriminating material that happened to miss the flight or were left in a van; the “magic passport” of an alleged hijacker, found at Ground Zero; documents found at motels where the alleged perpetrators had stayed days and weeks before 9/11.
b. The identities of the alleged hijackers remain unresolved, there are contradictions in official accounts of their actions and travels, and there is evidence several of them had “doubles,” all of which is omitted from official investigations.
c. What happened to initial claims by the government that 50 people involved in the attacks had been identified, including the 19 alleged hijackers, with 10 still at large (suggesting that 20 had been apprehended)? http://www.chicagotribune.com/news/nationworld/sns-worldtrade-50suspects,0,1825231.story
d. How did they enter the US? Where did they get their VISAS?

THE 9/11 COVER-UP, 2001-2006

13) Who Is Osama Bin Ladin?
a. Who judges which of the many conflicting and dubious statements and videos attributed to Osama Bin Ladin are genuine, and which are fake? The most important Osama Bin Ladin video (Nov. 2001), in which he supposedly confesses to masterminding 9/11, appears to be a fake. In any event, the State Department”s translation of it is fraudulent.
b. Did Osama Bin Ladin visit Dubai and meet a CIA agent in July 2001 (Le Figaro)? Was he receiving dialysis in a Pakistani military hospital on the night of September 10, 2001 (CBS)?
c. Whether by Bush or Clinton: Why is Osama always allowed to escape?
d. The terror network associated with Osama, known as the “base” (al-Qaeda), originated in the CIA-sponsored 1980s anti-Soviet jihad in Afghanistan. When did this network stop serving as an asset to covert operations by US intelligence and allied agencies? What were its operatives doing in Kosovo, Bosnia and Chechnya in the years prior to 9/11?

14) All the Signs of a Systematic 9/11 Cover-up
a. 911Truth.Org broke the story that Airplane black boxes were found at Ground Zero, according to two first responders and an unnamed NTSB official, but they were “disappeared” and their existence is denied in /11 Commission Report.
b. US officials consistently suppressed and destroyed evidence (like the tapes recorded by air traffic controllers who handled the New York flights). NEADS recordings damaged during transcription.
c. Whistleblowers (like Sibel Edmonds and Anthony Shaffer) were intimidated, gagged and sanctioned, sending a clear signal to others who might be thinking about speaking out.
d. Officials who “failed” (like Myers and Eberhard, as well as Frasca, Maltbie and Bowman of the FBI) were given promotions.

15) Poisoning New York
The White House deliberately pressured the EPA into giving false public assurances that the toxic air at Ground Zero was safe to breathe. This knowingly contributed to an as-yet unknown number of health cases and fatalities, and demonstrates that the administration does consider the lives of American citizens to be expendable on behalf of certain interests.

16) Disposing of the Crime Scene
The rapid and illegal scrapping of the WTC ruins at Ground Zero disposed of almost all of the structural steel indispensable to any investigation of the collapse mechanics. (See also item no. 23, below.)

17) Anthrax
Mailings of weapons-grade anthrax – which caused a practical suspension of the 9/11 investigations – were traced back to US military stock. Soon after the attacks began in October 2001, the FBI approved the destruction of the original samples of the Ames strain, disposing of perhaps the most important evidence in identifying the source of the pathogens used in the mailings. Were the anthrax attacks timed to coincide with the Afghanistan invasion? Why were the letters sent only to media figures and to the leaders of the opposition in the Senate (who had just raised objections to the USA PATRIOT Act)? Calls were issued to investigate the investigators.

18) The Stonewall
a. Colin Powell promised a “white paper” from the State Department to establish the authorship of the attacks by al-Qaeda. This was never forthcoming, and was instead replaced by a paper from Tony Blair, which presented only circumstantial evidence, with very few points actually relating to September 11th.
b. Bush and Cheney pressured the (freshly-anthraxed) leadership of the Congressional opposition into delaying the 9/11 investigation for months. The administration fought against the creation of an independent investigation for more than a year.
c. The White House thereupon attempted to appoint Henry Kissinger as the chief investigator, and acted to underfund and obstruct the 9/11 Commission.

19) A Record of Official Lies
a. “No one could have imagined planes into buildings” – a transparent falsehood upheld repeatedly by Rice, Rumsfeld and Bush.
b. “Iraq was connected to 9/11? – The most “outrageous conspiracy theory” of all, with the most disastrous impact.
c. CIA misleads FBI about hijackers in US.

20) Pakistani Connection – Congressional Connection
a. The Pakistani intelligence agency ISI, creator of the Taliban and close ally to both the CIA and “al-Qaeda,” allegedly wired $100,000 to Mohamed Atta just prior to September 11th, reportedly through the ISI asset Omar Saeed Sheikh (later arrested for the killing of Wall Street Journal reporter Daniel Pearl, who was investigating ISI connections to “al-Qaeda.”)
b. This was ignored by the congressional 9/11 investigation, although the senator and congressman who ran the probe (Bob Graham and Porter Goss) were meeting with the ISI chief, Mahmud Ahmed, on Capitol Hill on the morning of September 11th.
c. About 25 percent of the report of the Congressional Joint Inquiry was redacted, including long passages regarding how the attack (or the network allegedly behind it) was financed. Graham later said foreign allies were involved in financing the alleged terror network, but that this would only come out in 30 years.

21) 9/11 Commission:
a. The September 11th families who fought for and gained an independent investigation (the 9/11 Commission) posed 400-plus questions, which the 9/11 Commission adopted as its roadmap. The vast majority of these questions were completely ignored in the Commission hearings and the final report.
b. The membership and staff of the 9/11 Commission displayed awesome conflicts of interest. The families called for the resignation of Executive Director Philip Zelikow, a Bush administration member and close associate of “star witness” Condoleezza Rice, and were snubbed. Commission member Max Cleland resigned, condemning the entire exercise as a “scam” and “whitewash.”
c./11 Commission Report is notable mainly for its contradictions, obvious omissions, distortions and outright falsehoods – ignoring anything incompatible with the official story, banishing the issues to footnotes, and even dismissing the still-unresolved question of who financed 9/11 as being “of little practical significance.”

22) Crown Witnesses Held at Undisclosed Locations
The alleged masterminds of 9/11, Khalid Sheikh Mohamed (KSM) and Ramzi Binalshibh, are reported to have been captured in 2002 and 2003, although one Pakistani newspaper said KSM was killed in an attempted capture. They have been held at undisclosed locations and their supposed testimonies, as provided in transcript form by the government, form much of the basis for /11 Commission Report (although the Commission”s request to see them in person was denied). After holding them for years, why doesn”t the government produce these men and put them to trial?

23) Spitzer Redux
a. Eliot Spitzer, attorney general of New York State, snubbed pleas by New York citizens to open 9/11 as a criminal case (Justicefor911.org).
b. Spitzer also refused to allow his employee, former 9/11 Commission staff member Dietrich Snell, to testify to the Congress about his (Snell”s) role in keeping “Able Danger” entirely out of /11 Commission Report.

24) NIST Omissions
After the destruction of the WTC structural steel, the official Twin Towers collapse investigation was left with almost no forensic evidence, and thus could only provide dubious computer models of ultimately unprovable hypotheses. It failed to even test for the possibility of explosives. (Why not clear this up?)

25) Radio Silence
The 9/11 Commission and NIST both allowed the continuing cover-up of how Motorola’s faulty radios, purchased by the Giuliani administration, caused firefighter deaths at the WTC – once again showing the expendability, even of the first responders.

26) The Legal Catch-22
a. Hush Money – Accepting victims” compensation barred September 11th families from pursuing discovery through litigation.
b. Judge Hellerstein – Those who refused compensation to pursue litigation and discovery had their cases consolidated under the same judge (and as a rule dismissed).

27) Saudi Connections
a. The 9/11 investigations made light of the “Bin Ladin Airlift” during the no-fly period, and ignored the long-standing Bush family business ties to the Bin Ladin family fortune. (A company in which both families held interests, the Carlyle Group, was holding its annual meeting on September 11th, with George Bush Sr., James Baker, and two brothers of Osama Bin Ladin in attendance.)
b. The issue of Ptech.

28) Media Blackout of Prominent Doubters
The official story has been questioned and many of the above points were raised by members of the US Congress, retired high-ranking officers of the US military, the three leading third-party candidates for President in the 2004 election, a member of the 9/11 Commission who resigned in protest, a former high-ranking adviser to the George W. Bush administration, former ministers to the German, British and Canadian governments, the commander-in-chief of the Russian air force, 100 luminaries who signed the “9/11 Truth Statement,” and the presidents of Iran and Venezuela. Not all of these people agree fully with each other, but all would normally be considered newsworthy. Why has the corporate-owned US mass media remained silent about these statements, granting due coverage only to the comments of actor Charlie Sheen?

GEOPOLITICS, TIMING AND POSSIBLE MOTIVES

29) “The Great Game”
The Afghanistan invasion was ready for Bush”s go-ahead on September 9, 2001, with US and UK force deployments to the region already in place or underway. This followed the failure earlier that year of backdoor diplomacy with the Taliban (including payments of $125 million in US government aid to Afghanistan), in an attempt to secure a unity government for that country as a prerequisite to a Central Asian pipeline deal.

30) The Need for a “New Pearl Harbor”
Principals in US foreign policy under the current Bush administration (including Cheney, Rumsfeld, Wolfowitz, Perle and others) have been instrumental in developing long-running plans for worldwide military hegemony, including an invasion of the Middle East, dating back to the Ford, Reagan and Bush Sr. administrations. They reiterated these plans in the late 1990s as members of the “Project for a New American Century,” and stated a clear intent to invade Iraq for the purpose of “regime change.” After 9/11, they lost no time in their attempt to tie Iraq to the attacks.

31) Perpetual “War on Terror”
9/11 is supposed to provide carte-blanche for an open-ended, global and perpetual “War on Terror,” against any enemy, foreign or domestic, that the executive branch chooses to designate, and regardless of whether evidence exists to actually connect these enemies to 9/11.

32) Attacking the Constitution
a. The USA PATRIOT Act was written before 9/11, Homeland Security and the “Shadow Government” were developed long before 9/11, and plans for rounding up dissidents as a means for suppressing civil disturbance have been in the works for decades.
b. 9/11 was used as the pretext to create a new, extra-constitutional executive authority to declare anyone an “enemy combatant” (including American citizens), to detain persons indefinitely without habeas corpus, and to “render” such persons to secret prisons where torture is practiced.

33) Legal Trillions
9/11 triggers a predictable shift of public spending to war, and boosts public and private spending in the “new” New Economy of “Homeland Security,” biometrics, universal surveillance, prisons, civil defense, secured enclaves, security,
etc.

34) Plundered Trillions?
On September 10, 2001, Donald Rumsfeld announced a “war on waste” after an internal audit found that the Pentagon was “missing” 2.3 trillion dollars in unaccounted assets. On September 11th, this was as good as forgotten.

35) Did 9/11 prevent a stock market crash?
Did anyone benefit from the destruction of the Securities and Exchange Commission offices at WTC 7, and the resultant crippling of hundreds of fraud investigations?

36) Resource Wars
a. What was discussed in the Energy Task Force meetings under Dick Cheney in 2001? Why is the documentation of these meetings still being suppressed?
b. Is Peak Oil a motive for 9/11 as inside job?

37) The “Little Game”
Why was the WTC privatized just before its destruction?

HISTORY

38) “Al-CIA-da?”
The longstanding relationship between US intelligence networks and radical Islamists, including the network surrounding Osama Bin Ladin. (See also point 13d.)

39) Historical Precedents for “Synthetic Terror”
a. In the past many states, including the US government, have sponsored attacks on their own people, fabricated the “cause for war,” created (and armed) their own enemies of convenience, and sacrificed their own citizens for “reasons of state.”
b.Was 9/11 an update of the Pentagon-approved “Project Northwoods” plan for conducting self-inflicted, false-flag terror attacks in the United States, and blaming them on a foreign enemy?

40) Secret Government
a. The record of criminality and sponsorship of coups around the world by the covert networks based within the US intelligence complex.
b. Specifically also: The evidence of crime by Bush administration principals and their associates, from October Surprise to Iran-Contra and the S&L plunder to PNAC, Enron/Halliburton and beyond.

REASON NUMBER 41:
RELATED MOVEMENTS AND PARALLEL ISSUES

Ground Zero aftermath movements:
– Justice for the air-poisoning cover-up (wtceo.org)
– “Radio Silence” (radiosilencefdny.com)
– Skyscraper Safety (www.skyscrapersafety.org).

Election fraud and black box voting, 2000 to 2004. (BlackBoxVoting.org)

Lies to justify the invasion of Iraq. (afterdowningstreet.org)

Use of depleted uranium and its multi-generational consequences on human health and the environment.

Longstanding development of contingency plans for civil disturbance and military rule in the USA (See, “The War at Home”)

Oklahoma City Truth movement. (Offline, but not forgotten – May 9, 2008!)

Whether you call it “Globalization” or “The New World Order” – An unsustainable system of permanent growth ultimately requires warfare, fraud, and mass manipulation.

GOING FORWARD …

“But an inside job would involve thousands of people! How could they keep a secret?” Counter-arguments, red herrings, speculations and false information.

Selected essays, books and websites that make the case for 9/11 as inside job. (See Resources)

Demanding a real investigation of the September crimes – Not just a patriotic duty, but a matter of survival.


John W Whitehead #conspiracy newsbud.com

Unaffected by elections. Unaltered by populist movements. Beyond the reach of the law.

Say hello to America’s shadow government.

A corporatized, militarized, entrenched bureaucracy that is fully operational and staffed by unelected officials who are, in essence, running the country, this shadow government represents the hidden face of a government that has no respect for the freedom of its citizenry.

No matter which candidate wins the presidential election, this shadow government is here to stay. Indeed, as recent documents by the FBI reveal, this shadow government—also referred to as “The 7th Floor Group”—may well have played a patt in who will win the White House this year.

To be precise, however, the future president will actually inherit not one but two shadow governments.

The first shadow government, referred to as COG or Continuity of Government, is made up of unelected individuals who have been appointed to run the government in the event of a “catastrophe.” COG is a phantom menace waiting for the right circumstances—a terrorist attack, a natural disaster, an economic meltdown—to bring it out of the shadows, where it operates even now. When and if COG takes over, the police state will transition to martial law.

Yet it is the second shadow government—also referred to as the Deep State—that poses the greater threat to freedom right now. Comprised of unelected government bureaucrats, corporations, contractors, paper-pushers, and button-pushers who are actually calling the shots behind the scenes, this government within a government is the real reason “we the people” have no real control over our government.

The Deep State, which “operates according to its own compass heading regardless of who is formally in power,” makes a mockery of elections and the entire concept of a representative government.

So who or what is the Deep State?

It’s the militarized police, which have joined forces with state and federal law enforcement agencies in order to establish themselves as a standing army. It’s the fusion centers and spy agencies that have created a surveillance state and turned all of us into suspects. It’s the courthouses and prisons that have allowed corporate profits to take precedence over due process and justice. It’s the military empire with its private contractors and defense industry that is bankrupting the nation. It’s the private sector with its 854,000 contract personnel with top-secret clearances, “a number greater than that of top-secret-cleared civilian employees of the government.” It’s what former congressional staffer Mike Lofgren refers to as “a hybrid of national security and law enforcement agencies”: the Department of Defense, the State Department, Homeland Security, the CIA, the Justice Department, the Treasury, the Executive Office of the President via the National Security Council, the Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Court, a handful of vital federal trial courts, and members of the defense and intelligence committees.

It’s every facet of a government that is no longer friendly to freedom and is working overtime to trample the Constitution underfoot and render the citizenry powerless in the face of the government’s power grabs, corruption and abusive tactics.

These are the key players that drive the shadow government.

This is the hidden face of the American police state that will continue long past Election Day.

Just consider some of the key programs and policies advanced by the shadow government that will continue no matter who occupies the Oval Office.

Domestic surveillance. No matter who wins the presidential popularity contest, the National Security Agency (NSA), with its $10.8 billion black ops annual budget, will continue to spy on every person in the United States who uses a computer or phone. Thus, on any given day, whether you’re walking through a store, driving your car, checking email, or talking to friends and family on the phone, you can be sure that some government agency, whether the NSA or some other entity, is listening in and tracking your behavior. Local police have been outfitted with a litany of surveillance gear, from license plate readers and cell phone tracking devices to biometric data recorders. Technology now makes it possible for the police to scan passersby in order to detect the contents of their pockets, purses, briefcases, etc. Full-body scanners, which perform virtual strip-searches of Americans traveling by plane, have gone mobile, with roving police vans that peer into vehicles and buildings alike—including homes. Coupled with the nation’s growing network of real-time surveillance cameras and facial recognition software, soon there really will be nowhere to run and nowhere to hide.

Global spying. The NSA’s massive surveillance network, what the Washington Post refers to as a $500 billion “espionage empire,” will continue to span the globe and target every single person on the planet who uses a phone or a computer. The NSA’s Echelon program intercepts and analyzes virtually every phone call, fax and email message sent anywhere in the world. In addition to carrying out domestic surveillance on peaceful political groups such as Amnesty International, Greenpeace and several religious groups, Echelon has also been a keystone in the government’s attempts at political and corporate espionage.

Roving TSA searches. The American taxpayer will continue to get ripped off by government agencies in the dubious name of national security. One of the greatest culprits when it comes to swindling taxpayers has been the Transportation Security Administration (TSA), with its questionable deployment of and complete mismanagement of millions of dollars’ worth of airport full-body X-ray scanners, punitive patdowns by TSA agents and thefts of travelers’ valuables. Considered essential to national security, TSA programs will continue in airports and at transportation hubs around the country.

USA Patriot Act, NDAA. America’s so-called war on terror, which it has relentlessly pursued since 9/11, will continue to chip away at our freedoms, unravel our Constitution and transform our nation into a battlefield, thanks in large part to such subversive legislation as the USA Patriot Act and National Defense Authorization Act. These laws completely circumvent the rule of law and the rights of American citizens. In so doing, they re-orient our legal landscape in such a way as to ensure that martial law, rather than the U.S. Constitution, is the map by which we navigate life in the United States. These laws will continue to be enforced no matter who gets elected.

Militarized police state. Thanks to federal grant programs allowing the Pentagon to transfer surplus military supplies and weapons to local law enforcement agencies without charge, police forces will continue to be transformed from peace officers into heavily armed extensions of the military, complete with jackboots, helmets, shields, batons, pepper-spray, stun guns, assault rifles, body armor, miniature tanks and weaponized drones. Having been given the green light to probe, poke, pinch, taser, search, seize, strip and generally manhandle anyone they see fit in almost any circumstance, all with the general blessing of the courts, America’s law enforcement officials, no longer mere servants of the people entrusted with keeping the peace, will continue to keep the masses corralled, controlled, and treated like suspects and enemies rather than citizens.

SWAT team raids. With more than 80,000 SWAT team raids carried out every year on unsuspecting Americans by local police for relatively routine police matters and federal agencies laying claim to their own law enforcement divisions, the incidence of botched raids and related casualties will continue to rise. Nationwide, SWAT teams will continue to be employed to address an astonishingly trivial array of criminal activity or mere community nuisances including angry dogs, domestic disputes, improper paperwork filed by an orchid farmer, and misdemeanor marijuana possession.

Domestic drones. The domestic use of drones will continue unabated. As mandated by Congress, there will be 30,000 drones crisscrossing the skies of America by 2020, all part of an industry that could be worth as much as $30 billion per year. These machines, which will be equipped with weapons, will be able to record all activities, using video feeds, heat sensors and radar. An Inspector General report revealed that the Dept. of Justice has already spent nearly $4 million on drones domestically, largely for use by the FBI, with grants for another $1.26 million so police departments and nonprofits can acquire their own drones.

School-to-prison pipeline. The paradigm of abject compliance to the state will continue to be taught by example in the schools, through school lockdowns where police and drug-sniffing dogs enter the classroom, and zero tolerance policies that punish all offenses equally and result in young people being expelled for childish behavior. School districts will continue to team up with law enforcement to create a “schoolhouse to jailhouse track” by imposing a “double dose” of punishment: suspension or expulsion from school, accompanied by an arrest by the police and a trip to juvenile court.

Overcriminalization. The government bureaucracy will continue to churn out laws, statutes, codes and regulations that reinforce its powers and value systems and those of the police state and its corporate allies, rendering the rest of us petty criminals. The average American now unknowingly commits three felonies a day, thanks to this overabundance of vague laws that render otherwise innocent activity illegal. Consequently, small farmers who dare to make unpasteurized goat cheese and share it with members of their community will continue to have their farms raided.

Privatized Prisons. States will continue to outsource prisons to private corporations, resulting in a cash cow whereby mega-corporations imprison Americans in private prisons in order to make a profit. In exchange for corporations buying and managing public prisons across the country at a supposed savings to the states, the states have to agree to maintain a 90% occupancy rate in the privately run prisons for at least 20 years.

Endless wars. America’s expanding military empire will continue to bleed the country dry at a rate of more than $15 billion a month (or $20 million an hour). The Pentagon spends more on war than all 50 states combined spend on health, education, welfare, and safety. Yet what most Americans fail to recognize is that these ongoing wars have little to do with keeping the country safe and everything to do with enriching the military industrial complex at taxpayer expense.

Are you getting the message yet?

The next president, much like the current president and his predecessors, will be little more than a figurehead, a puppet to entertain and distract the populace from what’s really going on.

As Lofgren reveals, this state within a state, “concealed behind the one that is visible at either end of Pennsylvania Avenue,” is a “hybrid entity of public and private institutions ruling the country according to consistent patterns in season and out, connected to, but only intermittently controlled by, the visible state whose leaders we choose.”

The Deep State not only holds the nation’s capital in thrall, but it also controls Wall Street (“which supplies the cash that keeps the political machine quiescent and operating as a diversionary marionette theater”) and Silicon Valley.

This is fascism in its most covert form, hiding behind public agencies and private companies to carry out its dirty deeds.

It is a marriage between government bureaucrats and corporate fat cats.

As Lofgren concludes:

[T]he Deep State is so heavily entrenched, so well protected by surveillance, firepower, money and its ability to co-opt resistance that it is almost impervious to change… If there is anything the Deep State requires it is silent, uninterrupted cash flow and the confidence that things will go on as they have in the past. It is even willing to tolerate a degree of gridlock: Partisan mud wrestling over cultural issues may be a useful distraction from its agenda.

In other words, as I point out in my book Battlefield America: The War on the American People, as long as government officials—elected and unelected alike—are allowed to operate beyond the reach of the Constitution, the courts and the citizenry, the threat to our freedoms remains undiminished.

So the next time you find yourselves despondent over the 2016 presidential candidates, remember that it’s just a puppet show intended to distract you from the silent coup being carried out by America's shadow government.

Anonymous #conspiracy dataasylum.com

What is the Purpose of Chemtrails

Chemtrails are a huge logistical operation. Larger than the hoover damn, trans-alaska pipeline or moon landing. It's large. And expensive. The biggest mistake one can make is assuming there is only one reason for chemtrails. There are about five or six reasons and possibly more. The top six are listed below with a brief summary. This web site is concerned with the last. A visual overview may help by reviewing a flowchart here.

•Blocking the Sun: This is the standard reason given to fools in the government. We need to secretly stop global warming, so keep it a secret that we're spraying. Global warming is the catch all con for everyone in the government. If you're smarter than this they'll give you a better reason.

•Blocking the Sun (Again): A reduction in sun light across the planet works well to decrease or manipulate crop yields slightly. This is part of the requirement to engineer a food crisis and bring in a famine. You can dismiss this.

•Superheating the Atmosphere: In order to create earthquakes and steer hurricanes (for example hurricane Katrina in New Orleans) the atmosphere needs to be more conductive for electricity so installations such as HAARP (HAARP is just what they want you to see, HAARP has nothing to do with anything) can work their magic. So the chemtrails spray barium and aluminum among other things to create a more conductive upper atmosphere. In The Phoenix Rises (2012) they tell you exactly this @ exactly ~16:00 in the movie as they specifically talk about chemtrails. For your information barium has nothing to do with the BioAPI, nano-fibers or nano-tech at all.

•Health Erosion: As a side effect everyone's health and immune systems become slightly compromised. This is usually not an issue for most healthy people. Older people on average will now die sooner and any health complication is slightly more likely to be fatal. This is both a side effect of spraying and intentional.
Climate Modification: To help or hurt crops, keep skies clear for a major event (like the Olympics), cause a typhoon, steer super storms, etc.

•Nano-fiber Propagation: To universally install a BioAPI in everyone they need to spray nano-fibers. These fibers cannot be put into the food supply or given in some other way, the uptake across the population would take forever and not propagate very effectively. It's much easier just to spray everyone like an insect; and because it's happening to everyone the universal herd mentality of the unwashed masses then justifies it.

Nano-fiber Basics

Nano-fibers specifically are a transport mechanism. Nothing more. They hold a payload for delivery. A payload that would otherwise be compromised by the sun or atmosphere or not make it to its destination (your body). Such as viral RNA code, metals such as aluminum, nano-components, etc. The fibers are (surprisingly) quite harmless as everyone has them. Examples of these fibers can be found all over the internet or in the physical examples section of this site. The fibers must be independently sprayed, if they we're added to the jet fuel the extreme heat would destroy the payload.

So it's not the fiber that is critical, it's the payload.

Why?

This is a complicated question. The people creating and doing this are trying to force biblical principles onto the populace (including themselves) through technology. For example the seven deadly sins. They take a basic human requirement (food, sex, a specific emotion) and quantify it (within the BioAPI). If the result is to extreme (for example you eat too much) or you do something not approved of then they decide that you're not worthy of life or judge you accordingly. In the alternative your are added to a program. The possibilities for the BioAPI or nano-tech in general is endless. Therefore you should not focus on any one reason as being the end all purpose. It's too dynamic. It's to complex. As I mentioned on the top of page 5 of the media references - 'the BioAPI is the greatest revelation in human history'. For example see the last paragraph of the description for Vexille (2007), specifically the trailer for H+ mentioned in it. Data Asylum is only giving you one angle of the BioAPI - the nano-tech disease and all the implications that encompass it.

Also see question #9 of the frequently asked questions for a brief explanation on how this (and chemtrails) are (mostly) lawful.

Who?

The same group of people that brought humanity HIV in the late 1970's. Also see FAQ question #15.

BioAPI Phases

There are essentially two phases involved with the installation of the BioAPI. I categorize it as phase 1 and phase 2. If you can imagine a new laptop computer, all it has is the operating system like Windows, so it's kind of useless. This would be the equivalent to phase 1. So a new computer can be remotely controlled (aka phase 1, see Surrogates (2009)) by your IT tech support guy, but that is all. There are no programs installed (provided by phase 2) to do much else with it. These names of a phase 1 and 2 are not necessarily just random nonsense I made up, see the clip and movie for Control Factor (2003) in which they use these exact names in the exact same context; because they are telling you everything.

•Phase 1: Everyone on the planet is affected and involved in this phase. Everyone to some extent has the nano-fibers within their body cavity, and therefore wired ['I'm wired too.' - Michael Hall, Gamer (2009)]. Side effects include a clicking sound from within the skull and basic annoying body complications like aching joints. This phase provides complete remote control of your speech and thought patterns through suggestion (partially subconsciously). I guess about 99% of the populace of the entire planet has this phase complete.

Phase 1 could be construed as positive and beneficial to you, at least in the future. See John Hodgman (2012) for more information. You should also see question 9 of the FAQs.

•Phase 2: This phase must be triggered (by nano-trigger-bots) and is extreme. It completely compromises your health and can do anything from kill you to simply monitor you. This phase cannot be forced onto you like phase 1 (technically it can but they don't do that yet). This involves multiple nano-sensors from ocular to heart and everything in between. I figure about 2% of the population has gone through this phase. If this phase is triggered in you they consider you evil as shown within the media examples page of this site. You must do something to trigger this phase, including eating cheap red meat, kissing specific people, using specific corporate health care/beauty products, etc. The objective they are (partially) reaching for here is to connect each event with a deadly sin of some sort. For example morgellons would be connected with vanity because your skin goes to hell. Ultimately this phase provides complete remote control of your body and mind, including the monitoring of your emotions, thoughts, body functions and everything in between. Phase 2 then can be considered a nano-tech disease (as clearly shown in the Family Guy clip) in which the contagious aspect can be switched on and off. For example I have phase 2, but I am not contagious, but I can be if they decide to make me contagious in some way - typically kissing. This allows them to completely control the transmission/vector or spreading of the nano-disease. If you want to get specific, the nano-tech or nano-implants that compose phase 2 of the BioAPI is actually just the vehicle they use to monitor, torment, test and hurt people. The disease itself is actually one of dishonor. The more dishonor you demonstrate, the more they hate you, the worse things get for you. They do not want people to figure that out. See Meeting Evil (2012) for clear details. Phase 2 can or is definitely detrimental to your life. That is the point of it. A cure can be found in the review for Rise of the Zombies (2012).

You can 100% confirm if you have phase 2 or not by seeing an eye doctor and asking him to look for anomalies exactly where the ocular implant is located. The implant is still a camera and therefore must conform to the laws of physics and optics still so it must, just like your eye has, have a concave lens which it does. You might be able to slightly feel it at night when your falling asleep when your eyes are dryer and you move your eyeball around with your eyes closed. More information on the implant's location is available here.

Also see the clip for Contracted (2013) which specifically covers the contraction of phase 2 and the physical side effects there from. Pretty Dead (2013), no clip provided, also does a good job at covering multiple aspects of the contraction of the nano-tech disease and BioAPI in general, both good and bad. They show a couple triggers (meat and hard drugs) which makes her sick, complete with heavy zombie overtones. They also show a possible positive aspect such as accelerated healing. The entire movie, every scene, becomes like a documentary.

Nano-Fiber and BioAPI Side Effects

•Phase 1 & 2 - Cranium Clicking/Screeching: A phase 1 side effect goes back as early as 2001. Exactly what is happening is not completely known but involves some sort of nano-chip being installed/operated in the cranium (your head) of the host. This is probably the equivalent of a CPU of some sort. The actual clicking/screeching sound observed is usually at night on average once a month and only lasts for a few seconds. Completely painless and easily ignored or passed off by the person. The entire purpose of the movie Shutter Island (2010) is to discount this. The nano-implant that is specifically and clearly responsible for this side effect is symbolically referenced in the second clip for Surrogates (2009). I suspect over time they have improved this side effect.

•Phase 1 & 2 - Aching Joints, Headaches, Fatigue, etc.: The saturation of nano-fibers has different effects on different people. The sheer numbers involved results is a random combination of health implications. Most people will not notice anything, or pass any slight symptom off as getting older. Other people who have more of a reaction will go to the doctor and get diagnosed with fibromyalgia. Fibromyalgia is a catch all disease that was created about a decade ago to give doctors something to tell the patient when they complained. The doctors can't accurate diagnose or understand what or why a patient is feeling a certain way, so the corrupt medical establishment gives them this nonsense to spew. These side effects are primarily phase 1 but are a constant problem across the board. Notice the root word of fibromyalgia is fib[e]r, it's not a coincidence. This Family Guy clip indirectly references Fibromyalgia.

•Phase 2 - Itching: For whatever reason they may force harsh itching on you when they do not agree with what you are doing or how you are behaving. You probably will have no idea it is phase 2 at the beginning. This is shown in Flash of Genius (2008) when they show her typing and zoom in on her hand (@ 44:50 in the movie) when she itches it. She's presumed to be a bad wife for leaving her husband (no clip is provided; screenshot here; you'll have to read this whole site to understand this). The exact same concept is shown in Lay the Favorite (2012) where Bruce Willis itches his forearm clearly and intentionally after referencing it a few seconds earlier (screenshot here). Why? Why would they put that in? I mean millions of dollars are spent on these scripts and production thereto. This happens in real life to countless people around the world all day long, he's being warned. Why? Because in the movie he's thinking about cheating on his wife with the hot blonde that just walked in. In people with phase 2, the BioAPI is monitoring thought and emotional patterns which if conflict triggers an itch; it's automated. For example lust + guilt (because he's married) do not go together. Think Pontypool (2008). So they are judging you (or more accurately people with phase 2 who are pre-targeted). Itching is also shown in Fast Zombies with Guns (2011), as they turn into zombies [contract phase 2 in real life] they itch a lot. Again, why show this? Because it's real. Most targeted individuals will understand the extremely itchy forearm. So itching is not a side effect in the common sense of the term; it is instead intentionally inflected via the BioAPI as reflected in the aforementioned references as well as loosely shown in A Scanner Darkly (2006) @ 0:44 in the clip/trailer.

•Phase 2 - Burning Smell: Phase 2 encapsulates the person's ability to smell, so they can read/write scents. It's used to help warp the reality of someone they have specifically targeted (aka Black Limousine (2010)). When inhaling or specifically exhaling quickly its often a burning/smoke smell that is noticed. This is an unwanted side effect - or more accurately to encapsulate any neuron in the body involved in sensing (for example, smell, taste, etc.) there ends up being be some minor side effect. Interestingly when I cry the smell is amplified and it smells like buttered popcorn of all things. An example of how the media discounts this is demonstrated in the movie Bandits (2001).

•Phase 2 - The Left Eye: One of the concepts they push in the movies is the left eye is evil for some reason. Or to a lesser extent use the eye as a gateway to demonstrate functionality such as with Technotise (2009) or Gamer (2009). In phase 2 an actual nano-camera will be installed in the left eye. People with this might comment on how they feel like there's a small bump in their eye under slightly drier conditions such as when going to sleep at night. This is documented in the physical example page. Note if you figure out you have a camera in the left eye they will probably install something in the right eye too. Clips referencing this concept are now available here, here and here and now also Doomsday Book (2012).

•Phase 2 - Permanent Metallic Taste: Some people will comment on a metallic taste in the mouth. Typically when going to sleep it becomes prevalent. In the alternative, the temporary compromising of taste buds is shown in the clip for Contracted (2013) @ 2:18. It is not a side effect of medication, that's the typical response a doctor will give you. If you are not on medication and otherwise completely healthy and all of a sudden have a permanent metallic taste in your mouth, you are being recorded (but not watched) 24/7 as per the trailer for A Scanner Darkly (2006).

•Phase 2 - Morgellons: Morgellon's can strike anyone. It's a direct problem from the nano-fibers, whether intentional or accidental. The body's immune system can't see or recognize the fibers at all. So when the body can't accept the fibers anymore it beings to push them out through the skin. But the skin is a barrier because the fibers are too large. So the skin breaks up which is why people get lesions. Note that technically everyone has morgellons (nano-fibers), the actual mogellon's symptoms are when the person's body tries to get rid of them the only way possible. Some more conclusions can be seen here and examples within media references including this.

Chemtrail nano-Fiber Examples and Evidence

Ultimately you need some proof. This is very difficult, as we all don't exactly have nano-tech labs in our basements. The only thing possible at this point in time is to put out the physical evidence that is known and back it up with media/movie supporting clips. A complete list of unbelievable things this technology can do is listed here, also make sure you see the real life body & mind control examples in Media References.

Unknown #conspiracy dataasylum.com

In 1999 the world changed. The money trust, the law (commerical code/contract law, applicability of public/statutory presumptions, etc.), technology (nano-tech), and the general direction of the planet completely changed. In order to even remotely grasp what is happening you must disconnect your mind from the last century's way of thinking. Failure to change the way you think will preclude you from seeing reality accurately. There is no money anymore, taxes are a thing of the past and no written law applies to you.

So what we now have is a real brave new world. The purpose of this site is to simply show the extent at which they have leveraged nano-technology directly on you, how they control everyone on demand with it, and end the confusion around the subject of chemtrails and how they fit into the larger picture while showing how the media and movies are conditioning the mind of the general public.


Let's just get right to it. Forget everything you know. Here it is, the epitome of reality. This video is the best example that summarizes what's happening or has happened in your body already. This is the most prevalent secret in the whole world because it has been forced onto everyone unknowingly.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=JBGF98rAcGQ

What you see here is a nano-bot encapsulating a neuron or synapse (for example your purkinje neurons) or other nerve ending/bridge. It's only a simulation, but accurately summaries everything that has happened in the past decade. This allows complete control of the host (your body) remotely as demonstrated repeatedly in the movies (for example Metropia (2009), Ultrasonic (2012)). A more sophisticated set of nano-bots would and very well has subsequently allowed for a complete and full BioAPI to be installed without the host (you) even knowing it. If you want to get technical your neurons have been encapsulated, your synapses have been bridged.


The basic idea consists of a set of nano-wires tethered to electronics in the main catheter such that they will spread out in a "bouquet" arrangement into a particular portion of the brain's vascular system. Such arrangement could support a very large number of probes (in the millions). Each n-wire would be used to record, very securely, electrical activity of a single or small group of neurons without invading the brain parenchyma.

Source

Chemtrails are a huge logistical operation. Larger than the hoover damn, trans-alaska pipeline or moon landing. It's large. And expensive. The biggest mistake one can make is assuming there is only one reason for chemtrails. There are about five or six reasons and possibly more. The top six are listed below with a brief summary. This web site is concerned with the last. A visual overview may help by reviewing a flowchart here.
Blocking the Sun: This is the standard reason given to fools in the government. We need to secretly stop global warming, so keep it a secret that we're spraying. Global warming is the catch all con for everyone in the government. If you're smarter than this they'll give you a better reason.
Blocking the Sun (Again): A reduction in sun light across the planet works well to decrease or manipulate crop yields slightly. This is part of the requirement to engineer a food crisis and bring in a famine. You can dismiss this.
Superheating the Atmosphere: In order to create earthquakes and steer hurricanes (for example hurricane Katrina in New Orleans) the atmosphere needs to be more conductive for electricity so installations such as HAARP (HAARP is just what they want you to see, HAARP has nothing to do with anything) can work their magic. So the chemtrails spray barium and aluminum among other things to create a more conductive upper atmosphere. In The Phoenix Rises (2012) they tell you exactly this @ exactly ~16:00 in the movie as they specifically talk about chemtrails. For your information barium has nothing to do with the BioAPI, nano-fibers or nano-tech at all.
Health Erosion: As a side effect everyone's health and immune systems become slightly compromised. This is usually not an issue for most healthy people. Older people on average will now die sooner and any health complication is slightly more likely to be fatal. This is both a side effect of spraying and intentional.
Climate Modification: To help or hurt crops, keep skies clear for a major event (like the Olympics), cause a typhoon, steer super storms, etc.
Nano-fiber Propagation: To universally install a BioAPI in everyone they need to spray nano-fibers. These fibers cannot be put into the food supply or given in some other way, the uptake across the population would take forever and not propagate very effectively. It's much easier just to spray everyone like an insect; and because it's happening to everyone the universal herd mentality of the unwashed masses then justifies it.
Nano-fibers specifically are a transport mechanism. Nothing more. They hold a payload for delivery. A payload that would otherwise be compromised by the sun or atmosphere or not make it to its destination (your body). Such as viral RNA code, metals such as aluminum, nano-components, etc. The fibers are (surprisingly) quite harmless as everyone has them. Examples of these fibers can be found all over the internet or in the physical examples section of this site. The fibers must be independently sprayed, if they we're added to the jet fuel the extreme heat would destroy the payload.

So it's not the fiber that is critical, it's the payload.

This is a complicated question. The people creating and doing this are trying to force biblical principles onto the populace (including themselves) through technology. For example the seven deadly sins. They take a basic human requirement (food, sex, a specific emotion) and quantify it (within the BioAPI). If the result is to extreme (for example you eat too much) or you do something not approved of then they decide that you're not worthy of life or judge you accordingly. In the alternative your are added to a program. The possibilities for the BioAPI or nano-tech in general is endless. Therefore you should not focus on any one reason as being the end all purpose. It's too dynamic. It's to complex. As I mentioned on the top of page 5 of the media references - 'the BioAPI is the greatest revelation in human history'. For example see the last paragraph of the description for Vexille (2007), specifically the trailer for H+ mentioned in it. Data Asylum is only giving you one angle of the BioAPI - the nano-tech disease and all the implications that encompass it.

Also see question #9 of the frequently asked questions for a brief explanation on how this (and chemtrails) are (mostly) lawful.


The same group of people that brought humanity HIV in the late 1970's. Also see FAQ question #15.


There are essentially two phases involved with the installation of the BioAPI. I categorize it as phase 1 and phase 2. If you can imagine a new laptop computer, all it has is the operating system like Windows, so it's kind of useless. This would be the equivalent to phase 1. So a new computer can be remotely controlled (aka phase 1, see Surrogates (2009)) by your IT tech support guy, but that is all. There are no programs installed (provided by phase 2) to do much else with it. These names of a phase 1 and 2 are not necessarily just random nonsense I made up, see the clip and movie for Control Factor (2003) in which they use these exact names in the exact same context; because they are telling you everything.
Phase 1: Everyone on the planet is affected and involved in this phase. Everyone to some extent has the nano-fibers within their body cavity, and therefore wired ['I'm wired too.' - Michael Hall, Gamer (2009)]. Side effects include a clicking sound from within the skull and basic annoying body complications like aching joints. This phase provides complete remote control of your speech and thought patterns through suggestion (partially subconsciously). I guess about 99% of the populace of the entire planet has this phase complete.

Phase 1 could be construed as positive and beneficial to you, at least in the future. See John Hodgman (2012) for more information. You should also see question 9 of the FAQs.
Phase 2: This phase must be triggered (by nano-trigger-bots) and is extreme. It completely compromises your health and can do anything from kill you to simply monitor you. This phase cannot be forced onto you like phase 1 (technically it can but they don't do that yet). This involves multiple nano-sensors from ocular to heart and everything in between. I figure about 2% of the population has gone through this phase. If this phase is triggered in you they consider you evil as shown within the media examples page of this site. You must do something to trigger this phase, including eating cheap red meat, kissing specific people, using specific corporate health care/beauty products, etc. The objective they are (partially) reaching for here is to connect each event with a deadly sin of some sort. For example morgellons would be connected with vanity because your skin goes to hell. Ultimately this phase provides complete remote control of your body and mind, including the monitoring of your emotions, thoughts, body functions and everything in between. Phase 2 then can be considered a nano-tech disease (as clearly shown in the Family Guy clip) in which the contagious aspect can be switched on and off. For example I have phase 2, but I am not contagious, but I can be if they decide to make me contagious in some way - typically kissing. This allows them to completely control the transmission/vector or spreading of the nano-disease. If you want to get specific, the nano-tech or nano-implants that compose phase 2 of the BioAPI is actually just the vehicle they use to monitor, torment, test and hurt people. The disease itself is actually one of dishonor. The more dishonor you demonstrate, the more they hate you, the worse things get for you. They do not want people to figure that out. See Meeting Evil (2012) for clear details. Phase 2 can or is definitely detrimental to your life. That is the point of it. A cure can be found in the review for Rise of the Zombies (2012).

You can 100% confirm if you have phase 2 or not by seeing an eye doctor and asking him to look for anomalies exactly where the ocular implant is located. The implant is still a camera and therefore must conform to the laws of physics and optics still so it must, just like your eye has, have a concave lens which it does. You might be able to slightly feel it at night when your falling asleep when your eyes are dryer and you move your eyeball around with your eyes closed. More information on the implant's location is available here.

Also see the clip for Contracted (2013) which specifically covers the contraction of phase 2 and the physical side effects there from. Pretty Dead (2013), no clip provided, also does a good job at covering multiple aspects of the contraction of the nano-tech disease and BioAPI in general, both good and bad. They show a couple triggers (meat and hard drugs) which makes her sick, complete with heavy zombie overtones. They also show a possible positive aspect such as accelerated healing. The entire movie, every scene, becomes like a documentary.

Neuron example Of course with something as extreme as nanotech being installed within people's body's you would assume there would be health implications and side effects. This is correct and covered on this site. The approach to handle these side effects has been one of "embrace and extend" it's called. There are several examples in the media section that show how the specific side effects listed below are recognized and then associated with something ridiculous or stupid which then discounts the authenticity in the mind of the viewer. In effect convincing the viewer to dismiss a real side effect as being something that's too crazy to be real. Each side effect is dealt with in a media example. Additional technical possibilities are also talked about in the BioAPI details section. Additional side effects related to phase 2 are covered in the clip for Contracted (2013).
Phase 1 & 2 - Cranium Clicking/Screeching: A phase 1 side effect goes back as early as 2001. Exactly what is happening is not completely known but involves some sort of nano-chip being installed/operated in the cranium (your head) of the host. This is probably the equivalent of a CPU of some sort. The actual clicking/screeching sound observed is usually at night on average once a month and only lasts for a few seconds. Completely painless and easily ignored or passed off by the person. The entire purpose of the movie Shutter Island (2010) is to discount this. The nano-implant that is specifically and clearly responsible for this side effect is symbolically referenced in the second clip for Surrogates (2009). I suspect over time they have improved this side effect.
Phase 1 & 2 - Aching Joints, Headaches, Fatigue, etc.: The saturation of nano-fibers has different effects on different people. The sheer numbers involved results is a random combination of health implications. Most people will not notice anything, or pass any slight symptom off as getting older. Other people who have more of a reaction will go to the doctor and get diagnosed with fibromyalgia. Fibromyalgia is a catch all disease that was created about a decade ago to give doctors something to tell the patient when they complained. The doctors can't accurate diagnose or understand what or why a patient is feeling a certain way, so the corrupt medical establishment gives them this nonsense to spew. These side effects are primarily phase 1 but are a constant problem across the board. Notice the root word of fibromyalgia is fib[e]r, it's not a coincidence. This Family Guy clip indirectly references Fibromyalgia.
Phase 2 - Itching: For whatever reason they may force harsh itching on you when they do not agree with what you are doing or how you are behaving. You probably will have no idea it is phase 2 at the beginning. This is shown in Flash of Genius (2008) when they show her typing and zoom in on her hand (@ 44:50 in the movie) when she itches it. She's presumed to be a bad wife for leaving her husband (no clip is provided; screenshot here; you'll have to read this whole site to understand this). The exact same concept is shown in Lay the Favorite (2012) where Bruce Willis itches his forearm clearly and intentionally after referencing it a few seconds earlier (screenshot here). Why? Why would they put that in? I mean millions of dollars are spent on these scripts and production thereto. This happens in real life to countless people around the world all day long, he's being warned. Why? Because in the movie he's thinking about cheating on his wife with the hot blonde that just walked in. In people with phase 2, the BioAPI is monitoring thought and emotional patterns which if conflict triggers an itch; it's automated. For example lust + guilt (because he's married) do not go together. Think Pontypool (2008). So they are judging you (or more accurately people with phase 2 who are pre-targeted). Itching is also shown in Fast Zombies with Guns (2011), as they turn into zombies [contract phase 2 in real life] they itch a lot. Again, why show this? Because it's real. Most targeted individuals will understand the extremely itchy forearm. So itching is not a side effect in the common sense of the term; it is instead intentionally inflected via the BioAPI as reflected in the aforementioned references as well as loosely shown in A Scanner Darkly (2006) @ 0:44 in the clip/trailer.
Phase 2 - Burning Smell: Phase 2 encapsulates the person's ability to smell, so they can read/write scents. It's used to help warp the reality of someone they have specifically targeted (aka Black Limousine (2010)). When inhaling or specifically exhaling quickly its often a burning/smoke smell that is noticed. This is an unwanted side effect - or more accurately to encapsulate any neuron in the body involved in sensing (for example, smell, taste, etc.) there ends up being be some minor side effect. Interestingly when I cry the smell is amplified and it smells like buttered popcorn of all things. An example of how the media discounts this is demonstrated in the movie Bandits (2001).
Phase 2 - The Left Eye: One of the concepts they push in the movies is the left eye is evil for some reason. Or to a lesser extent use the eye as a gateway to demonstrate functionality such as with Technotise (2009) or Gamer (2009). In phase 2 an actual nano-camera will be installed in the left eye. People with this might comment on how they feel like there's a small bump in their eye under slightly drier conditions such as when going to sleep at night. This is documented in the physical example page. Note if you figure out you have a camera in the left eye they will probably install something in the right eye too. Clips referencing this concept are now available here, here and here and now also Doomsday Book (2012).
Phase 2 - Permanent Metallic Taste: Some people will comment on a metallic taste in the mouth. Typically when going to sleep it becomes prevalent. In the alternative, the temporary compromising of taste buds is shown in the clip for Contracted (2013) @ 2:18. It is not a side effect of medication, that's the typical response a doctor will give you. If you are not on medication and otherwise completely healthy and all of a sudden have a permanent metallic taste in your mouth, you are being recorded (but not watched) 24/7 as per the trailer for A Scanner Darkly (2006).
Phase 2 - Morgellons: Morgellon's can strike anyone. It's a direct problem from the nano-fibers, whether intentional or accidental. The body's immune system can't see or recognize the fibers at all. So when the body can't accept the fibers anymore it beings to push them out through the skin. But the skin is a barrier because the fibers are too large. So the skin breaks up which is why people get lesions. Note that technically everyone has morgellons (nano-fibers), the actual mogellon's symptoms are when the person's body tries to get rid of them the only way possible. Some more conclusions can be seen here and examples within media references including this.

Ultimately you need some proof. This is very difficult, as we all don't exactly have nano-tech labs in our basements. The only thing possible at this point in time is to put out the physical evidence that is known and back it up with media/movie supporting clips. A complete list of unbelievable things this technology can do is listed here, also make sure you see the real life body & mind control examples in Media References.

Miguel #fundie theantifeminist.com

Ephebophilia (or ‘hebephilia’) is a word commonly bandied about online by individuals wishing to differentiate between men (like themselves), who are attracted towards underage teenagers, and ‘paedophiles’ who are sexually attracted to pre-pubescent children. Of course, the media, and the legal system, makes no such distinction. However, many who would champion the right of men to have sexual relations with girls currently under the age of consent feel strongly that if this distinction was more widely known and accepted then it could facilitate a more reasonable public discussion on the age of consent and the laws and punishments relating to sex with teens. Paedophiles are evil perverts and beyond the pale, but ephebophiles? Well, they are not so very different from the average red-blooded man – they just like their women a little bit younger. Yes, they are suffering from a clinical disorder, as paedophiles are, but it’s not so harmful and they are a lot closer to the normal spectrum than subhuman paedos.

So is ephebophilia a real thing? Does the concept serve any useful purpose in the context of the feminist war upon male sexuality and age of consent issues in particular? And am I just as much as a hebo as some of my former readers who have championed the label in the past, such as ‘Human Stupidity‘?

As regulars will know, I’ve made a point of strongly disavowing the very idea of ephebophilia. There are two good reasons for this.

Firstly, my experience of ‘ephebophiles’ both here and elsewhere online. Self-identified ephebophiles tend to be universally 1/ clearly autistic 2/ tactically clueless 3/ prone to paedocrisy and even 4/ Left-Wing and pro-feminist (obviously some exceptions, such as HS) and certainly ‘anti-misogynistic’.

To put it bluntly, based upon my experience, such people are worse than useless in the fight against the Sexual Trade Union. I’d rather go into battle against an Isis horde with only a dozen disabled, pacifist, transgenders alongside me than these creepy ‘ephebophiles’. Hell, I’d rather take on a handful of Russian Ultras with a thousand English football hooligans to back me up. That’s how pathetic these aspie hebos are when it comes to the street fight we are all in.

Secondly, I see no strategic advantage whatsoever in embracing the label of ephebophilia. ‘Hebos’ are so clueless that they really do believe, in their aspie naivety, that the same hysteric mobs who burn down the homes of pediatricians will take kindly to a group defining themselves by a slightly different Ancient Greek term meaning ‘ perverted love of underage girls with hair and perky breasts’.

Of course, this isn’t quite fair. Ephebophilia means ‘love of youth’ (form the Greek word for youth – ‘hebe’). And the attraction to young post-pubescent girls is indeed normal. The point is, to paedohysterics, a word doesn’t change a thing. David Futrelle, child snuff porn apologist and paedocrite that he is, is right to mock the idea that it could ‘win over’ feminists or the paedo hating population at large. In fact, it could make things very much worse. I have spoken here before of the fact that shows like ‘To Catch a Predator’, and ‘anti-paedophile’ vigilantes such as Stinson Hunter, nearly always target men who are trying to have sex with girls only a little under the age of consent. They never try to entrap real perverts and child molestors.

The reason why we have this insane moral panic over ‘paedophiles’ is not because perverts who molest 5 year old children are hated. It’s because society hates and fears even more the normal men who break age of consent laws by having sex with nubile young teens. Paedocritical men are shouting at the bulge in their pants at the thought of climbing into bed with a sexy 14 year old, and all the legal consequences that would follow for them, and paedohysteric woman (and feminists) are shouting at the millions of men who would not even hide the bulge in their pants and openly pursue teenage girls if it wasn’t for the law, the shaming, and the feminist induced hysteria over ‘paedophilia’.

It is true to an extent that establishing the concept of ephebophilia in mainstream discourse would help to clarify what real paedophilia is and isn’t. Real paedophilia is a psychological perversion involving the sexual preference for pre-pubescent children (in today’s USA, that means girls under the age of 10 or so). But at the same time, I see absolutely no advantage in replacing one clinically defined pathology with another. Anti-feminism is the fight against the feminist suppression and pathologizing of normal male heterosexuality. It is normal for men to be sexually attracted to females who have started puberty and who have the maximum number of fertile years ahead of them.

Ephebophile activists believe they can identify themselves as a group and fight for and eventually win their sexual rights, just as gays (supposedly) did. No they can’t. However, MEN can perhaps reclaim their sexual rights against feminists. Only normal, heterosexual MEN can win in the fight against the war on male sexuality.

With all this said, however, I wouldn’t be honest not to add my own personal experiences over the last couple of years, and describe how they have perhaps enabled me to look at the ‘ephebophile question’ in a new and more nuanced light. For some time I’d largely given up on dating. I was getting older, I was still introverted and awkward around the opposite sex, and in any case, as ‘the Anti-Feminist’ I saw all women as rapists, every one of them limiting male sexuality in order to futher their own selfish sexual ends. Walking down the street and smiling at a pretty jailbait as an act of defiance was the limit of female involvement in my world.

For over two years now I’ve been spending the majority of my time in Eastern Europe. As most readers accept here, Slavic women are much more feminine and better looking than their Anglo counterparts, with Russians at the very apex of the female beauty pyramid. Furthermore, they age rather differently too. Yes, of course any normal man would be attracted to even an average Russian 15 year old girl, but the ‘Manosphere Myth’ that I’ve criticised here in the past regarding peak fertility and women reaching their maximum attractiveness at 21-25 isn’t so implausible when you constantly see such stunningly beautiful long legged slim women in their early twenties all around you.

In Eastern Europe I don’t get the achingly painful sense of regret at seeing a pretty 14 year old girl and thinking that by the time she is legal, she will already be losing her youthful charm and beauty. The fact is, in the UK, and even in countries such as France and Germany, the majority of girls are burnt out, bitter, overweight slags by the time they reach 18. Because of diet, lifestyle, and genetics, even pretty 14 year olds do start to lose it by the time they are off to university. In Eastern Europe, puberty arrives a little later, lasts longer, and everywhere you turn there are 20 year old women who are ravishingly beautiful, have perfect skin, possess the long slim legs of ballerinas, and who wear elegant fashions with a graceful air.

Furthermore, I’ve fallen in love with at least a couple of such specimans. One of them is now 26. I have seen photos of her when she was a teenager and the curious thing is she didn’t look anything special even at 17. By 21 she was modelling, and even now as she approaches her 30’s, I get jealous looks constantly when I am with her, even in a city where HB8s are the norm. Even the likes of Krauser PUA would give me a nod of respect if he saw me with her. Look closely and she has crow feet developing around her eyes. Her skin is no longer perfect. But if I could re-wind time I would not wish her any younger than 21. And it’s not down to make-up either. I have seen her without, and she is still beautiful, and more beautiful than she was when she was a schoolgirl.

Another of my girlfriends is 20, and very pretty. She still looks like a teen, and even behaves like one in many ways, though thankfully more in a cute than insufferable manner. Although beautiful, I do not recieve so many jealous looks when I am with her as when I am with the woman who is a good deal older. This girl, I only met recently. I have seen photos of her when she was 18, and she looked almost perfect. I would have liked to have known her then, and I would still not object to a girlfriend such as her who is 16 or 17. However, in Eastern Europe the age of consent is not such a weighty issue given the mass of beautiful females aged above even 18. And this is probably why paedohysteria is primarily an Anglo-Saxon phenomenon.

So in the light of my experiences, how would I finally appraise ‘ephebophila’? As to whether it is a real thing, I am both more and less inclined to say yes. Despite my disavowal of the term here in the past, I somewhat suspected that I might be ‘a little different’ to the average man. Not just in being honest about attraction to young teenagers, but perhaps more strongly attracted than most. Although partly right, I think I had simply fallen into the same mistake that I’d rightly accused self-identified ‘ephebophiles‘ of making. The honesty to accept that teens are attractive can lead you to identify yourself, even subconsciously, as ‘somebody who is attracted to teenage girls’ and different to other men, and to somewhat ignore the charms of slightly older females. And this is compounded by the disgraceful state of femininity in the Anglo-Saxon world, a world in which the only feminine and loveable girls left are indeed mostly under 18.

If ephebophilia exists, therefore, it is not a clinical disorder, such as real paedophilia is, but rather a situation in a man’s life brought about by feminism and the state of women in the Western world.

And as a badge, it’s still tactically clueless and aspie.

My experiences of falling in love have also altered somewhat my views on ‘normal male sexuality’ in the sense that I now give more value to the merits of sex within a loving relationship. Of course, I am not now claiming that the female monogamous system is ‘right’ for men. I am currently in love with two beautiful women, and I think I have emotional room left for a couple more as well, hehe. All I’m saying is I no longer mock the notion of love, and that sex with love is, after all, something that every man should be able to experience as part of a happy life. I also look at porn less, and so I have to admit, I am closer to Eivind Berge’s view that real relationships are better than fapping. However, I still feel that he doesn’t understand the dangers of giving the slightest credence to feminist arguments against porn. And also, not many men can have girlfriends as good looking as his, and not many men approaching 50, as I am, can walk down the street with a beautiful 20 year old, or a HB9 26 year old, as I can. Porn never stopped me having relationships. Rather, it was a life-saving substitute in fallow times. It also helped to keep the flame of desire alive as I sank into middle-age.

And that thought leads nicely onto a final word regarding my contribution to men’s rights activism and the lack of updates on this blog. Yes, I am in some ways happier and more content than before, and therefore no longer feel the need or have the desire to carry the stress and time commitment of regularly posting articles here. It’s also true that I certainly no longer feel any personal pain at current age of consent laws. I would certainly be satisfied forever more at having relationships with beautiful Slavic girls aged 16 above, or even 18 above. But this certainly isn’t the reason for my lack of involvement in men’s rights. I still maintain that the ‘age of consent’, or more correctly, all the many issues that revolve around it, as part of the wider assault upon male sexuality by feminists, is the leading men’s rights issue. But perhaps I am less inclined to maintain this site, just when I am finding some happiness and sexual satisfaction, to cater to disloyal self-identified ephebophile readers such as the likes of Jon or Human-Stupidity, themselves prone to paedocrisy whenever it suits them.

Sierra Wright #fundie quora.com

WE ARE NOT WRONG. ALLAHS HEAD IS FILLED WITH HATE, AND ENVY, THE DEVIL HAS GRASPED ONTO HIS HEART.

It should be noted that all the facts used by the Christian in the above hypothetical conversation are true. Yes, God is the first cause, the designer of life, the resurrected Christ, the Author of Scripture, and the Savior of Christians. Yet the way these facts are used is not decisive. That is, none of the above arguments really prove that God exists.

Some of the above arguments are very weak: appeals to personal experience, vicious circular reasoning, and appeals to a first cause. While the facts are true, the arguments do not come close to proving the existence of the biblical God. Some of the arguments seem stronger; I happen to think that irreducible complexity and information in DNA are strong confirmations of biblical creation. And predictive prophecy does confirm the inspiration of Scripture. Nonetheless, for each one of these arguments, the atheist was able to invent a “rescuing device.” He was able to propose an explanation for this evidence that is compatible with his belief that God does not exist.

Moreover, most of the atheist’s explanations are actually pretty reasonable, given his view of the world. He’s not being illogical. He is being consistent with his position. Christians and atheists have different worldviews—different philosophies of life. And we must learn to argue on the level of worldviews if we are to argue in a cogent and effective fashion.

The Christian in the above hypothetical conversation did not have a correct approach to apologetics. He was arguing on the basis of specific evidences with someone who had a totally different professed worldview than his own. This approach is never conclusive, because the critic can always invoke a rescuing device to protect his worldview.1 Thus, if we are to be effective, we must use an argument that deals with worldviews, and not simply isolated facts. The best argument for the existence of God will be a “big-picture” kind of argument.

God Doesn’t Believe in Atheists

THE BIBLE TEACHES THAT ATHEISTS ARE NOT REALLY ATHEISTS.

The Bible teaches that atheists are not really atheists. That is, those who profess to be atheists do ultimately believe in God in their heart-of-hearts. The Bible teaches that everyone knows God, because God has revealed Himself to all (Romans 1:19). In fact, the Bible tells us that God’s existence is so obvious that anyone who suppresses this truth is “without excuse” (Romans 1:20). The atheist denies with his lips what he knows in his heart. But if they know God, then why do atheists claim that they do not believe in God?

The answer may be found in Romans 1:18. God is angry at unbelievers for their wickedness. And an all-powerful, all-knowing God who is angry at you is a terrifying prospect. So even though many atheists might claim that they are neutral, objective observers, and that their disbelief in God is purely rational, in reality, they are strongly motivated to reject the biblical God who is rightly angry with them. So they suppress that truth in unrighteousness. They convince themselves that they do not believe in God.2 The atheist is intellectually schizophrenic—believing in God, but believing that he does not believe in God.3

Therefore, we do not really need to give the atheist any more specific evidences for God’s existence. He already knows in his heart-of-hearts that God exists, but he doesn’t want to believe it. Our goal is to expose the atheist’s suppressed knowledge of God.4 With gentleness and respect, we can show the atheist that he already knows about God, but is suppressing what he knows to be true.

Exposing the Inconsistency

BECAUSE AN ATHEIST DOES BELIEVE IN GOD, BUT DOES NOT BELIEVE THAT HE BELIEVES IN GOD, HE IS SIMPLY A WALKING BUNDLE OF INCONSISTENCIES.

Because an atheist does believe in God, but does not believe that he believes in God, he is simply a walking bundle of inconsistencies. One type to watch for is a behavioral inconsistency; this is where a person’s behavior does not comport with what he claims to believe. For example, consider the atheist university professor who teaches that human beings are simply chemical accidents—the end result of a long and purposeless chain of biological evolution. But then he goes home and kisses his wife and hugs his children, as if they were not simply chemical accidents, but valuable, irreplaceable persons deserving of respect and worthy of love.

Consider the atheist who is outraged at seeing a violent murder on the ten o’clock news. He is very upset and hopes that the murderer will be punished for his wicked actions. But in his view of the world, why should he be angry? In an atheistic, evolutionary universe where people are just animals, murder is no different than a lion killing an antelope. But we don’t punish the lion! If people are just chemical accidents, then why punish one for killing another? We wouldn’t get upset at baking soda for reacting with vinegar; that’s just what chemicals do. The concepts that human beings are valuable, are not simply animals, are not simply chemicals, have genuine freedom to make choices, are responsible for their actions, and are bound by a universal objective moral code all stem from a Christian worldview. Such things simply do not make sense in an atheistic view of life.

Many atheists behave morally and expect others to behave morally as well. But absolute morality simply does not comport with atheism. Why should there be an absolute, objective standard of behavior that all people should obey if the universe and the people within it are simply accidents of nature? Of course, people can assert that there is a moral code. But who is to say what that moral code should be? Some people think it is okay to be racist; others think it is okay to kill babies, and others think we should kill people of other religions or ethnicities, etc. Who is to say which position should be followed? Any standard of our own creation would necessarily be subjective and arbitrary.

Now, some atheists might respond, “That’s right! Morality is subjective. We each have the right to create our own moral code. And therefore, you cannot impose your personal morality on other people!” But of course, this statement is self-refuting, because when they say, “you cannot impose your personal morality on other people” they are imposing their personal moral code on other people. When push comes to shove, no one really believes that morality is merely a subjective, personal choice.

Logical Inconsistency

Another inconsistency occurs when atheists attempt to be rational. Rationality involves the use of laws of logic. Laws of logic prescribe the correct chain of reasoning between truth claims. For example, consider the argument: “If it is snowing outside, then it must be cold out. It is snowing. Therefore, it is cold out.” This argument is correct because it uses a law of logic called modus ponens. Laws of logic, like modus ponens, are immaterial, universal, invariant, abstract entities. They are immaterial because you can’t touch them or stub your toe on one. They are universal and invariant because they apply in all places and at all times (modus ponens works just as well in Africa as it does in the United States, and just as well on Friday as it does on Monday). And they are abstract because they deal with concepts.

LAWS OF LOGIC STEM FROM GOD’S SOVEREIGN NATURE; THEY ARE A REFLECTION OF THE WAY HE THINKS.

Laws of logic stem from God’s sovereign nature; they are a reflection of the way He thinks. They are immaterial, universal, invariant, abstract entities, because God is an immaterial (Spirit), omnipresent, unchanging God who has all knowledge (Colossians 2:3). Thus, all true statements will be governed by God’s thinking—they will be logical. The law of non-contradiction, for example, stems from the fact that God does not deny Himself (2 Timothy 2:13). The Christian can account for laws of logic; they are the correct standard for reasoning because God is sovereign over all truth. We can know some of God’s thoughts because God has revealed Himself to us through the words of Scripture and the person of Jesus Christ.

However, the atheist cannot account for laws of logic. He cannot make sense of them within his own worldview. How could there be immaterial, universal, invariant, abstract laws in a chance universe formed by a big bang? Why should there be an absolute standard of reasoning if everything is simply “molecules in motion”? Most atheists have a materialistic outlook—meaning they believe that everything that exists is material, or explained by material processes. But laws of logic are not material! You cannot pull a law of logic out of the refrigerator! If atheistic materialism is true, then there could be no laws of logic, since they are immaterial. Thus, logical reasoning would be impossible!

Laws of Logic

No one is denying that atheists are able to reason and use laws of logic. The point is that if atheism were true, the atheist would not be able to reason or use laws of logic because such things would not be meaningful. The fact that the atheist is able to reason demonstrates that he is wrong. By using that which makes no sense given his worldview, the atheist is being horribly inconsistent. He is using God’s laws of logic, while denying the biblical God that makes such laws possible.

How could there be laws at all without a lawgiver? The atheist cannot account for (1) the existence of laws of logic, (2) why they are immaterial, (3) why they are universal, (4) why they do not change with time, and (5) how human beings can possibly know about them or their properties. But of course, all these things make perfect sense on the Christian system. Laws of logic owe their existence to the biblical God. Yet they are required to reason rationally, to prove things. So the biblical God must exist in order for reasoning to be possible. Therefore, the best proof of God’s existence is that without Him we couldn’t prove anything at all! The existence of the biblical God is the prerequisite for knowledge and rationality. This is called the “transcendental argument for God” or TAG for short. It is a devastating and conclusive argument, one that only a few people have even attempted to refute (and none of them successfully).5

Proof Versus Persuasion

Transcendental Argument

Though the transcendental argument for God is deductively sound, not all atheists will be convinced upon hearing it. It may take time for them to even understand the argument in the first place. As I write this chapter, I am in the midst of an electronic exchange with an atheist who has not yet fully grasped the argument. Real-life discussions on this issue take time. But even if the atheist fully understands the argument, he may not be convinced. We must remember that there is a difference between proof and persuasion. Proof is objective, but persuasion is subjective. The transcendental argument does indeed objectively prove that God exists. However, that does not mean that the atheists will necessarily cry “uncle.” Atheists are strongly motivated to not believe in the biblical God—a God who is rightly angry at them for their treason against Him.

THE ATHEIST’S DENIAL OF GOD IS AN EMOTIONAL REACTION, NOT A LOGICAL ONE.

But the atheist’s denial of God is an emotional reaction, not a logical one. We might imagine a disobedient child who is about to be punished by his father. He might cover his eyes with his hands and say of his father, “You don’t exist!” but that would hardly be rational. Atheists deny (with their lips) the biblical God, not for logical reasons, but for psychological reasons. We must also keep in mind that the unbeliever’s problem is not simply an emotional issue, but a deep spiritual problem (1 Corinthians 2:14). It is the Holy Spirit that must give him the ability to repent (1 Corinthians 12:3; 2 Timothy 2:25).

So we must keep in mind that it is not our job to convert people—nor can we. Our job is to give a defense of the faith in a way that is faithful to the Scriptures (1 Peter 3:15). It is the Holy Spirit that brings conversion. But God can use our arguments as part of the process by which He draws people to Himself.

J. D. Heyes #conspiracy naturalnews.com

Consumer watchdogs say popular toys are secretly spying on your children

(NaturalNews) The Information and Technology Age is exciting for all the helpful changes it has delivered to consumers to make our lives much easier. But with it has come something terrible: The loss of privacy and the ability for Big Brother to keep an eye on all of us 24/7/365—and often in sinister ways.

Consumer watchdog groups say that increasingly sophisticated children’s toys come with the dual ability to spy on families, in essence. As CNN reports, there are a number of children’s dolls that have such capability.

The groups say that two items manufactured by Genesis Toys record conversations, further claiming that the recordings then are uploaded to Nuance Communications, a voice technology company that has as some of its clients the U.S. military, intelligence agencies and law enforcement.

The consumer watchdogs—the Electronic Privacy Information Center (EPIC); the Campaign for a Commercial Free Childhood; the Center for Digital Democracy; and the Consumers Union—have filed a complaint with the Federal Trade Commission in reference to two toys, the My Friend Cayla doll and the i-Que robot. The groups say that the “toys subject young children to ongoing surveillance” while violating privacy and consumer protection statutes.

The complaint adds: “Both Genesis Toys and Nuance Communications unfairly and deceptively collect, use, and disclose audio files of children’s voices without providing adequate notice or obtaining verified parental consent.”
The potential for such devices to be misused is huge

CNN reported further that the two toys are connected to the Internet and allow children to talk to and interact with them. When a child asks one of the toys a question, his or her words are recorded and then converted into text so that answers can be obtained from Google, Wikipedia and Weather Underground. Then those voice recordings are summarily uploaded to Nuance, which is a voice recognition technology.

EPIC and the other consumer groups also state that Nuance then uses the recordings it surreptitiously obtains in order to improve products that it then sells to the Pentagon, the U.S. government and law enforcement agencies. One specific product—Nuance Identifier—works like voice recognition, helping security and intelligence officials search a database of millions of recordings so they can identify criminals by their voices.

The company’s VP of corporate marketing and communications, Richard Mack, told CNN that his firm does not use or sell the voice data collected for any marketing or advertising purposes—as if that is what matters most to unsuspecting parents.

He added that he had not yet received any inquiry from the FTC but that the company would cooperate and respond should that happen.

Toys certainly are not the only products being connected to the “Internet of things” that have privacy advocates worried.
24/7 privacy abuse

As Natural News has reported, consumer groups have also expressed concern over devices like Amazon’s “Echo,” which again is always online and is always listening for the sound of the owner’s voice. Like the dolls, Echo also uses voice recognition to invade privacy, and EPIC, among others, has also been opposed to the devices because they can be so readily misused.

“We are on the trajectory of a future filled with voice-assisted apps and voice-assisted devices,” Forrester Research analyst Fatemeh Khatibloo told the AP. “This is going to require finding the fine balance between creating a really great user experience and something that’s creepy.”

Such devices—toys, ‘household products’ like Echo, and even our “Internet of Things” appliances—can all be secretly tasked by spy agencies, law enforcement or just hackers in order to eavesdrop on our conversations. Besides a blatant violation of the Constitution’s Fourth Amendment privacy protections, our inner most thoughts, secrets, passwords and other closely-held information will be at constant risk of being exposed and/or stolen.

And in the case of the two dolls, that would include abusing the privacy of our children.

Chateau Heartiste #sexist heartiste.wordpress.com

The Sixteen Commandments Of Poon

I. Never say ‘I Love You’ first

Women want to feel like they have to overcome obstacles to win a man’s heart. They crave the challenge of capturing the interest of a man who has other women competing for his attention, and eventually prevailing over his grudging reluctance to award his committed exclusivity. The man who gives his emotional world away too easily robs women of the satisfaction of earning his love. Though you may be in love with her, don’t say it before she has said it. Show compassionate restraint for her need to struggle toward yin fulfillment. Inspire her to take the leap for you, and she’ll return the favor a thousandfold.

II. Make her jealous

Flirt with other women in front of her. Do not dissuade other women from flirting with you. Women will never admit this but jealousy excites them. The thought of you turning on another woman will arouse her sexually. No girl wants a man that no other woman wants. The partner who harnesses the gale storm of jealousy controls the direction of the relationship.

III. You shall make your mission, not your woman, your priority

Forget all those romantic cliches of the leading man proclaiming his undying love for the woman who completes him. Despite whatever protestations to the contrary, women do not want to be “The One” or the center of a man’s existence. They in fact want to subordinate themselves to a worthy man’s life purpose, to help him achieve that purpose with their feminine support, and to follow the path he lays out. You must respect a woman’s integrity and not lie to her that she is “your everything”. She is not your everything, and if she is, she will soon not be anymore.

IV. Don’t play by her rules

If you allow a woman to make the rules she will resent you with a seething contempt even a rapist cannot inspire. The strongest woman and the most strident feminist wants to be led by, and to submit to, a more powerful man. Polarity is the core of a healthy loving relationship. She does not want the prerogative to walk all over you with her capricious demands and mercurial moods. Her emotions are a hurricane, her soul a saboteur. Think of yourself as a bulwark against her tempest. When she grasps for a pillar to steady herself against the whipping winds or yearns for an authority figure to foil her worst instincts, it is you who has to be there… strong, solid, unshakeable and immovable.

V. Adhere to the golden ratio

Give your woman 2/3 of everything she gives you. For every three calls or texts, give her two back. Three declarations of love earn two in return. Three gifts; two nights out. Give her two displays of affection and stop until she has answered with three more. When she speaks, you reply with fewer words. When she emotes, you emote less. The idea behind the golden ratio is twofold — it establishes your greater value by making her chase you, and it demonstrates that you have the self-restraint to avoid getting swept up in her personal dramas. Refraining from reciprocating everything she does for you in equal measure instills in her the proper attitude of belief in your higher status. In her deepest loins it is what she truly wants.

VI. Keep her guessing

True to their inscrutable natures, women ask questions they don’t really want direct answers to. Woe be the man who plays it straight — his fate is the suffering of the beta. Evade, tease, obfuscate. She thrives when she has to imagine what you’re thinking about her, and withers when she knows exactly how you feel. A woman may want financial and family security, but she does not want passion security. In the same manner, when she has displeased you, punish swiftly, but when she has done you right, reward slowly. Reward her good behavior intermittently and unpredictably and she will never tire of working hard to please you.

VII. Always keep two in the kitty

Never allow yourself to be a “kept man”. A man with options is a man without need. It builds confidence and encourages boldness with women if there is another woman, a safety net, to catch you in case you slip and risk a breakup, divorce, or a lost prospect, leading to loneliness and a grinding dry spell. A woman knows once she has slept with a man she has abdicated a measure of her power; when she has fallen in love with him she has surrendered nearly all of it. But love is ephemeral and with time she may rediscover her power and threaten to leave you. It is her final trump card. Withdrawing all her love and all her body in an instant will rend your soul if you are faced with contemplating the empty abyss alone. Knowing there is another you can turn to for affection will fortify your will and satisfy your manhood.

VIII. Say you’re sorry only when absolutely necessary

Do not say you’re sorry for every wrong thing you do. It is a posture of submission that no man should reflexively adopt, no matter how alpha he is. Apologizing increases the demand for more apologies. She will come to expect your contrition, like a cat expects its meal at a set time each day. And then your value will lower in her eyes. Instead, if you have done something wrong, you should acknowledge your guilt in a glancing way without resorting to the actual words “I’m sorry.” Pull the Bill Clinton maneuver and say “Mistakes were made” or tell her you “feel bad” about what you did. You are granted two freebie “I’m sorry”s for the life of your relationship; use them wisely.

IX. Connect with her emotions

Set yourself apart from other men and connect with a woman’s emotional landscape. Her mind is an alien world that requires deft navigation to reach your rendevous. Frolic in the surf of emotions rather than the arid desert of logic. Be playful. Employ all your senses. Describe in lush detail scenarios to set her heart afire. Give your feelings freedom to roam. ROAM. Yes, that is a good word. You’re not on a linear path with her. You are ROAMING all over, taking her on an adventure. In this world, there is no need to finish thoughts or draw conclusions. There is only need to EXPERIENCE. You’re grabbing her hand and running with her down an infinite, labyrinthine alleyway with no end, laughing and letting your fingers glide on the cobblestone walls along the way.

X. Ignore her beauty

The man who trains his mind to subdue the reward centers of his brain when reflecting upon a beautiful female face will magically transform his interactions with women. His apprehension and self-consciousness will melt away, paving the path for more honest and self-possessed interactions with the objects of his desire. This is one reason why the greatest lotharios drown in more love than they can handle — through positive experiences with so many beautiful women they lose their awe of beauty and, in turn, their powerlessness under its spell. It will help you acquire the right frame of mind to stop using the words hot, cute, gorgeous, or beautiful to describe girls who turn you on. Instead, say to yourself “she’s interesting” or “she might be worth getting to know”. Never compliment a girl on her looks, especially not a girl you aren’t fucking. Turn off that part of your brain that wants to put them on pedestals. Further advanced training to reach this state of unawed Zen transcendence is to sleep with many MANY attractive women (try to avoid sleeping with a lot of ugly women if you don’t want to regress). Soon, a Jedi lover you will be.

XI. Be irrationally self-confident

No matter what your station in life, stride through the world without apology or excuse. It does not matter if objectively you are not the best man a woman can get; what matters is that you think and act like you are. Women have a dog’s instinct for uncovering weakness in men; don’t make it easy for them. Self-confidence, warranted or not, triggers submissive emotional responses in women. Irrational self-confidence will get you more pussy than rational defeatism.

XII. Maximize your strengths, minimize your weaknesses

In the betterment of ourselves as men we attract women into our orbit. To accomplish this gravitational pull as painlessly and efficiently as possible, you must identify your natural talents and shortcomings and parcel your efforts accordingly. If you are a gifted jokester, don’t waste time and energy trying to raise your status in philosophical debate. If you write well but dance poorly, don’t kill yourself trying to expand your manly influence on the dancefloor. Your goal should be to attract women effortlessly, so play to your strengths no matter what they are; there is a groupie for every male endeavor. Except World of Warcraft.

XIII. Err on the side of too much boldness, rather than too little

Touching a woman inappropriately on the first date will get you further with her than not touching her at all. Don’t let a woman’s faux indignation at your boldness sway you; they secretly love it when a man aggressively pursues what he wants and makes his sexual intentions known. You don’t have to be an asshole, but if you have no choice, being an inconsiderate asshole beats being a polite beta, every time.

XIV. Fuck her good

Fuck her like it’s your last fuck. And hers. Fuck her so good, so hard, so wantonly, so profligately that she is left a quivering, sparking mass of shaking flesh and sex fluids. Drain her of everything, then drain her some more. Kiss her all over, make love to her all night, and hold her close in the morning. Own her body, own her gratitude, own her love. If you don’t know how, learn to give her squirting orgasms.

XV. Maintain your state control

You are an oak tree. You will not be manipulated by crying, yelling, lying, head games, sexual withdrawal, jealousy ploys, pity plays, shit tests, hot/cold/hot/cold, disappearing acts, or guilt trips. She will rain and thunder all around you and you will shelter her until her storm passes. She will not drag you into her chaos or uproot you. When you have mastery over yourself, you will have mastery over her.

XVI. Never be afraid to lose her

You must not fear. Fear is the love-killer. Fear is the ego-triumph that brings abject loneliness. You will face your fear. You will permit it to pass over and through you. And when your ego-fear is gone you will turn and face your lover, and only your heart will remain. You will walk away from her when she has violated your integrity, and you will let her walk when her heart is closed to you. She who can destroy you, controls you. Don’t give her that power over yourself. Love yourself before you love her.

***

The closer you follow the letter of these commandments, the easier you will find and keep real, true unconditional love and happiness in your life.

Best,

Your Lord and King

Brian Tomasik #fundie reducing-suffering.org

The difference between non-player characters (NPCs)in video games and animals in real life is a matter of degree rather than kind. NPCs and animals are both fundamentally agents that emerge from a complicated collection of simple physical operations, and the main distinction between NPCs and animals is one of cognitive and affective complexity. Thus, if we care a lot about animals, we may care a tiny bit about game NPCs, at least the more elaborate versions. I think even present-day NPCs collectively have some ethical significance, though they don't rank near the top of ethical issues in our current world. However, as the sophistication and number of NPCs grow, our ethical obligations toward video-game characters may become an urgent moral topic.

...

If video games can be seen as "real" in a similar way as our own world, what distinguishes video-game characters from real people and animals? I think it comes down to differences in complexity, especially with regard to specific algorithms that we associate with "sentience." As I've argued elsewhere, sentience is not a binary property but can be seen with varying degrees of clarity in a variety of systems. We can interpret video-game characters as having the barest rudiments of consciousness, such as when they reflect on their own state variables ("self-awareness"), report on state variables to make decisions in other parts of their program ("information broadcasting"), and select among possible actions to best achieve a goal ("imagination, planning, and decision making"). Granted, these procedures are vastly simpler than what happens in animals, but a faint outline is there. If human sentience is a boulder, present-day video-game characters might be a grain of sand.

Digital agents using biologically plausible cognitive algorithms seem most likely to warrant ethical consideration. This is especially true if they use reinforcement learning, have a way of representing positive and negative valence for different experiences, and broadcast this information in a manner that unifies different parts of their brains into a conscious collective. Yet, I find it plausible that other attributes of an organism matter at least a little bit as well, such as engaging in apparently goal-directed behavior, having a metric for "betterness vs. worseness" of its condition, and executing complex operations in response to environmental situations. Many NPCs in video games have some of these attributes, at least to a vanishing degree, even if most (thankfully) don't yet have frameworks for reinforcement learning or sophisticated emotion.

...

Especially in RPGs, some NPCs have explicit representations of their "welfare level" in the form of hit points (HP), and the NPCs implement at least crude rule-based actions aiming to preserve their HP. In some turn-based RPGs like Super Mario RPG or Pokémon, an NPC may even choose an action whose sole purpose is to bolster its defenses against damage in subsequent rounds of the battle. The extent of damage may affect action selection. For example, in Revenge of the Titans (source code), drones select a building to target based on a rating formula that incorporates HP damage:

rating = cost * (damage / newTarget.getMaxHitPoints()) * factor * distanceModifier;

Even NPCs without explicit HP levels have an implicit degree of welfare, such as a binary flag for whether they've been killed. NPCs that require multiple strikes to be slain -- for instance, a boss who needs to be struck with a sword three times to die -- carry HP state information not exposed to the user. They also display scripted aversive reactions in response to damage.

And maybe representations of valuation could be seen more abstractly than in an explicit number like HP. In animal brains, values seem to be encoded by firing patterns of output nodes of certain neural networks. Why couldn't we also say that the patterns of state variables in an NPC encode its valuation? Animal stimulus valuation exists because of the flow-on effects that such valuation operations have on other parts of the brain. So why not regard variables or algorithms that trigger flow-on effects in NPCs as being a kind of at least implicit valuation?

Andrew Extein #fundie huffingtonpost.com

Why Queers Should Care About Sex Offenders
By Andrew Extein, MSW


“So, how are the pedophiles doing?”

As a group psychotherapist for convicted sex offenders on parole and probation who also operates a private practice for queer people, I am bombarded with comments and questions from friends and family:

“Aren’t you scared?”

“I could never do that.”

“What’s it like to talk to all those child molesters?”

At first I was surprised to hear some of my most educated, liberal friends ask questions that were, to me, biased and misinformed. I had assumed that, as queers and allies, my friends would have a greater sensitivity to the persecution sex offenders face in American society. I have since come to realize that queer folk are not more prone to find empathy for this population.

I often find myself feeling defensive, and almost guilty, in the line of such questioning. “So... why are you interested in them?” they ask, a look of distaste on their faces.

Here’s the thing: I don’t consider “them” my bizarre, special interest. All queer people are invested in the plight of sex offenders, whether they like it or not.

Deviance and the Dangers of Othering

Although I studied many subjects in college, my interest especially aligned with the radical thinking of my queer theories coursework. Queer theory obliterates the idea of good and bad sex and what should and should not be deemed deviant. As such, my courses covered gay history, the timeline of the gay rights movements, queer theory, and the burgeoning transgender studies, as well as genderqueers, kink, sexual fluidity, and asexuality.

But there was a strange silence in these class discussions as well. As my education continued, I began thinking about other people who transgressed cultural norms of sexuality, other people whose sexual desires had been labeled deviant — people who even queer theory courses weren’t talking about. There might be no group more maligned, marginalized, and disconcerting as modern-day America’s “sex offenders.”

In treatment, lawmaking, and cultural discourse, sex offenders are referred to as participating in deviant sexual behavior, having deviant sexual fantasies, and being inherently “deviant” themselves. From one angle, this is true; all sex offenders have deviated from the boundaries of one or more laws regarding sex or the body.

But sociologist Joel Best describes the problematic nature of how the term “deviance” is used in our culture. In his book Deviance, he emphasizes that “a deviant label was simply a sign that some groups with power had singled out some acts or conditions for disapproval.” The term means that, according to the rules of a powerful few, something is inherently wrong with you if you are not like everybody else. In other words, deviance becomes a viral social construct that serves as a moral imperative to dictate and intimidate people into behaving.

Queer theory has well documented how those in power have employed the terminology of deviance to oppress queers. In recent history, society has labeled gays, lesbians, and transgender folk as abnormal, problematic, and threatening. Gay men, for instance, threatened to lure, groom, and convert children into the homosexual lifestyle; they were not to be trusted or validated. At one point, they were considered mentally ill and criminal. Sex between consenting adult males was illegal and morally reprehensible and served to mandate a gay man to a mental hospital or jail cell. Gay men and trans people socially congregating in bars, such as at Stonewall, was a valid reason for police to raid, frisk, and arrest mass numbers of them.

This is an important part of history that needs to be retold, to serve as a reminder of what happens when authorities dictate the lives and behaviors of “deviant” populations. In fact, this history is still among us; trans, gay, and queer people are currently arrested and incarcerated at a rate disproportionate to the general population. In this infographic, the Sylvia Rivera Law Project outlines how trans and gender-nonconforming people are at a high risk of incarceration, police harassment, and violence. Despite the existence of these contemporary systems of inequality, I worry that in the era of gay marriage, pinkwashing, and assimilatory LGBT politics, we queers may be forgetting the dangers of othering.

Because there’s no use mincing words here: The same methods historically used by the government to imprison and pathologize homosexuality and gender variation are being used today to justify the extreme marginalization, lifetime institutionalization, and oppression of people who have violated sex laws. Sex offenders are the new queers.

Who Sex Offenders Are and What We Are Doing to Them

There is a widespread assumption that all sex offenders are child molesters, pedophiles, and violent rapists. This is not true. A large spectrum of acts are considered sex offenses. These include public nudity, urinating in public, public masturbation, peeping, photographing or videotaping without consent, consensual sex with a 17-year-old, sexting, and downloading unlawful pornography; many of these acts will put the offender on the public registry. There is no single “type” of sex offender; they can be from any walk of life, and any race, class, gender, or sexuality. They are fathers, mothers, brothers, teachers, and friends.

Let me be clear: I am not advocating for the legitimization of these acts as appropriate. A forceful, coercive, violent sexual assault is not to be tolerated. But I am saying that the public perception of the sex offender, and of the laws violated to become a sex offender, is inaccurate.

It is also important to explain the ramifications of this label. In California, many sex offenders must be publicly profiled for life on the online registry created as a result of Megan’s Law in 2004. In 2006, Jessica’s Law increased the penalties for sex offenders, created a residency restriction of 2,000 feet from parks and schools, and mandated GPS tracking for felony offenders. Chelsea’s Law further tightened the restrictions and increased monitoring.

The Supreme Court recently upheld a law that allows for the indefinite civil commitment of those sex offenders deemed unfit to reenter society. This means that they are placed in a forensic mental hospital for the rest of their lives, or until it is decided that they have been appropriately rehabilitated. Very few of these people have been released from civil commitment.

As a treatment provider for sex offenders, I have seen the effects of these punishments firsthand. One of the main issues faced is homelessness. According to the California Sex Offender Management Board, the number of homeless registrants rose from 88 to 6,012 in the five years after Jessica’s Law was enacted. It is almost impossible to find steady work as a felon, and especially difficult if you are listed on the public registry, photo and all. The sex offenders that I see have been socially ostracized, often by family and friends, and suffer from mental health issues such as depression, anxiety, and post-traumatic stress disorder as a result. GPS units, parole visits, and yearly registration serve as constant reminders of their crimes, their victims, and their newfound labels as deviants with no hope of recovery.

However, it is a misconception that the majority of sex offenders reoffend, as the actual number is around 2 to 5 percent for recidivism from a sex crime. A 2008 study by the California Sex Offender Management Board reports 3.38 percent of sex offenders released in 1997 and 1998 were convicted of a new sex offense in the decade after release. A far larger number reenter the prison system as a result of parole violations, an understandable sum considering the severity and rigidity of parole terms.

The sex offender treatment models currently in use are mostly based in cognitive behavioral therapy, helping offenders reevaluate their thoughts and beliefs and make healthier decisions to reduce risk of reoffense. Despite this good-natured approach, these treatment models still speak of sexual deviance. One manual recommends ammonia aversion therapy, in which the offender repeatedly inhales ammonia while reciting his most “deviant” sexual fantasies. The intended goal — to rid the offender of whatever sexual desire is deemed unhealthy or deviant by the treatment provider — echoes gay conversion therapy methods. If queer theory allows for one’s right to a diversity of sexual desire, shouldn’t we question the “reprogramming” of an offender’s sexual feelings?

The main problem with the ammonia aversion therapy is that it presupposes that the sexual feelings motivate and explain the crime. It assumes that if you rid the sexual desire, then you rid the possibility of criminal sexual activity; sexual feelings are understood as uncontrollable dictators of sexual activity. If a man has sexual feelings for children, it is assumed that he is at a high risk of nonconsensual contact with a child. As such, sex offender treatment emphasizes sexual desire as a motivator for a sex crime over other factors, such as low impulse control, a history of trauma, lack of social support, and emotional instability. “Deviant” sexual desire is thereby equated with criminal sexual activity. This is a dangerous stance, as it heightens paranoia and fear in our culture’s understanding of all abnormal sexual feeling, thought, fantasy, belief, or identity.

Why Queers Should Care

Any queer person should feel a pang of familiarity reading about the vilification of people based on sexual desire. At one point, the idea of the predatory, untamable homosexual was a widely held belief; the very fact that a man would think of desiring another man was reason enough to criminalize his existence. Whether growing up in the early 20th century or the early 21st century, a cultural condemnation of queer desire, affect, and identity is consistently reaffirmed.

While mainstream cultural perception of queer people is shifting, it affirms monogamous sex between married, consenting gay and lesbian adults. Gender variation and other forms of sexual desire and behavior, including heterosexual female desire outside of monogamy, still face condemnation. If queerness is teetering on the edge of what culture says is deviant, othered, or wrong, an alliance across marginalized communities is vital for acquisition and maintenance of civil liberties for all.

I need to emphasize that many sex offenders are queer themselves. Many gay men, lesbians, and trans women are labeled sex offenders as a result of survival sex, prostitution, cruising, and public sex. Many queer people don’t realize the legal risks associated with a number of cultural behaviors that have become somewhat normalized, such as public cruising.

A recent example of criminalizing queer relationships is the case of Kaitlyn Hunt. Kaitlyn is a now-18-year-old girl who is being charged with two counts of lewd and lascivious battery of a child resulting from an allegedly consensual relationship with her 15-year-old girlfriend. The Internet has seen a groundswell of support for Kaitlyn, finding her persecution homophobic, unfair, and misguided. This reaction is certainly warranted and points to a larger issue with age-of-consent legislation. This type of legal action takes place all the time, in all types of communities, resulting in new sex offenders to label, monitor, and vilify. The case of Kaitlyn Hunt should open our eyes to the ways in which sex laws are abused in our country — not just for queers but for everyone.

The people we have labeled sex offenders are a multifarious group, with a wide spectrum of sexual desires. Empathy is needed for the group as a whole to ensure that they do not continue to be the cultural pariahs that we queers, gays, lesbians, bisexuals, and transgender folk once were, and arguably still are. If we allow for the continuation of inhumane imprisonment based on what dominant culture and the government deem “bad sex,” we put ourselves at risk of further condemnation.

Clearly this is a tricky, complex, and imperfect dialogue to be holding. But I fear that if we queers do not engage in conversations about moral gray areas and uncomfortable topics, we put ourselves at risk and lose the fervor, innovation, and critical thinking that once defined queerness.

North Korea #quack web.archive.org

Kumdang-2 injections

[…]

Russian Itar-Tass on Kumdan-2 injections:

• ” PYONGYANG , June 11. / Correspondent . ITAR-TASS Yuri Sidorov / . Attention visitors recently held in the capital of North Korea international trade fair attracted the attention of the immune system stimulant ” Kymdan -2 .” This multifunctional injectable preparation is produced Korean pharmaceutical company ” Pungan .” According to its general manager Chung Sung Hoon , he was in great demand in foreign countries , including Cuba , Syria, Mongolia and Germany. ” Mongolian firm ” Aisha Pharma “- he told reporters , – monthly sells approximately 20 thousand packages ” Kymdan -2 ” not only in their own country but also in neighboring countries . This month , Sung Hoon Chung added , “our Mongolian business partner made ​​a proposal to increase supply.” ” Kumdan -2 ” is intended for the treatment of hepatitis , diabetes, polyps and other diseases , has a detoxifying and anti-inflammatory action , promotes rapid tissue regeneration and strengthening immunity. Korean Ministry of Health says nearly 100 – percent efficiency of this tool that is based on extracts from the famous Kaesong Ginseng / ginseng / grown under special conditions. For maximum healing effect by long scientific research has been developed specially formulated fertilizers for this plant , which included several kinds of amino acids , small doses of gold, platinum and other rare earth elements. Moreover, according to recent surveys of North Korean medics, ” Kymdan -2 ” is effective for the prevention of dangerous infectious diseases such as avian flu and SARS . It also protects tissues from exposure to radiation during radiotherapy. ” Kymdan -2 ” useful during sand storms. ” Channel

2. Unique features of Kumdang-2 Injection

1) Kumdang-2 Injection is a herbal medicine extracted from Kaesong Koryo insam (ginseng) cultivated in Kaesong DPR Korea by applying rare-earth molecular fertilizer. It contains insam saccharides, light rare earth elements, a micro-quantities of gold and platinum.
2) It causes no pain during and after injection.
3) Unlike chemical medicines, it has no adverse side effects.
4) It has no contraindications and can be used together with other medicines.
5) It optimizes the systems of autonomic nerve and self-curing by stimulating hypothalamus, the centre of the autonomic nervous system, functions anti-inflammatory, anti-bacteria and anti-virus, restores the diseased parts t revitalizing and proliferating cells, optimizes immunity, maintains the homoeostasis of the body, and functions anti-oxidant
6) It absorbs or removes all those that have not originally been in human body (e.g. cancer, pathological secretion, etc.) including those of the same cellular tissues as the healthy ones like polyps or some skin diseases.
7) Owing to its healing mechanism, it can cure a large variety of diseases, and its effects instantly emerge vivid and last long.
8) Dosage does not vaiy according to diseases, but alters a little according to the patient’s body weight and severity of the illness.
9) The main purpose of injection is to cure diseases, but it is also good for healthy persons as it invigorates them, optimizes their immunity and makes them more beautiful.
10) It is good for those who have taken chemical medicines like anti-biotics and narcotic drugs and those who have drunken much alcohol because Kumdang-2 Injection prevents, neutralizes or removes all side effects and addiction. In particular, when taking such medicines that entail severe side effects like anti-cancer and anti-TB medicines, it is advisable to apply this injection simultaneously with them so as to prevent their side effects and expedite cure of the diseases.
11) Hitherto, in uses of Kumdang-2 Injection, nobody could find any sign of attachment (love), addiction, intoxication or their similarity of any kind.

3. Notes

1) This being a herbal medicine, it can be administered without punctuality in disregard of the timetable exhibited in the enclosure of its packet. According to the hitherto clinical records, the rate of recovery was higher among its random users than its punctual users.
2) All the patients with clear knowledge of the principles of its dosage have experienced satisfactory effects and 95.5% of them resulted in complete cure.

[…]

5. Contraindications

• No contraindications have been reported. In the period of administration, you need not refrain from drinking or become too sensitive to foods. As no medicines antagonistic to Kumdang-2 Injection have so far been found, you may use Kumdang-2 Injection with any other medicines depending on your conditions.

6. Adverse Effects

• No adverse side effects have been found so far.

[…]

(Submitter’s note: For brevity’s sake, I’ll just post what they claim it cures and omit the paragraphs where they elaborate on the dubious claims.)

• Allergic skin diseases, Ambustion, Chilblain, Engorgement
• Cosmetic Effects
• Diabetes
• Different kinds of inflammation, Fevers of unknown reasons, Loss of appetite
• Disorders before and after child-delivery
• Drug Addiction
• Epidemic diseases including Bird Flu and New Flu, AIDS
• Gastric hemorrhage, Stomach cramp, Diseases of large and small intestines
• Heart Diseases, Arthritis
• Hypotension, Impotence
• Infection, adhesion and scar after medical operation
• Liver disorders caused by alcohol
• Malignant influenza and other kinds of cold
• Medicinal poisoning, Harm from use of computers, Stomatitis
• Neuralgia, Neurosis, Debility, Insomnia
• Pancreatitis, Poisoning by perished food, Thyroid Diseases
• Polyps, Myalgia, Vegetative Neurosis
• Spontaneous Gangrene, Epilepsy
• Sterility caused by undergrowth, Menstrual disorders, Cystitis
• Stimulant to children’s growth, Anti-radioactive
• Treatment Hepatitis А, В, C, D, E, G
• Tuberculosis (ТВ), Uterine and other intestinal hemorrhages
• Various cancers
• Venereal diseases, Resistance to aging

Vincent Cheung #fundie vincentcheung.com

From this biblical teaching, we can then form general interpretations of the various acts of providence, including natural and “man-made” disasters. And we have warrant from Scripture to say that when disasters like hurricanes, tsunamis, and even terrorist attacks occur, killing thousands of people, there is almost always an element of divine punishment. To speak plainly, God kills these people because they are sinners and they deserve to die, and the time is ripe to punish them. Is not this the scriptural teaching? If you reject this, you might as well stop calling yourself a Christian, for your faith rests in yourself and your own opinions, and it is evident that you have no regard for God and Scripture. Then, another intended effect of these disasters is to awaken the elect and to harden the reprobates.

The human element complicates the issue, although not for those who read and affirm Scripture, and who do not become so indignant over the teaching that they can no longer think clearly. What complicates the issue for some is that the very people that God uses to punish sinners are often just as wicked themselves. Scripture has addressed this in numerous places. When God uses the wicked to punish the guilty, he also plans to punish these instruments of his providence at a later time. In fact, God moves them to perform additional acts of wickedness in order to fulfill his own divine decree, which is to cause them to incur even greater wrath against themselves.

This had been demonstrated at various times in Israel’s history. When God’s people fell into sin and idolatry, he would send foreign nations to slaughter and enslave them. But these invaders were themselves subject to God’s wrath, and it is precisely because they slaughtered and enslaved God’s people (propelled by God’s power) that divine judgment soon visited them as well. Consider Israel at the time of Christ. The Son of God came and the Jews murdered him, and said, “Let his blood be on us and on our children!” (Matthew 27:25). God held them to their word. Within a generation, the Romans sacked and burned Jerusalem, and completely devastated it. But God saw to it that the Romans themselves were soon destroyed as well. This is the pattern of providence.

Just to mention this is considered anti-Semitic by many people, but they are hypocrites. Let the Jews first answer for the murder of Christ and the thousands of Christians who perished at the beginning of the Church, and then we can talk about anti-Semitism. The truth is that these disasters were the works of God, and to adopt the mentality that the victims were always innocent is to show that they still have not learned from their own history. As in Micah’s day, they are still saying, “Disgrace will not overtake us. Is the Spirit of the Lord angry? Does he do such things?” But unless they repent and believe the gospel, a thousand holocausts would not even approach the kind of suffering that they will experience after this life. Of course this is not true just for the Jews, but for all people everywhere.

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

Two lesbians are not a family. Two sodomites are not a family. The perversion of homosexuality is deliberately being promoted across America to break down the traditional family, to produce a generation of revolutionaries who will embrace the coming Antichrist (i.e., the man of sin). The falsehood of Evolution is intended to alienate children from God. The Insane Claims Of The Unscientific World (Evolution is intellectual fraud—a big hoax!!!).

It is unthinkable that the U.S. courts would actually entrust an innocent little child into the hands of two homosexuals as responsible “parents.” We are living in an insane society of God-haters. We hear people nowadays, who say they love God, support the evils of abortion, same-sex marriage, public nudity and all manner of wickedness. They certainly don't love the God of the Holy Bible.

Dolly Parton's famous “Dollywood” in Pigeon Forge, Tennessee, has an overtly Christian theme; yet she openly supports LGBT marriages and says everyone has a different “route” to Heaven. What a wicked and foolish woman!!! I am not trying to be unkind, but Dolly is a big public figure (no pun intended). She has a net worth of $500,000,000 and yet she is penniless in eternity. Dolly is everything that a lady ought not be! She has no children, which is where feminism often leads. In God's eyes, she is not a success. Her profession of faith is as fake as her breasts. The INDEPENDENT calls Dolly Parton a “Feminist Heroine.”

Homosexuality is not only a sin in God's eyes, it is a threat to every child in our society:

REPORT: PEDOPHILIA MORE COMMON AMONG 'GAYS'
Research purports to reveal 'dark side' of homosexual culture

WORLD NET DAILY

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.

Anonymous Coward #conspiracy godlikeproductions.com

EMF, the military, and you!

Hi! Did you know that our military is currently designing weapon systems that directly manipulate the way our minds and bodies operate? Would you believe that there are commercial devices used right now that “beam” voices directly into people’s heads? (Hampp) How about the fact that there is a growing community of people online who believe they are currently being targeted by these types of devices, for various reasons? (FFCHS) What about the simple fact that the World Health Organization (WHO) recently classified similar, consumer versions of these devices as possible sources of cancer? (IARC) Isn’t it curious that, even though I’m talking about the same thing in each of those previous sentences, the media doesn’t seem to inform us whatsoever about this topic?

EMF stands for Electro Magnetic Field. The World Health Organization recently determined RF (Radio Frequency) EMFs to be a “possible” human carcinogen. Just so we’re clear on the definition, “carcinogen” is defined as something that is known to cause cancer. Our bodies are bathed in numerous RF EMF’s every single day. Wireless routers, Bluetooth, microwaves (not the cooking device,) etc., are all examples of EMF. (WHO) Even the electric meters on our homes are likely emitting wireless signals! (American Cancer Society)

Secondhand smoke is a classified as a “known” carcinogen. (American Cancer Society) Evidence suggests that EMF is a “possible” human carcinogen. What is truly concerning, however, is that we cannot see or detect when we are in the presence of EMF, unlike secondhand smoke. If we don’t like being around smoke, we can leave the area. How do you remove yourself from a hazard if you aren’t aware you’re near one?

It is also concerning that, even though we are constant bathed in electromagnetic frequencies, this topic is never discussed in the media. This is such a curious thing for me. How can we disregard something of such potential importance without even a discussion? It’s not like this information is hidden, it is readily available and discussed in various forums. It is almost like the silence is intentional, and I can only speculate the reasons for this.

The various militaries of the world are studying how different types of frequencies affect the human body. The military, and other scientists, have filed some interesting patents regarding devices that modify the electrical field the human body emits, as well as the human brain.

For example, take the following patent, “Nervous System
Manipulation by EM Fields from Monitor.”

Abstract: Physiological effects have been observed in a human subject in response to stimulation of the skin with weak electromagnetic fields that are pulsed with certain frequencies near 1/2 Hz or 2.4 Hz, such as to excite a sensory resonance. Many computer monitors and TV tubes, when displaying pulsed images, emit pulsed electromagnetic fields of sufficient amplitudes to cause such excitation. It is therefore possible to manipulate the nervous system of a subject by pulsing images displayed on a nearby computer monitor or TV set. For the latter, the image pulsing may be embedded in the program material, or it may be overlaid by modulating a video stream, either as an RF signal or as a video signal. The image displayed on a computer monitor may be pulsed effectively by a simple computer program. For certain monitors, pulsed electromagnetic fields capable of exciting sensory resonances in nearby subjects may be generated even as the displayed images are pulsed with subliminal intensity. USP # 6,488,617 (December 3, 2002)

Let those words sink in for a moment. “Nervous system manipulation by EM (Electro Magnetic) Fields from (computer) Monitor. Someone has developed a method to modify your nervous system just from the EMF emitted from a computer monitor. You take this grain of knowledge, and add it to all of the hype from the NSA being in every piece of technology that exists, and it’s enough to generate a media story by itself. Yet, silence persists.

How about, a device that takes the human voice, converts it into microwaves, and beams it into the head of a target?

Hearing device
Patent number: 4858612
Abstract: A method and apparatus for simulation of hearing in mammals by introduction of a plurality of microwaves into the region of the auditory cortex is shown and described. A microphone is used to transform sound signals into electrical signals which are in turn analyzed and processed to provide controls for generating a plurality of microwave signals at different frequencies. The multifrequency microwaves are then applied to the brain in the region of the auditory cortex. By this method sounds are perceived by the mammal which are representative of the original sound received by the microphone.

Schizophrenia much? Maybe the people that “hear” voices are really just being manipulated? That is a bit of a stretch, but who knows? These are only two of many advances in this area. There is no way the military is making everything they discover public knowledge, they keep everything secret as long as they can. Believe it or not, there are commercially available devices that do this for advertising purposes. (Hampp)

Private messages #announcement fstdt.com

I've been letting my modly minions handle approving quotes and moderating comments for the past few days because I've been spending the couple of hours I can allot to FSTDT-time a day working on a change to FSTDT that you can finally actually see and use: a private-messaging system! This whole idea developed out of the need for a convenient way for my modly minions and I to keep in touch, but I figured why not let everybody use it?

Right now it uses a separate SQLite database to store messages, partially to ease the burden on the database server if I use the SQLite database when the PM system goes live, but mostly to simplify testing and a massive performance increase. The finished product will obviously still use the user-accounts table in the main database, but if everything works out, I will keep the SQLite database for messages, because SQLite is extremely fast, can be made secure with a little work, and this is exactly the sort of 'light database' SQLite was intended to handle.

[aside]Edit: Asked permission from the host, was told no even though there is nothing in their terms of service that could interpreted or construed to the effect that using SQLite or something similar was not allowed. Figured this host was more expensive than average because it had better than average service and was liberal in what they let you do with your share of resources on their servers so long as it was legal and within reason. But nah they're just overpriced and evidently have two terms of service: one they let people see, and a 'secret' one whose terms you apparently have to figure out by breaking them and getting your account suspended. Complaining to them ain't worth my time, because if they gave a shit their service wouldn't be shit in the first place. I'm half-tempted to scrap the current PM data code and set it up so it uses a .NET DataTable whose DataSource is a flat XML file. Would use substantially more server resources than SQLite.

And that's all I have to say about that aside from the fact that we will be not be renewing our hosting account here. We will instead be moving FSTDT to a relatively high-end Linux/BSD dedicated server plan elsewhere that lets you roll your own shit, and I will set the server up to run FSTDT with nginx + Mono / ASP.NET core + PostgreSQL like I wanted to begin with. I am much more familiar, experienced, and competent with *nix servers, especially when it comes to web servers and databases. We may even make the move a little before this account expires so it coincides with the Shavy-era FSTDT rewrite. (Amusingly, every admin of the site thus far has rewritten its code to suit them.)[/aside]

Progress on the new PM system
+ Database schema
+ Module (static class or struct in C# speak) for database access that handles all SQL queries and abstracts working with a database away from the main code, but I'll likely be making small changes to the queries that return lists of messages to retrieve one 'page' at a time (one page = 25 messages) so I can paginate message lists.
+ Abstract base classes (MessageList, PagedDataNavigator, Message, and Message's child classes MessageWrite and MessageRead) — for non-programmers this more or less means I did a skeleton or 'outline' to put most of the code and now have to 'fill in the blanks' with that code.
+ Most of the code generating the HTML table for message lists, probably one of if not the hardest part because I decided to write it by hand.

As you can see, I'm about one-quarter to one-third of the way finished. Much of the code is pretty generic, and a lot of it can be reused in other parts of the FSTDT rewrite: PagedDataNavigator was already written for it, and the Message, MessageWrite, MessageRead will likely form the foundation of similar code for quotes and comments.

One more thing: Pepe's probably pretty salty right now. Hasn't been able to get a message through in five days and counting, but I'm not calling 'victory' until it's been a week. Even then, something of his will probably manage to slip through every now and then, but at nothing near the old pace of his textual diarrhea. Hopefully it require enough work to get rid of him for good.

James “Chateau Heartiste” Weilman #sexist #psycho web.archive.org

Catfish Game

An emailer asks me for the details about how I run Catfish Game.

Hi,

I want the details about the fake profile pics and pulling girls. You basically catfish them?

Thanks

Basically, yes. Sometimes. Or the fake pic is so obviously fake that it’s not really a catfish, but an opportunity to wildly flirt with the girl and issue increasingly brazen challenges to her to overcome her “weird suspicions”. It’s what I call Gaslight Game, and the objective is to corrupt the girl’s comfortable grip on reality and make her think she’s going a little bit crazy believin’ her lyin’ eyes and her gatekeepin’ thighs. It’s akin to the advice I have given to men who get caught cheating: deny deny deny, until your woman starts to question her sanity.

It’s hard to give too many revealing details, what with the heat around every corner, but a couple of commenters provided personal techniques that are similar to what I do. From Chris,

I did exactly this all throughout 2012-2015 when I was on POF.

I used to hate being seen by locals on that sewer of a site, and so always used fake pics (that were, admittedly, a reasonably close resemblance to how I actually looked). I used to hunt for someone like me on Google Images.

The thing is, 50% of chicks never remarked on anything untoward when they met me, and when the other 50% mentioned me not looking like my photos I shrugged my shoulders and said “photos can be funny like that”. I actually had a girl I had been seeing on the regular (for around 4 months) finally discover one afternoon I had used fake pics; she was really upset that she had been duped, but it didn’t stop me from continuing to plough her.

One of the other reasons I used fake pics was that I could run no-holds-barred asshole game on these girls with the confidence of anonymity.

Those were my best years in game.

100% cosign. I use two methods. The one Chris describes here (similar looking photo and nonchalant dismissal of the woman’s suspicions) and a supplementary method where I choose a fake photo looking nothing like me and then challenge the girl to see past the pic and ask herself what kind of sexy asshole would think he could get away with this *wink*. Or, like I mentioned above, I’ll turn on the gaslight and make her think she’s nuts for even questioning my moral rectitude. The overall effect is a positive one: “who does this guy think he is?”

From HEM, a reminder that if you’re gonna try Catfish Game, you had better have command of your frame,

I like to do this when I get bored. I actually prefer not even using a pic at all. But, sometimes I’ll use a scenic pic of some exotic place. Put something interesting in the profile bio (eg something that illustrates you’re intelligent and witty, as well as explicitly state that you’re alpha; the alpha can also be referenced in the screen name) and prob about 30% will respond. Of those, half will immediately ask for a pic. I usually trash them. The other half are receptive to what you have to say. Be straight-forward, brash and cocky. Never compliment their looks. Never apologize for something jerky that you say. You’ll be amazed at the results.
These are generally useful rules for online and offline dating. Truth is, there is plenty of overlap between the techniques advised for each realm of pickup.

No Pic Game is a cousin of Fake Pic Game, and the tactical payload is the same: zero fucks given sexiness combined with an enticing challenge to a woman to rise above her lameness. Plus, follow the general rule that a big component of any online pickup is radical pre-screening. The numbers are there, so there’s no good reason not to screen.

Final note. I can drop one vagnette from my worldstar. If I meet an online prospect for a first date who has not seen my real pic, she naturally will be stunned once our faces are inches apart. I immediately move to reduce her anxiety: “Yeah, I know, you’re pleasantly surprised. Even better in real life than in photos.” This gets a laugh. If it doesn’t, I follow up, “If you keep acting weird, I’m gonna think you’re a serial killer. Some guys are into that. Not me.” See what I did there? What would normally be a defensive position is upturned and the onus to act like a normal person is placed on her.

If she bites on all this, she will get around to asking me why I chose a fake pic. I measure her buying temp and use that to decide wether to continue whimsically gaslighting her or to get real and confess that the fake pic is there to a) evade the feds or b) screen for really shallow women. Now she’s feeling a need to prove she’s not shallow. Off to the races!

Michael Houdmann #fundie gotquestions.org

Question: "Why is the idea of eternal damnation so repulsive to many people?"

Answer: In the shifting winds of modern cultures, the idea of everlasting torment and damnation is difficult for many people to grasp. Why is this? The Bible makes it clear that hell is a literal place. Christ spoke more about hell than He did of heaven. Not only Satan and his minions will be punished there, everyone who rejects Jesus Christ will spend eternity right along with them. A desire to reject or revise the doctrine of hell will not mitigate its flames or make the place go away. Still, the idea of eternal damnation is spurned by many, and here are some reasons for it:

The influence of contemporary thought. In this postmodern era, many go to great lengths to assure no one is offended, and the biblical doctrine of hell is considered offensive. It is too harsh, too old-fashioned, too insensitive. The wisdom of this world is focused on this life, with no thought of the life to come.

Fear. Never-ending, conscious punishment devoid of any hope is indeed a frightening prospect. Many people would rather ignore the source of fear than face it and deal with it biblically. The fact is, hell should be frightening, considering it is the place of judgment originally created for the devil and his angels (Matthew 25:41).

A flawed view of God’s love. Many who reject the idea of eternal damnation do so because they find it difficult to believe that a loving God could banish people to a place as horrific as hell for all eternity. However, God’s love does not negate His justice, His righteousness, or His holiness. Neither does His justice negate His love. In fact, God’s love has provided the way to escape His wrath: the sacrifice of Jesus Christ on the cross (John 3:16-18).

A downplaying of sin. Some find it shockingly unfair that the recompense for a mere lifetime of sinning should be an eternal punishment. Others reject the idea of hell because, in their minds, sin isn’t all that bad. Certainly not bad enough to warrant eternal torture. Of course, it is usually our own sin that we downplay; other people might deserve hell—murderers and the like. This attitude reveals a misunderstanding of the universally heinous nature of sin. The problem is an insistence on our own basic goodness, which precludes thoughts of a fiery judgment and denies the truth of Romans 3:10 (“There is no one righteous, not even one”). The egregiousness of iniquity compelled Christ to the cross. God hated sin to death.

Aberrant theories. Another reason people reject the concept of eternal damnation is that they have been taught alternative theories. One such theory is universalism, which says that everyone will eventually make it to heaven. Another theory is annihilationism, in which the existence of hell is acknowledged, but its eternal nature is denied. Annihilationists believe that those who end up in hell will eventually die and cease to exist (i.e., they will be annihilated). This theory simply makes hell a temporary punishment. Both these theories are presented as viable options to the biblical teaching on hell; however, both make the mistake of placing human opinion over divine revelation.

Incomplete teaching. Many contemporary pastors who do believe in the doctrine of hell consider it simply too delicate a subject to preach on. This further contributes to the modern denial of hell. Congregants in churches where hell is not preached are ignorant of what the Bible says on the subject and are prime candidates for deception on the issue. A pastor’s responsibility is “to contend for the faith that was once for all entrusted to the saints” (Jude 1:3), not pick and choose what parts of the Bible to leave out.

Satan’s ploys. Satan’s first lie was a denial of judgment. In the Garden of Eden, the serpent told Eve, “You will not surely die” (Genesis 3:4). It is still one of Satan’s main tactics. “The god of this age has blinded the minds of unbelievers” (2 Corinthians 4:4), and the blindness he produces includes a denial of God’s holy decrees. Convince the unsaved that there is no judgment, and they can “eat, drink and be merry” with no care for the future.

If we understand the nature of our Creator, we should have no difficulty understanding the concept of hell. “[God] is the Rock, His works are perfect, and all His ways are just. A faithful God who does no wrong, upright and just is He” (Deuteronomy 32:4, emphasis added). His desire is that no one perish but that all come to repentance (2 Peter 3:9).

To contradict the Bible’s teaching on hell is to say, essentially, “If I were God, I would not make hell like that.” The problem with such a mindset is its inherent pride—it smugly suggests that we can improve on God’s plan. However, we are not wiser than God; we are not more loving or more just. Rejecting or revising the biblical doctrine of hell carries a sad irony, which one writer put this way: “The only result of attempts, however well meaning, to air-condition hell is to assure that more and more people wind up there.”

Got Questions #fundie gotquestions.org

Question: "Why is the idea of eternal damnation so repulsive to many people?"

Answer: In the shifting winds of modern cultures, the idea of everlasting torment and damnation is difficult for many people to grasp. Why is this? The Bible makes it clear that hell is a literal place. Christ spoke more about hell than He did of heaven. Not only Satan and his minions will be punished there, everyone who rejects Jesus Christ will spend eternity right along with them. A desire to reject or revise the doctrine of hell will not mitigate its flames or make the place go away. Still, the idea of eternal damnation is spurned by many, and here are some reasons for it:

The influence of contemporary thought. In this postmodern era, many go to great lengths to assure no one is offended, and the biblical doctrine of hell is considered offensive. It is too harsh, too old-fashioned, too insensitive. The wisdom of this world is focused on this life, with no thought of the life to come.

Fear. Never-ending, conscious punishment devoid of any hope is indeed a frightening prospect. Many people would rather ignore the source of fear than face it and deal with it biblically. The fact is, hell should be frightening, considering it is the place of judgment originally created for the devil and his angels (Matthew 25:41).

A flawed view of God’s love. Many who reject the idea of eternal damnation do so because they find it difficult to believe that a loving God could banish people to a place as horrific as hell for all eternity. However, God’s love does not negate His justice, His righteousness, or His holiness. Neither does His justice negate His love. In fact, God’s love has provided the way to escape His wrath: the sacrifice of Jesus Christ on the cross (John 3:16-18).

A downplaying of sin. Some find it shockingly unfair that the recompense for a mere lifetime of sinning should be an eternal punishment. Others reject the idea of hell because, in their minds, sin isn’t all that bad. Certainly not bad enough to warrant eternal torture. Of course, it is usually our own sin that we downplay; other people might deserve hell—murderers and the like. This attitude reveals a misunderstanding of the universally heinous nature of sin. The problem is an insistence on our own basic goodness, which precludes thoughts of a fiery judgment and denies the truth of Romans 3:10 (“There is no one righteous, not even one”). The egregiousness of iniquity compelled Christ to the cross. God hated sin to death.

Aberrant theories. Another reason people reject the concept of eternal damnation is that they have been taught alternative theories. One such theory is universalism, which says that everyone will eventually make it to heaven. Another theory is annihilationism, in which the existence of hell is acknowledged, but its eternal nature is denied. Annihilationists believe that those who end up in hell will eventually die and cease to exist (i.e., they will be annihilated). This theory simply makes hell a temporary punishment. Both these theories are presented as viable options to the biblical teaching on hell; however, both make the mistake of placing human opinion over divine revelation.

Incomplete teaching. Many contemporary pastors who do believe in the doctrine of hell consider it simply too delicate a subject to preach on. This further contributes to the modern denial of hell. Congregants in churches where hell is not preached are ignorant of what the Bible says on the subject and are prime candidates for deception on the issue. A pastor’s responsibility is “to contend for the faith that was once for all entrusted to the saints” (Jude 1:3), not pick and choose what parts of the Bible to leave out.

Satan’s ploys. Satan’s first lie was a denial of judgment. In the Garden of Eden, the serpent told Eve, “You will not surely die” (Genesis 3:4). It is still one of Satan’s main tactics. “The god of this age has blinded the minds of unbelievers” (2 Corinthians 4:4), and the blindness he produces includes a denial of God’s holy decrees. Convince the unsaved that there is no judgment, and they can “eat, drink and be merry” with no care for the future.

If we understand the nature of our Creator, we should have no difficulty understanding the concept of hell. “[God] is the Rock, His works are perfect, and all His ways are just. A faithful God who does no wrong, upright and just is He” (Deuteronomy 32:4, emphasis added). His desire is that no one perish but that all come to repentance (2 Peter 3:9).

To contradict the Bible’s teaching on hell is to say, essentially, “If I were God, I would not make hell like that.” The problem with such a mindset is its inherent pride—it smugly suggests that we can improve on God’s plan. However, we are not wiser than God; we are not more loving or more just. Rejecting or revising the biblical doctrine of hell carries a sad irony, which one writer put this way: “The only result of attempts, however well meaning, to air-condition hell is to assure that more and more people wind up there.”

Zuzanna Mroz #fundie blogs.spectator.co.uk

I am a conservative. I believe everyone in society does best when government takes a light touch. I believe in low taxes, less regulation, the rule of law, national sovereignty, strong borders, individual liberty, personal responsibility, meritocracy, tolerance to people’s differences, and traditional family values.
I am also a transsexual woman. But those on the left regard me as a Judas. And they do so because I don’t fit conveniently into their insatiable and pathological need to stereotype everyone. To them, the very notion that a trans woman – because we are “different” and a “minority group” – could be anything other than a Mao-quoting, Che-Guevara-T-shirt-wearing, red-flag-waving socialist is sacrilegious. They call me a traitor. A house tranny. Or, more crudely, a fascist.

And so, coming out as a conservative was an entirely more tumultuous affair for me than coming out as trans. If only there were a chapter in Dale Carnegie’s seminal “How to Win Friends and Influence People” that offered helpful advice on such matters. Two factors, more than any others, that chiseled and honed my conservative worldview were growing up in a post-communist country and taking personal responsibility for making the best of being born in the wrong body.

My childhood was awash with my family’s forlorn recollections about the hardships they endured under communism in Poland: the chronic scarcity of food, medicine and other basic necessities; outright hostility to basic liberties. And if we didn’t like it, too bad: they killed anyone who tried to leave. But throughout Poland’s 44-year communist ordeal, my family stood firm: my great-grandfather was imprisoned twice for distributing pro-capitalism pamphlets and for listening to Radio Free Europe. This instilled in me a powerful respect for the twin virtues of free people and free enterprise.

Even in the earliest years of my childhood, I knew that I was different. Unlike the boys in the neighbourhood who enjoyed roughhousing and kicking around footballs, I spent my time dreaming of one day having a child of my own to nurture and rear. My family thought it was a phase. But it wasn’t. I had what we now know as gender dysphoria: I was a girl born in the wrong body. And I could no more choose to not be a boy than a gay person could choose to be straight. I desperately wished to be normal. But to me, becoming “normal” meant becoming physically female.

My mum and I moved to Denmark when I was nine. By the time I was an adult, the Danish healthcare system provided gender reassignment surgery funded by the taxpayer. But as with all socialised healthcare systems, they rationed access to treatment with interminably long waiting times. I would have had no choice over the surgeon eventually assigned to me or the surgical techniques they would use. Because of my sense of personal responsibility and non-reliance on the state that my family had instilled in me, I felt uncomfortable with the idea that strangers should be forced to pay for my surgery.

So I took matters into my own hands. I found a part-time job while in high school and worked at weekends to earn as much as I could to pay for private surgery. I set myself a savings goal. It required financial sacrifices on my and my mum’s part. But by the time I was 18, I had scrimped and saved enough; after exhaustive research, I chose the surgeon I wanted.

And, then, the day of my surgery arrived. I went into hospital a girl trapped in a male body. I emerged a woman, liberated. I felt resounding joy at finally being made whole. But I also felt immense pride that I had accomplished it by myself. Not just a woman. A self-made woman.

So, whenever I hear self-entitled, Labour-voting millennials shouting “we deserve this”, “you owe us”, “tax the rich”, I can’t help but raise an eyebrow. Because no one deserves anything simply by virtue of being alive. If I could accomplish what I did without reliance on the state, then everybody else is perfectly capable of funding and achieving their life goals too.

One thing that particularly whips up the frothy and indignant ire of some of those on the left is my view that members of the LGBT community are not well-served by any form of special treatment or protection, such as quotas or anti-discrimination and hate-speech legislation. Frankly, such measures are patronising and insulting. No thanks. None of that for me.

I want to succeed – and take pride in my success – because I work hard and exercise good judgment. Not because of a law that requires organisations to hire and promote a certain number of LGBT people, irrespective of merit. If an organisation doesn’t want to associate with me because I’m a transgender woman, well that’s their loss and not mine. I’d much rather focus my energy on working with companies and groups who value me for what I can do and not for who I am. But forcing them by law to associate with me is only going to make them resent trans people, not embrace us. Government can lead by example. But it can’t legislate intolerance away.

Similarly, hate speech laws have the pernicious effect of making others constantly walk on eggshells around trans people, lest they inadvertently say something that could be construed as “offensive”. This makes me – and other trans people in the workplace – a potentially hazardous lawsuit waiting to happen. And that discourages the employment of trans people even further. If someone wants to say ugly things to me because of who I am, then I have every opportunity to try to disabuse them of their narrow-minded views or simply walk away. No harm, no foul. A law that criminalises what they say because of who I am just makes me out to be a helpless victim. And I am nobody’s helpless victim. All I ask for is the same treatment under the law as everyone else. Nothing more. Nothing less.

The irony, of course, is that whereas the Labour party – and its groovy, self-righteous, champagne socialist acolytes – like to tout themselves as tolerant, inclusive and champions of minority rights, it is actually the Conservative party that has pioneered time and time again in terms of providing equality of opportunity and rewarding merit for all. Universal suffrage, full decriminalisation of homosexual acts over the age of consent, and same-sex marriage were all ushered into law under Conservative governments. The Conservative party has had two female prime ministers, one Jewish-born prime minister, two ethnic minority holders of a great office of state, and two female leaders of the Scottish Conservatives. The Labour party has had none. Ever.

Meanwhile, Jeremy Corbyn’s Labour party seems intent on reminding us again and again through its appalling record on anti-Semitism that it is “For the Many, Not the Jew”. Labour MPs even attend gender-segregated party rallies and meetings. And while the number of black and ethnic minority members of the government and shadow cabinet should be more proportionate to society at large, one cannot help but wonder – given her litany of car crash interviews and her apparent struggle with basic arithmetic – whether the shadow home secretary is in her role because she is fit for purpose or because of her appearance.

Very clearly, when it comes to matters of equality and inclusion, the Conservative party walks the walk, while the Labour party just talks and talks and talks. And so, if I were a betting woman, my money would be firmly on the Conservative party to have the first ever transsexual MP. Or – who knows – perhaps, one day, the UK’s first ever transsexual prime minister.

Ann Barnhardt #fundie barnhardt.biz

TOLDYA: Hillary Is A Lesbian, And Why These Things Matter
It seems that Hillary Clinton’s lesbianism is now being openly discussed. I think most people have at minimum assumed that she was a lesbian all along, or at least for many years now, so I suspect this will be yet another example of the 36 hour news cycle and effeminate indifference of the populace shrugging off yet another huge indicator.

“Hillary Clinton is a dyke. Yeah, also water is wet. So?”

Remember, as we discussed in the Diabolical Narcissism video, all sexual perversions are derivative of the overarching super-pathology of Diabolical Narcissism. Hillary Clinton, being a full-blown psychopath, was almost guaranteed to be monstrously sexually perverted.

This seems a good time to revisit a very hard truth that Christians need to face. We believe that the Bible is the inerrant, Divinely Inspired Word of God. We believe that the first five books of the Old Testament, the Pentateuch or the Five Books of Moses, are inerrant and Divinely Inspired and contain the Divine Law given by God to Moses under the Old Covenant. In this Law, it is clearly stated that homosexuality is a CAPITAL OFFENSE.

We have to ask ourselves, and ask ourselves precisely as believing, orthodox Christians, “WHY?”

WHY is homosexuality a crime meriting the death penalty?

The reason is because of the psycho-spiritual evil that all sexual perversion is derived from, and the clear and present danger that such people present to other individuals and to society at large. Homosexuals and all sex perverts are dangerous to the point of meriting execution by the state precisely because they are, by definition, Diabolical Narcissists to some degree. Hillary Clinton isn’t a psychopath because she is a lesbian. She is a lesbian secondarily because she is a psychopath primordially. The fact that she is a sex pervert CLEARLY POINTS to her murderousness, or at minimum the CAPACITY FOR MURDEROUSNESS. And she is a murderer. The Clintons have been having people killed for decades. As I wrote extensively on years ago now, Ambassador Chris Stevens was murdered by Hillary Clinton and company in order to attempt to cover up, or at least silence a key player in Clinton’s gun-running and arming of the Musloid Brotherhood – agitated and heavily influenced by Hillary’s lesbian concubine and high-ranking Musloid Brotherhood operative, Huma Abedin. Do you see how these things all tie together? Further, the very MANPADs that Clinton/Abedin/Washington sent to the New Caliphate via Benghazi with Ambassador Chris Stevens as the point man, were almost certainly used to shoot down a Russian passenger jet over SYRIA as retaliation for Russia’s actions in Syria. Remember that? This is why Russia is gearing up for open hot war with the former U.S. in Syria. The hot war has technically already begun – it just isn’t “open” yet. My commentary on that from November of ARSH 2015 HERE.

You might ask how I can say that ALL sex perverts, ALL homosexuals are “murderous”. Oh, quite easily. Remember, people who go through life seeking to murder other people’s SOULS are murderers too. Remember, satan, who Our Lord called, “a murderer from the beginning”, (John 8: 44), is not known for PHYSICALLY killing human beings himself. The murderousness of satan is about the eternal, unending murder of the soul. If you haven’t already, read my essay, “HELL: So Much Worse Than You Can Possibly Imagine“.

Sex perverts are soul-murderers, and remain in the domain of soul murder, and generally on a micro level – that is to say the people immediately surrounding them – family members, spouses, “friends”, sex partners, coworkers, students, etc. Relatively few are, like Hillary Clinton, involved in physical murder. Hillary Clinton’s Diabolical Narcissism is of the most severe variety, what we refer to as “psychopathy”, and thus she is an Alpha Narcissist, very much desirous of personal power, all the way up to the national and even global level.

HOWEVER, this micro dynamic is also being discussed of late with regards to Hillary Clinton, specifically with regards to Vince Foster. Now I’m not entirely convinced that Vince Foster committed suicide, but I did find it interesting that FBI investigators openly discussed Hillary Clinton’s obscenity-laden raging tirades and degrading verbal abuse of Vince Foster as the reason for Foster’s suicide. Think about that. The FBI suspected that Hillary Clinton literally drove Vince Foster to suicide, or at least proffered it as the explanation for the suicide angle. As I mentioned in the big DN video presentation at the 01:12:06 mark, many DNs fantasize about hurting someone so badly that they commit suicide. In particular, DNs will fixate of people who LOVE THEM as primary objects of their murderous hatred. A woman reader who was involved with a DN man, after breaking free and asking the man WHY he did all of the truly evil things to her that he did, got the following answer from him: “I need to hurt the people who love me.”

Vince Foster was clearly attached to Hillary, dedicating his entire career to her service, and it is has long been rumored that Vince Foster and Hillary Clinton were sexually involved (most lesbians are bisexual and have sex with men, generally as a means of control and/or manipulation).

Hillary Clinton should have been executed by the state (under anti-sodomy statutes) a long time ago for her sexual perversion, precisely so that the broad society would have been protected from her DN psychopathy. Now she should be executed after arrest, speedy trial, conviction and being offered the sacraments, for her myriad crimes against humanity and peace, which have been allowed to eclipse her capital offenses against nature.

The point is, had she been executed by the state for her sexual perversion, as is called for in the inerrant and Divinely inspired Word of God, the broad society would have been spared some or all of her crimes against humanity.

If enough of these people had been identified and dealt with as they should have been, the Constitutional Republic wouldn’t have been overthrown, and the descent into the Kayfabe that we are all now witnessing might never have happened.

So long as a culture keeps telling itself that sexual perversion does not matter, that culture is doomed, and doomed to rule by psychopath despots, almost all of which are sex perverts of one stripe or another.

Eric hyde's Blog #conspiracy ehyde.wordpress.com

I write very little in the area of Christian vs. atheist apologetics anymore, and for good reason.

It was in atheist chat-rooms and blogs that I first cut my teeth in theology many years ago. Since those days I have not heard anything new from atheists.

It seems that many atheists today (some like to use the title ‘New Atheists’ to distinguish them from the more profound philosophical atheists of yesteryear) have very little to add to the discussion. To be fair, the same goes with most Christian apologists.

However, I thought it would be fun to comment on the ten arguments I hear the most. My hope is that it will help expose some of the more obvious problems with them and maybe help both sides—atheists and Christians alike—to move on to more interesting debate material.

One additional note: another reason I do not enter into the atheist-Christian debate world much anymore is because of the sheer discourtesy that both sides tend to show the other. I will not delete any comments, no matter how uncivil or juvenile they become, because, for me, it is an important part of the article. The responses (if there are any) will demonstrate the current state of atheist vs. Christian banter. Also, I will not respond to rude posts. This is advanced warning so please don’t think me rude as well if I ignore them.

Okay, here we go:

1. There is no evidence for God’s existence.

There are a couple of problems with this line. Starting with the idea of ‘evidence,’ what exactly does one mean by evidence? What is sufficient evidence for one person is often not sufficient evidence for another. A court of law provides innumerable examples of how two parties can possess the same collection of data, the same power of logic and reasoning, yet argue for completely different interpretations of the data. The old saying is true: the facts do not determine the argument, the argument determines the facts.

When confronted with the charge that there is no evidence for God the Christian often does not know where to start with a rebuttal. It’s as G.K. Chesterton once said, asking a Christian to prove God’s existence is like asking someone to prove the existence of civilization. What is one to do but point and say, “look, there’s a chair, and there’s a building,” etc. How can one prove civilization by merely selecting a piece here and a piece there as sufficient proofs rather than having an experience of civilization as a whole?

Nearly everything the Christian lays eyes on is evidence of God’s existence because he sees the ‘handiwork’ of God all around him in creation. But this is hardly sufficient evidence in the court of atheist opinion, a court which presupposes that only what can be apprehended by the senses rightly qualifies as evidence (in other words, the atheist demands not evidence of God’s handiwork, but rather material evidence of God Himself). For the Christian who believes in a transcendent God, he can offer no such evidence; to produce material evidence of God is, ironically, to disprove a transcendent God and cast out faith. If one desires God to appear in the flesh, well… He already did. But even if one lived at the time and could touch Christ in the flesh, this would still not “prove” God’s existence in the scientific sense (science has no such categories).

The second part of the line is equally short-sighted. What does one mean by ‘existence’? If one means, ‘that which has come into existence,’ then surely God does not exist because God never came into existence. He always was; He is eternal. This was a famous assessment of the matter by Soren Kierkegaard (dealing with Hegel’s dialectic of existence). The argument is a bit involved, so for times sakes I’ll just have to state it and leave it there.

2. If God created the universe, who created God?

This is one of the more peculiar arguments I’ve ever come across. Those who use this charge as some sort of intellectual checkmate have simply failed to grasp what Christians understand as ‘eternal.’ It is an argument usually levied once a theist posits that God is required for the existence of the universe (a necessary Being upon which all other things exist by way of contingency). Some atheists then shift the weight over to the theist saying, “Well then who created God?” (which demonstrates a failure to understand God as the source and ground of being rather than God as simply one more being among other beings in existence, follow this link for more.) What is a Christian to do but smile at such a question? God is the antecedent of all things in creation and is eternal. If God had a Creator then His Creator would be God. God is God precisely because He does not have a creator.

3. God is not all-powerful if there is something He cannot do. God cannot lie, therefore God is not all-powerful.

Bang! Owned.

Not so fast. This argument would be fantastic—devastating maybe—if God was more of the ancient Greek god persuasion, where the gods themselves were subject to fate and limited to their specific roles in the cosmos. The Orthodox doctrine of God is much different. Christians (at least Orthodox Christians) view God’s ontology as subject to His perfect free-will. Why is He good? Because He wills to be good. Why does He not lie? Because He wills to be honest. Why does God exist as Trinity? Because He wills it. He could just as easily will to not exist. And yes, He could just as easily will to lie. The fact that He doesn’t is no commentary on whether He could.

(Note: Due to the immense amount of discussion that this point has raised, one clarifying statement is worth noting. An argument based on strict logical word games can render the idea ‘all-powerful,’ or ‘omnipotent’ self-defeating. When one considers the juvenile question, “Can God create a rock so big that He can’t lift it?” this point becomes clear. But in reality, such an argument winds up further solidifying what Christianity means by an all-powerful God. For the Christian it simply means that all power and authority are God’s. Following the logical word game above forces the believer to make a redundant proclamation in order to remain consistent: “God cannot overpower Himself.” But this fact is anything but confounding, it merely stresses the point that there is no power greater than God, so much so that one is forced to pit God against Himself in order to find His equal.)

4. Believing in God is the same as believing in the Tooth Fairy, Santa Clause, and the Flying Spaghetti Monster.

What I love about this well-worn atheist ‘argument’ is that it actually serves to demonstrate how vastly different a belief in God is to these myths and imaginations. When one honestly assesses the Judeo-Christian doctrine of God he will find multiple thousands of years of human testimony and religious development; he will find martyrs enduring the most horrific trauma in defense of the faith; he will find accounts in religious texts with historical and geographical corroboration; etc (these fact are of course not ‘proofs,’ but rather ‘evidences’ that elicit strong consideration). Pit this against tales of the Tooth Fairy, Santa, and Spaghetti Monsters and one finds the exact opposite: no testimony or religious refinement, no martyrs, no historical and geographical corroboration, etc. Instead, one finds myths created intentionally for children, for point making, or for whatever. It’s strawman argumentation at its worst.

5. Christianity arose from an ancient and ignorant people who didn’t have science.

Indeed, those ancient, ignorant people who believed in the virgin birth of Christ must have believed it because they did not possess the knowledge of how babies were born. Goodness. The virgin birth of Christ was profound and of paramount concern to the ancients precisely because they understood that conception was impossible without intercourse. Ancient man considered the virgin birth miraculous, i.e., impossible without divine action (and at the time most people scorned the idea), and the same could be said with every miraculous story in Scripture.

Indeed ancient people did not have the Hubble telescope, but they were able to see the night sky in full array, something almost no modern person can claim (thanks to modern lighting which distorts our ability to see the full night sky). On average, ancient people lived much closer to nature and to the realities of life and death than many of us moderners.

In terms of a living relationship with these things the ancients were far more advanced than we are today, and this relationship is essentially the nature of religious inquiry. If people lack religious speculation today, maybe it is because they spend more time with their iphones and Macs then with nature. Maybe.

But the claim that Christianity was viable in the ancient world because it was endorsed by wide spread ignorance is a profoundly ignorant idea. Christianity arose in one of the most highly advanced civilizations in human history. The Roman Empire was not known for its stupidity. It was the epicenter of innovation and philosophical giants. I would wager that if a common person of today found himself in a philosophical debate with a common person of first century Alexandria, the moderner would be utterly humiliated in the exchange.

6. Christian’s only believe in Christianity because they were born in a Christian culture. If they’d been born in India they would have been Hindu instead.

This argument is appealing because it pretends to wholly dismiss people’s reasoning capabilities based on their environmental influences in childhood. The idea is that people in general are so intellectually near-sighted that they can’t see past their own upbringing, which, it would follow, would be an equally condemning commentary on atheism (if one was consistent with the charge), but the idea is fairly easy to counter.

Take the history of the Jewish people for example. Let us say that to ‘be’ Jewish, in the religious sense, is much more than a matter of cultural adherence. To be a Jewish believer is to have Judaism permeate one’s thinking and believing and interaction with the world. But is this the state of affairs with the majority of the Jewish people, whether in America, Europe, Israel, or wherever? One would have to be seriously out of touch to believe so. The same phenomenon is found within so-called Christian communities, that is: many sport a Christian title, but are wholly derelict in personal faith. “Believing” in Christianity is a far more serious endeavor then merely wearing a church name tag. Indeed, being born in a Jewish or Christian centric home today is more often a precursor that the child will grow up to abandon the faith of his or her family, or at least be associated with the faith by affiliation only.

7. The gospel doesn’t make sense: God was mad at mankind because of sin so he decided to torture and kill his own Son so that he could appease his own pathological anger. God is the weirdo, not me.

This is actually a really good argument against certain Protestant sects (I’ve used it myself on numerous occasions), but it has no traction with the Orthodox Christian faith. The Orthodox have no concept of a God who needed appeasement in order to love His creation. The Father sacrificed His own Son in order to destroy death with His life; not to assuage His wrath, but to heal; not to protect mankind from His fury, but to unite mankind to His love. If the reader is interested to hear more on this topic follow this link for a fuller discussion.

8. History is full of mother-child messiah cults, trinity godheads, and the like. Thus the Christian story is a myth like the rest.

This argument seems insurmountable on the surface, but is really a slow-pitch across the plate (if you don’t mind a baseball analogy). There is no arguing the fact that history is full of similar stories found in the Bible, and I won’t take the time to recount them here. But this fact should not be surprising in the least, indeed if history had no similar stories it would be reason for concern. Anything beautiful always has replicas. A counterfeit coin does not prove the non-existence of the authentic coin, it proves the exact opposite. A thousand U2 cover bands is not evidence that U2 is a myth.

Ah, but that doesn’t address the fact that some of these stories were told before the Biblical accounts. True. But imagine if the only story of a messianic virgin birth, death, and resurrection were contained in the New Testament. That, to me, would be odd. It would be odd because if all people everywhere had God as their Creator, yet the central event of human history—the game changing event of all the ages—the incarnation, death, and resurrection of Christ had never occurred to them, in at least some hazy form, they would have been completely cut off from the prime mysteries of human existence. It seems only natural that if the advent of Christ was real it would permeate through the consciousness of mankind on some level regardless of their place in history. One should expect to find mankind replicating these stories, found in their own visions and dreams, again and again throughout history. And indeed, that is what we find.

9. The God of the Bible is evil. A God who allows so much suffering and death can be nothing but evil.

This criticism is voice in many different ways. For me, this is one of the most legitimate arguments against the existence of a good God. The fact that there is suffering and death is the strongest argument against the belief in an all-powerful, all-knowing, all-loving God. If suffering and death exist it seems to suggest one of two things: (1) either God is love, but He is not all-powerful and cannot stop suffering and death, or (2) God is all-powerful, but He does not care for us.

I devoted a separate article addressing this problem, but let me deal here with the problem inherent in the criticism itself. The argument takes as its presupposition that good and evil are real; that there is an ultimate standard of good and evil that supersedes mere fanciful ‘ideas’ about what is good and evil at a given time in our ethical evolution, as it were. If there is not a real existence—an ontological reality—of good and evil, then the charge that God is evil because of this or that is really to say nothing more than, “I personally don’t like what I see in the world and therefore a good God cannot exist.” I like what C.S. Lewis said on a similar matter: “There is no sense in talking of ‘becoming better’ if better means simply ‘what we are becoming’—it is like congratulating yourself on reaching your destination and defining destination as ‘the place you have reached.’”

What is tricky for the atheist in these sorts of debates is to steer clear of words loaded with religious overtones. It’s weird for someone who does not believe in ultimate good and evil to condemn God as evil because He did not achieve their personal vision of good. So, the initial criticism is sound, but it is subversive to the atheist’s staging ground. If one is going to accept good and evil as realities, he is not in a position to fully reject God. Instead, he is more in a position to wrestle with the idea that God is good. This struggle is applauded in the Orthodox Church. After all, the very word God used for his people in the Old Testament—“Israel”—means to struggle with God.

10. Evolution has answered the question of where we came from. There is no need for ignorant ancient myths anymore.

This might be the most popular attempted smack-downs of religion in general today. It is found in many variations but the concept is fairly consistent and goes something like this: Science has brought us to a point where we no longer need mythology to understand the world, and any questions which remain will eventually be answered through future scientific breakthroughs. The main battle-ground where this criticism is seen today is in evolution vs. creationism debates.

Let me say upfront that there is perhaps no other subject that bores me more than evolution vs. creationism debates. I would rather watch paint dry. And when I’m not falling asleep through such debates I’m frustrated because usually both sides of the debate use large amounts of dishonesty in order to gain points rather than to gain the truth. The evolutionist has no commentary whatsoever on the existence of God, and the creationist usually suffers from profound confusion in their understanding of the first few chapters of Genesis.

So, without entering into the most pathetic debate of the ages, bereft of all intellectual profundity, I’ll only comment on the underlining idea that science has put Christianity out of the answer business. Science is fantastic if you want to know what gauge wire is compatible with a 20 amp electric charge, how agriculture works, what causes disease and how to cure it, and a million other things. But where the physical sciences are completely lacking is in those issues most important to human beings—the truly existential issues: what does it mean to be human, why are we here, what is valuable, what does it mean to love, to hate, what am I to do with guilt, grief, sorrow, what does it mean to succeed, is there any meaning and what does ‘meaning’ mean, and, of course, is there a God? etc, ad infinitum.

As far as where we come from, evolution has barely scratched the purely scientific surface of the matter. Even if the whole project of evolution as an account of our history was without serious objection, it would still not answer the problem of the origin of life, since the option of natural selection as an explanation is not available when considering how dead or inorganic matter becomes organic. Even more complicated is the matter of where matter came from. The ‘Big Bang’ is not an answer to origins but rather a description of the event by which everything came into being; i.e., it’s the description of a smoking gun, not the shooter.

That’s it… my top 10 list. Thanks for reading. Cheers.

Alan F. Alford #fundie bibliotecapleyades.net

WHERE did we come from?
Are we the product of a Divine Creation?
Did we evolve through natural selection?
Or is there another possible answer?


Introduction

In November 1859, Charles Darwin published a most dangerous idea - that all living things had evolved through a process of natural selection. Although there was almost no mention of mankind in Darwin’s treatise, the implications were unavoidable and led to a more radical change in human self-perception than anything before it in recorded history. In one blow, Darwin had relegated us from divinely-created beings to apes - the culmination of evolution by the impersonal mechanism of natural selection.

But are the scientists right in applying the theory of evolution to the strange two-legged hominid known as ‘man’? Charles Darwin himself was strangely quiet on this point but his co-discoverer Alfred Wallace was less reluctant to express his views. Wallace himself was adamant that ‘some intelligent power has guided or determined the development of man.’

One hundred years of science have failed to prove Alfred Wallace wrong. Anthropologists have failed miserably to produce fossil evidence of man’s ‘missing link’ with the apes and there has been a growing recognition of the complexity of organs such as the human brain.

Such are the problems with the application of Darwinism to mankind that Stephen Jay Gould - America’s evolutionist laureate - has described human evolution as an ‘awesome improbability’.


In Search of the Missing Link

Speciation - the separation of one species into two different species - is defined as the point where two groups within the same species are no longer able to inter-breed. The British scientist Richard Dawkins has described the separation quite poetically as ‘the long goodbye’.

The search for the missing link between man and the apes is the search for the earliest hominid - the upright, bipedal ape who waved ‘a long goodbye’ to his four-legged friends.

I will now attempt to briefly summarize what is known about human evolution.

According to the experts, the rivers of human genes and chimpanzee genes split from a common ancestral source some time between 5 and 7 million years ago, whilst the river of gorilla genes is generally thought to have branched off slightly earlier. In order for this speciation to occur, three populations of common ape ancestors (the future gorillas, chimpanzees and hominids) had to become geographically separated and thereafter subject to genetic drift, influenced by their different environments.

The search for the missing link has turned up a number of fossil contenders, dating from around 4 million years ago, but the picture remains very incomplete and the sample size is too small to draw any statistically valid conclusions. There are, however, three contenders for the prize of the first fully bipedal hominid, all discovered in the East African Rift valley which slashes through Ethiopia, Kenya and Tanzania.

The first contender, discovered in the Afar province of Ethiopia in 1974, is named Lucy, although her more scientific name is Australopithecus Afarensis. Lucy is estimated to have lived between 3.6-3.2 million years ago. Unfortunately her skeleton was only 40 per cent complete and this has resulted in controversy regarding whether she was a true biped and whether in fact ‘she’ might even have been a ‘he’.

The second contender is Australopithecus Ramidus, a 4.4 million year old pygmy chimpanzee-like creature, discovered at Aramis in Ethiopia by Professor Timothy White in 1994. Despite a 70 per cent complete skeleton, it has again not been possible to prove categorically whether it had two or four legs.

The third contender, dated between 4.1-3.9 million years old, is the Australopithecus Anamensis, discovered at Lake Turkana in Kenya by Dr Meave Leakey in August 1995. A shinbone from Anamensis has been used to back up the claim that it walked on two feet.

The evidence of our oldest ancestors is confusing because they do not seem to be closely related to each other. Furthermore, the inexplicable lack of fossil evidence for the preceding 10 million years has made it impossible to confirm the exact separation date of these early hominids from the four-legged apes. It is also important to emphasize that many of these finds have skulls more like chimpanzees than men.

They may be the first apes that walked but, as of 4 million years ago, we are still a long way from anything that looked even remotely human.

Moving forward in time, we find evidence of several types of early man which are equally confusing. We have the 1.8 million year old appropriately named Robustus, the 2.5 million year old and more lightly built Africanus, and the 1.5 to 2 million year old Advanced Australopithecus. The latter, as the name suggests, is more man-like than the others and is sometimes referred to as ‘near-man’ or Homo habilis (‘handy man’). It is generally agreed that Homo habilis was the first truly man-like being which could walk efficiently and use very rough stone tools. The fossil evidence does not reveal whether rudimentary speech had developed at this stage.

Around 1.5 million years ago Homo erectus appeared on the scene. This hominid had a considerably larger brain-box (cranium) than its predecessors and started to design and use more sophisticated stone tools.

A wide spread of fossils indicates that Homo erectus groups left Africa and spread across China, Australasia and Europe between 1,000,000-700,000 years ago but, for unknown reasons, disappeared altogether around 300,000-200,000 years ago. There is little doubt, by a process of elimination, that this is the line from which Homo sapiens descended.

The missing link, however, remains a mystery. In 1995, The Sunday Times summarized the evolutionary evidence as follows:
The scientists themselves are confused. A series of recent discoveries has forced them to tear up the simplistic charts on which they blithely used to draw linkages... the classic family tree delineating man’s descent from the apes, familiar to us at school, has given way to the concept of genetic islands. The bridgework between them is anyone’s guess.
As to the various contenders speculated as mankind’s ancestor, The Sunday Times stated:
Their relationships to one another remain clouded in mystery and nobody has conclusively identified any of them as the early hominid that gave rise to Homo sapiens.
In summary, the evidence discovered to date is so sparse that a few more sensational finds will still leave the scientists clutching at straws.

Consequently mankind’s evolutionary history is likely to remain shrouded in mystery for the foreseeable future.


The Miracle of Man

Today, four out of ten Americans find it difficult to believe that humans are related to the apes. Why is this so? Compare yourself to a chimpanzee. Man is intelligent, naked and highly sexual - a species apart from his alleged primate relatives.

This may be an intuitive observation but it is actually supported by scientific study. In 1911, the anthropologist Sir Arthur Keith listed the anatomical characteristics peculiar to each of the primate species, calling them ‘generic characters’ which set each apart from the others. His results were as follows: gorilla 75; chimpanzee 109; orangutan 113; gibbon 116; man 312. Keith thus showed scientifically that mankind was nearly three times more distinctive than any other ape.

Another scientist to take this approach was the British zoologist Desmond Morris. In his book, The Naked Ape, Desmond Morris highlighted the amazing mystery of mankind’s ‘missing hair’:
Functionally, we are stark naked and our skin is fully exposed to the outside world. This state of affairs still has to be explained, regardless of how many tiny hairs we can count under a magnifying lens.
Desmond Morris contrasted Homo sapiens with 4,237 species of mammals, the vast majority of which were hairy or partly haired. The only non-hairy species were those which lived underground (and thus kept warm without hair), species which were aquatic (and benefited from streamlining), and armoured species such as the armadillo (where hair would clearly be superfluous). Morris commented:
The naked ape [man] stands alone, marked off by his nudity from all the thousands of hairy, shaggy or furry land-dwelling mammalian species... if the hair has to go, then clearly there must be a powerful reason for abolishing it.
Darwinism has yet to produce a satisfactory answer as to how and why man lost his hair. Many imaginative theories have been suggested, but so far no-one has come up with a really acceptable explanation. The one conclusion that can perhaps be drawn, based on the principle of gradiented change, is that man spent a long time evolving, either in a very hot environment or in water.

Another unique feature of mankind may provide us with a clue to the loss of body hair. That feature is sexuality. The subject was covered in juicy detail by Desmond Morris, who highlighted unique human features such as extended foreplay, extended copulation and the orgasm. One particular anomaly is that the human female is always ‘in heat’, yet she can only conceive for a few days each month.

As another scientist, Jared Diamond, has pointed out, this is an evolutionary enigma that cannot be explained by natural selection:
The most hotly debated problem in the evolution of human reproduction is to explain why we nevertheless ended up with concealed ovulation, and what good all our mistimed copulations do us.
Many scientists have commented also on the anomaly of the male penis, which is by far the largest erect penis of any living primate.

The geneticist Steve Jones has noted it as a mystery which is ‘unanswered by science’, a point which is echoed by Jared Diamond:
... we descend to a glaring failure: the inability of twentieth-century science to formulate an adequate Theory of Penis Length... astonishing as it seems, important functions of the human penis remain obscure.
Desmond Morris described man as ‘the sexiest primate alive’, but why did evolution grant us such a bountiful gift? The whole human body seems to be perfectly designed for sexual excitement and pair bonding.

Morris saw elements of this plan in the enlarged breasts of the female, the sensitive ear lobes and lips, and a vaginal angle that encouraged intimate face to face copulation. He also highlighted our abundance of scent-producing glands, our unique facial mobility and our unique ability to produce copious tears - all features which strengthened the exclusive emotional pair-bonding between male and female.

This grand design could not be imagined unless humans also lost their shaggy coat of hair and so it might seem that the mystery of the missing hair is solved. Unfortunately, it is not that simple, for evolution does not set about achieving grand designs. The Darwinists are strangely silent on what incremental steps were involved, but however it happened it should have taken a long, long time.

There are three other interesting anomalies of ‘the naked ape’ which are also worthy of note.
The first is the appalling ineptitude of the human skin to repair itself. In the context of a move to the open savanna, where bipedal man became a vulnerable target, and in the context of a gradual loss of protective hair, it seems inconceivable that the human skin should have become so fragile relative to our primate cousins.

The second anomaly is the unique lack of penis bone in the male. This is in complete contrast to other mammals, which use the penis bone to copulate at short notice. The deselection of this vital bone would have jeopardized the existence of the human species unless it took place against the background of a long and peaceful environment.

The third anomaly is our eating habits. Whereas most animals will swallow their food instantaneously, we take the luxury of six whole seconds to transport our food from mouth to stomach. This again suggests a long period of peaceful evolution.
The question which arises is where this long and peaceful evolution is supposed to have taken place, because it certainly does not fit the scenario which is presented for Homo sapiens.

Nor have Darwinists explained adequately how the major changes in human anatomy were achieved in a time frame of only 6 million years...


The Mystery of the Human Brain

The greatest mystery of Homo sapiens is its incredible brain.

During the last fifteen years, scientists have used new imaging technologies (such as positron-emission tomography) to discover more about the human brain than ever before. The full extent of the complexity of its billions of cells has thus become more and more apparent. In addition to the brain’s physical complexity, its performance knows no bounds - mathematics and art, abstract thought and conceptualization and, above all, moral conscience and self-awareness.

Whilst many of the human brain’s secrets remain shrouded in mystery, enough has been revealed for National Geographic to have boldly described it as ’the most complex object in the known universe’.

Evolutionists see the brain as nothing more than a set of algorithms, but they are forced to admit that it is so complex and unique that there is no chance of reverse engineering the evolutionary process that created it.

The eminent scientist Roger Penrose, for example, commented:
I am a strong believer in the power of natural selection. But I do not see how natural selection, in itself, can evolve algorithms which could have the kind of conscious judgments of the validity of other algorithms that we seem to have.
What does the fossil record tell us about our evolving brain capabilities? The data varies considerably and must be treated with care (since the sample sizes are limited), but the following is a rough guide.

The early hominid Afarensis had around 500cc and Habilis/Australopithecus had around 700cc. Whilst it is by no means certain that one evolved from the other, it is possible to see in these figures the evolutionary effects over two million years of the hominid’s new environment.

As we move forward in time to 1.5 million years ago, we find a sudden leap in the cranial capacity of Homo erectus to around 900-1000cc. If we assume, as most anthropologists do, that this was accompanied by an increase in intelligence, it represents a most unlikely macromutation. Alternatively, we might explain this anomaly by viewing erectus as a separate species whose ancestors have not yet been found due to the poor fossil records.

Finally, after surviving 1.2 to 1.3 million years without any apparent change, and having successfully spread out of Africa to China, Australasia and Europe, something extraordinary happened to the Homo erectus hominid. Perhaps due to climatic changes, his population began to dwindle until he eventually died out. And yet, while most Homo erectus were dying, one managed to suddenly transform itself into Homo sapiens , with a vast increase in cranial capacity from 950cc to 1450cc.

Human evolution thus appears like an hourglass, with a narrowing population of Homo erectus leading to possibly one single mutant, whose improved genes emerged into a new era of unprecedented progress. The transformation from failure to success is startling. It is widely accepted that we are the descendants of Homo erectus (who else was there to descend from?) but the sudden changeover defies all known laws of evolution. Hence Stephen Jay Gould’s comment about the ’awesome improbability of human evolution’.

Why has Homo sapiens developed intelligence and self-awareness whilst his ape cousins have spent the last 6 million years in evolutionary stagnation? Why has no other creature in the animal kingdom developed an advanced level of intelligence?

natsumihanaki20 #fundie natsumihanaki20.deviantart.com

1# Homosexuality is inborn


There's no proof that homosexuality is inborn. All of the studies often used to prove that homosexuality is inborn are fallacious. Why? Well, let’s begin with LeVay’s brain study. When looking at the methodology of the LeVay study, one of the key problems is that the study has never been reproduced. Another problem is that out of nineteen homosexual subjects used in the study, all had died of complications of acquired immunodeficiency syndrome (AIDS). AIDS has been shown to decrease testosterone levels, so it should be expected that those who suffered from that condition would have smaller INAH. Furthermore, in a scientific environment where controls and standards are a necessity, LeVay did not possess a complete medical history of the individuals included in his study. He therefore was forced to assume the sexual orientation of the non-AIDS victims as being heterosexual, when some may not have been. Also, there’s brain plasticity which is a fact acknowledged by most scientists. Given that we know today that the brain exhibits plasticity, one must ask if the act of living a homosexual lifestyle itself might be responsible for the difference LeVay noted? Another study often used by gay activists as a proof that homosexuals are ‘born’ that way is Bailey and Pillard’s Study. In this one there isn’t much to explain as the whole fallacy of the study can be proven with this one statement: If there was in fact a “gay gene” or “a gay combination per se” then all of the identical twins should have reported a homosexual orientation. This observation suggests that there is no genetic component but rather social component in homosexuality. In fact, more adoptive brothers shared homosexuality than non-twin biological brothers. If there was a genetic factor in homosexuality, this result would be counter to the expected trend. The other fallacious study we will be covering here is Dr. Alan Sanders’ study of x-male chromosome. Dr. Alan Sander’s study fails for this one reason: the results exhibited on the gay men were never compared to that of heterosexual males. Another thing as to why homosexuality cannot be inborn from an evolutionary standpoint is that: Being gay is a disadvantage as if gay people where everywhere this race would not produce offspring. Besides, there's no proof that homosexuality is caused by hormonal misbalances such as low testosterone, such claims are naught but mere hypothesis and thus, invalid. In fact, low testosterone has been associated with low sex drive and infertility so, there really isn't any ground for such hypothesis. So even if it did exist at one point it would be dissolved within a few generations. Things will evolve or die, since we are still here chances are it evolved away if it even existed. As you can see there's no study that even suggests that homosexuality is inborn.

2# Homosexuality is not harmful, it is just fine

Nowadays, there’s this myth that homosexuality is not harmful and an equal to heterosexual relationships; however, this couldn’t be further away from the truth. Homosexuality is a very harmful practice that results in many illnesses, it’s kind of like smoking a misbehavior that feels good but destroys your body. How can this be true? How can homosexuality be harmful when so many LGBT are such wonderful people? Well, let’s begin with how gays have shortened lifespan. Yes, homosexuals have shortens lifespan and this isn’t just my word as there are studies to back my claims. It isn't just the 1997 study that pointed to this grim truth, according to the article you attached, the 1997 study is fallacious because the lifespan of gays should have improved over time thus, so it shouldn’t be valid today. However, other recent studies have reported similar findings. Such studies include an study done by Paul Cameron and Kirk Cameron of the Family Research Institute and who held a poster session and presented the study at March, 2007 Eastern Psychological Association convention in Philadelphia. The facts of the Cameron's studies were these: the lifespan of homosexuals is 20 years lower than that of straights. They found that in the Canadian database, a decline in homosexuality was evident by the fourth decade of life. Those who identified themselves as homosexual constituted a relatively stable fraction of adults only for those aged into their mid-40s (e.g., one of every 47-48 adults). Thereafter, their proportion dropped regularly, down to one of every 234 adults in old age (65+), resulting in an overall estimate of 1.4% of adults who ‘were. In both the table and abstract done by the Cameron a precipitous decline in the homosexual population following middle age was noted. Taking a look at the statistics and studies regarding homosexuals, both old and new, it becomes evident what’s the real reason as to the reduction in homosexuals’ lifespan. Unlike what most pro-gay activist like to claims this reduced lifespans is not due to discrimination or stigmatization because these studies were conducted in countries were homosexuals are not persecuted, there's very little disapproval of homosexuality, and were homosexuals even enjoy special rights. The reason for this statistics is the nature of homosexual sex itself is harmful, and many of the harmful acts committed in such relationships are not committed by straights as often as by homosexuals. Like Diggs said the anus is not made for penetration and anal sex is extremely harmful for both homosexuals and straights. However, straights have the option to indulge in traditional sexual intercourse which is way safer than those homosexual practices. There's no such thing as safe homosexual sex for all the practices involved in their so called making 'love' ritual have been proven to be dangerous practices that often result in many illnesses. The use of a condom reduces the chances of HIV; however, it does not eliminate the risk especially during anal sex practiced mostly by homosexuals as 1 in 27 condoms will break during anogenital homosexual sex. Also, there’s no scientific evidence that condoms prevent the transmission of Gonorrhea, Chlamydia, and Herpes simplex virus. The prevention of the these three STDs has not been absolutely quantified, because no one is suggesting that a person known to have one of these treatable infections have regular intercourse with an unaffected partner. Though, health professionals assume the usage of condoms reduces the risks of getting these diseases; however, as to what extent condoms prevent these diseases are unknown. Back to anal sex, this kind of sex is extremely dangerous and harmful. The use of artificial lubricants doesn’t make this practice any safer, in one study involving nearly 900 men and women in Baltimore and Los Angeles, the researchers found that those who used lubricants were three times more likely to have rectal sexually transmitted infections (STIs). Even after controlling for gender, HIV status, city, condom use, and number of sex partners in the past month, the association between lubricant use before receptive rectal intercourse and rectal STIs remained strong. Another study that subjected popular over-the-counter and mail-order lubricants to rigorous laboratory tests discovered that many of the products were toxic to cells and rectal tissue. Thus, lubricants don’t really make anal sex safer if anything it makes anal sex more dangerous. Anal sexual intercourse as Mr.Diggs noted does increase fecal incontinence as shown in the National Health and Nutrition Examination Survey (2009–2010) done by Alayne D Markland and others which included 2,100 male participants. Anal sex is also known to increase anal cancer and it’s no surprise taking into account anal sex is done mostly by homosexuals that, gay and bisexual men are 17 times more likely to develop anal cancer than heterosexual men. Other physical problems associated with anal sex are: hemorrhoids, anal fissures, anorectal trauma, retained foreign bodies. Oral sex practiced amongst heterosexuals and homosexuals but particularly among homosexuals is dangerous as well. Fisting is far more dangerous than anal intercourse; results of fisting can include infections, inflammation and enhanced susceptibility to STDs. Rimming a practice done by most homosexuals which increases the risk for Hepatitis A or B, gonorrhea, syphilis, and herpes/genital warts, though low, the risks are still there especially when most people perform unprotected oral sex. Another illness that is very prevalent among homosexual communities is Shigella, it can be transmitted through person-to-person contact, oral-anal sex, or sucking or licking of the anus (anilingus or "rimming"), may be especially risky.Many shigellosis outbreaks among MSM have been reported in the United States, Australia, Canada, Japan, and Europe since 1999. Frottage, when done naked or simply if the infected skin of a partaker rubs against the uninfected skin of the partner, can result in STDs transmitted by skin-to-skin contact which include: Herpes, HPV, genital warts, mononucleosis, Molluscum Contagiosum, and syphilis. Also, another risk of frottage is clothing rubbing on a lesion as it can irritate it risking either a secondary infection or a disease spreading through self-inoculation. Tribadism includes the risks of frottage as well. There is almost no published research addressing the question of whether fingering is transmits STDs or not. However, common sense says it should be extremely low but still, fingering is not risk free from STDs. The usage of latex condoms does not completely eliminate the risks of STDs during mutual masturbation and other forms of sexual contacts as it is not 100% effective and there’s also the risk of developing latex allergies. Centers for Disease Control (CDC) reported that while men with same-sex attraction make up only 2 percent of the total population, they accounted for 63% of all newly-diagnosed HIV/AIDS cases in 2010. Despite what gay activist would like to believe, HIV among msm seems to be increasing as in 2014, gay and bisexual men accounted for an estimated 83% of HIV diagnoses among males and 67% of all diagnoses (CDC). When into account that gays are about 1.6% or 2.3% (counting bisexuals) of the population, according to a recent survey done by the National Health Statistics Reports (2014), it can be concluded by using basic math that being gay drastically increases your chances of getting many illnesses. In 2014, gay, bisexual, and other men who have sex with men accounted for 82.9% of all male syphilis cases and 61.2% of all syphilis cases in the US. In your article it was claimed that over time Homosexual’s ailments would become less common but it seems the opposite is happening as the Center for Disease Control and Prevention(2014) noted that the number of cases of Chlamydia, gonorrhea, and syphilis is increasing among men and particularly the msm populace. A study done by Damien Stark(2007) resulted in indicating that MSM were more likely to have multiple parasites in their stool compared to non-MSM (43.5% versus 8%; P < 0.001). In a sexual health survey of MSM in Vancouver, 18% of men had been diagnosed with genital warts, 62% were infected with a strain of HPV, and screening for anal cancer detected abnormalities in 64% of HIV-positive men and 34% of HIV-negative men (suggesting anal cancer may be present). What’s more, it seems most homosexuals infected with HIV are unaware of their infection! A CDC study found that in 2008 one in five (19%) MSM in 21 major US cities were infected with HIV, and nearly half (44%) were unaware of their infection. Another study conducted by Marc Martí-Pastor,Patricia García de Olalla, and others (2015) concluded that an increase in cases of STIs was observed in 2015, most of which affected mainly msm. The Marc and Patricia’s study revealed that 66.8 % of the HIV cases were men who had sex with men (MSM), 45.5 % of the gonorrhea cases were MSM.74.2 % of the syphilis cases were MSM and 95.3 % of the LGV cases are MSM. Homosexuality increases the risk to HPV as shown by the statistics presented in the journal Cancer (2004): 60% of gay men without HIV, 90% of gay men with, have human papilloma virus infection in their anal canal. A study conducted n 2002 by Susanne L. Dibble and others concluded that lesbians are at a higher risk of developing ovarian cancer. HPV (human papillomavirus) is common in WSW as HPV can be transmitted through skin to skin contact. A study published by the Gay and Lesbian Association concluded that lesbians have higher rates of breast cancer. The lesbians that chose not to do the screenings do them for the same reasons straights chose not to. Since oral-genital sex is a frequent practice of women who have sex with women, genital herpes transmission with both HSV-1 and HSV-2 can occur. A National survey from 2001-2006, reported that 30% of women who reported having same-sex sexual contact in the past year, had positive blood tests for HSV-2. This finding is contrasted with women who report no same-sex sexual contact, among whom 24% had positive blood tests for HSV-2. Other diseases abundant in homosexuals include: Hepatites A, Hepatitis B, Hepatitis C, Proctitis, HSV, BV, HEP B, Giardia lamblia, Amebiasis, and mental disorders. The tendency of gay men to acquire many of these plethora of diseases, contrary to what most gay activists suggest, isn’t due to discrimination as public acceptance of gay/lesbian relations as morally acceptable grew slowly but steadily from 38% in 2002 to 56% in 2011 and is now holding at the majority level; the problems with the American LGBT community aren’t also due to lack of knowledge about ‘safe’ homosexual sex practices as since 2013 in The Real Education For Healthy Youth Act, an act that promotes homsosexual sex education by providing federal fund solely to programs that educate about ‘safe’ homosexual sex partners, has been in place. Also, there have been numerous LGBT education programs receiving federal funding before and many school districts teaching about safe homosexual sex education that date back prior the 2013. On the web there’s also a plethora of websites that cover safe gay sex available to homosexuals of any age, when you write the word ‘safe gay sex’ on Google you will get 36,100,000 results many of which cover on ‘safe’ gay sex practices with tips. So, it can be concluded that the many illnesses present on the homosexual community are more due to the harmful nature of the homosexual lifestyle and homosexuality per se rather than due to discrimination or lack of homosexual sex education. Homosexuality is asexual behavior, not a characteristic like a skin color, and when looking at all this statistics we can determine that homosexuality is a harmful sexual behavior such as smoking is a harmful behavior.

3# Children of gays parents do as well as those of straights

Children raised by homosexual parents don’t fare as well. Studies that indicate that children from homosexual households fare as well as those with heterosexual parents are fallacious. Such studies usually have relied on samples that are small and not representative of the population, and they frequently have been conducted by openly homosexual researchers who have an ideological bias on the question being studied. In addition, these studies usually make comparisons with children raised by divorced or single parents--rather than with children raised by their married, biological mother and father. They have also used selective recruiting instead of using random samples. And usually the reports are given by the parents instead of the kids themselves. Studies that prove kids under the care of same sex parents don’t fare as well as those raised by heterosexual parents include: Regnerus(2012), Allen(2013), and Sullins(2015). Most of these studies have random samples with numbers that are representative of the children raised in same sex households.

4# Homosexuality cannot be changed

there's evidence that shows intervention to change ones' sexualities are actually pretty successful.Robert Spitzer conducted a study on 200 self-selected individuals (143 males, 57 females) in an effort to see if participants could change their sexual orientation from homosexual to heterosexual (2003, 32:403-417). He reported some minimal change from homosexual to heterosexual orientation that lasted at least five years (p. 403). Spitzer observed:

The majority of participants gave reports of change from a predominantly or exclusively homosexual orientation before therapy to a predominantly or exclusively heterosexual orientation in the past year (p. 403).
In summarizing his findings, Spitzer declared: “Thus, there is evidence that change in sexual orientation following some form of reparative therapy does occur in some gay men and lesbians.” He thus concluded: “This study provides evidence that some gay men and lesbians are able to also change the core features of sexual orientation” (p. 415).
Six years earlier, the National Association for Research and Therapy of Homosexuality (NARTH) released the results of a two-year study stating:
Before treatment, 68 percent of the respondents perceived themselves as exclusively or almost entirely homosexual, with another 22 percent stating that they were more homosexual than heterosexual. After treatment, only 13 percent perceived themselves as exclusively or almost entirely homosexual, while 33 percent described themselves as either exclusively or almost entirely heterosexual (see Nicolosi, 2000, 86:1071).

The study also reported:
Although 83 percent of respondents indicated that they entered therapy primarily because of homosexuality, 99 percent of those who participated in the survey said they now believe treatment to change homosexuality can be effective and valuable (p. 1071).

These data are consistent with the ongoing research project of Rob Goetze, who has identified 84 articles or books that contain some relevance to the possibility of sexual orientation change (2004). Of the data reported, 31 of the 84 studies showed a quantitative outcome of individuals able to change sexual orientation. These studies are not mere speculation as they have numbers to back up their results. These studies are more than enough proof that homosexuality can be changed.

#faggots #gay #homosexuality #homosexuals #lesbian #religion #statistics #yaoi #yuri #antigay #boyslove #homophobe #homophobia #lgbt #misconception #myths #science #study #truths #boys_love
Once again God is right and humans are wrong.

Matt Nuenke #fundie amazon.com

Most of the books on eugenics from the radical environmental fringe, such as this one, recount the same earlier mistakes made in eugenics, and then the books trail off into some abstract Gouldian/Boas dissertation on the evils of biological determinism. This book follows the same worn out formula, but has a few interesting new twists on the story. But first, any discounting of eugenics because of errors made at the very beginning, would apply to virtually any scientific niche, including medicine. Do any of these authors try to convince people that we should give up modern medicine because at one time it was practiced only by witch doctors? I think not, but that is the general theme of all these books. But of course, no matter how recent they are published, they usually suspend scientific facts at about 1975 so they do not have to discuss the dazzling progress made in genetics over the last twenty five years.
This book, unlike others, spends a great deal of time discussing the eugenic movements success in penetrating education, by presenting its value to school children in the curriculum. Selden laments this, but of course the flip side is that now the radical egalitarians are demanding that racial equality in intelligence be taught in schools, along with other Marxist ideologies, but ignores the fact that like eugenics it is unfounded and pseudoscientific. In all fairness, during the earlier part of the last century, eugenics was largely pseudoscience. But now, the Gould/Boas school of egalitarianism now carries that mantle by denying what modern science has found. Genes matter far more than the environment on important human traits such as intelligence, athleticism, conscientiousness, and even religiosity. These are all solid facts now discussed openly at the academic level, but kept from the general public by the new doctrines of political correctness. Published in 1999, it even has the gall to ignore books and reports by the American Psychological Association showing that there is a real concern with regards to dysgenic trends and that blacks are in fact less intelligent on average than whites. (The Rising Curve / Intelligence: Knowns and Unknowns.) These are stated policy positions of this very liberal organization, but ignored by Selden, putting him in the Marxist camp along with Gould, Kamin, Lewontin and Rose. He even discusses Gould's rejection of the correlation between brain size and intelligence, even though there have been numerous recent studies showing a correlation using MRI of about 0.4. (Gould has never apologized for omitting this latest evidence from his republication of "The Mismeasure of Man" to the chagrin of other scientists who have pointed it out to him.)

Selden hammers home again and again how biological determinism is a theory of limits, ignoring the fact that modern eugenicists believe that improving genetic capital means building for the future. Would we cut down the "rain forests" if it gave us additional money for Head Start programs? I wouldn't think so. But that is the logic used throughout the book to condemn all studies in human nature.
One rebuttal that I haven't seen so far, apparently because the Gouldian school is getting desperate in light of all the recent data in behavior genetics, is that twin and adoption studies are not reliable because the separated subjects, placed in different families, may in fact be in families that are so similar as to be almost like they are the same family. Did you get that? For years, sociologists have been looking for subtle differences between family environments to explain differences. But now, even after they haven't been successful at finding what Jensen says is the missing Factor X explaining racial differences in intelligence (which these debates are really all about), they claim that twin studies are invalid because, well, families are really just all alike. I would think even Gould should admit that this is a "just so" story with little empirical evidence. Anyone familiar with behavior genetics can see the duplicity of such an inane argument. But to the unaware reader it may appear to be valid. So much for academic honesty.

Overall, if one is aware that this book is really about politics and not science, and Marxist politics at that, it is easy to read and does a very good job of showing the lucid reader how desperate the left has become in trying to stop studies in racial differences.

CH #sexist heartiste.wordpress.com

Hot off the presses, a criminally patriarchal research paper has concluded that men with higher income and status have more reproductive success than women with high income and status have in industrialized nations. First, to set the table, an excerpt from the abstract:

It is concluded that an evolutionary perspective helps explain reproductive patterns in modern humans and may thus make a valuable contribution in the assessment of urgent contemporary problems.

The sexual market is the one market to rule them all, across space and time.
– Le 156% Heartiste

[Tweet by Rolf Degen]

Contrary to women, men still convert higher income and status into greater reproductive success in industrialized nations.

Female hypergamy, female education, female economic self-sufficiency, low female fertility…choose any four.

In terms of social and economic status, men date across and down, women date across and up. Industrialized societies filled with overeducated careerist shrikes make it more difficult for both men and women to find long-term reproductive partners. What the West has done is weaponize female hypergamy, so that the only winner in this zero sum mating game are the HSMV alpha males who can serially date and marry increasingly younger women.

In the modren West, overeducated, careerist women are DARWINIAN LOSERS. They now join the lonesome ranks of fat women, ugly women, and old spinsters. Lean in? Try barren quim.

Low status beta and omega males are bigger losers in this new world order than they were before under the rock solid pre-femcunt patriarchal system, because the women who would be theirs under the old rules have decided to skip past them for a shot at 1. the high status alpha or 2. a tub of ben and jerrys.

The biggest DARWINIAN WINNERS are the charming jerkboy cads and the sociopath hedge funders.

...

Potential fertility — that’s a nerdy way to say “sexiness”. Men with high social and economic status in industrialized and primitive nations alike — HSMV alphas — monopolize the hottest babes, and probably more than their fair share of the plain janes too. The Pill and condom don’t thwart the sex act; those things just thwart the consequence of the sex act, and incentivize women to liberate their sexuality (which in practice means liberating themselves from beta males). Imagine how many little snot-nosed Heartistes (heartots?) would be running around creating kindergarten mayhem if the Industrial Contraception Complex didn’t exist.

How unequally is sex distributed in industrialized jizztopias? Very:

[image taken from a tweet by Rolf Degen]

image

There are interesting eugenic/dysgenic possibilities to ponder from this knowledge. There is dysgenic selection pressure on high status women — at least as measured by income, social status, and their proxy, IQ — but eugenic selection pressure on their male counterparts, the HSMV alphas who are having more kids.

This isn’t a complete picture, though, because female mate worth is so much more tied into their physical beauty. Those HSMV alpha males are choosing less educated, less wealthy, lower SES “status” women who are younger, hotter, tighter, so by Darwinian calculation the end result is very eugenic: capable sons and pretty daughters. This is evidence that the West is beginning to pursue the patented CH BOSSS strategy of sexual market health and societal reinvigoration.

I’ve been warning about this stuff for a while, and I’m glad to see ¡SCIENCE! finally catching up with Heartistian observations. There was only ever going to be one effective response by men to the emergence of weaponized female hypergamy (and it wasn’t cuddly beta supplication).

Game will save the West….in one respect, by heightening its late stage contradictions and encouraging a change in course.

***

On the silliness of the “wage gap”:

[Tweets in quotes blocks, each line by a different account]

"On the next edition of "Who Gives A Shit"..."

A lot of people apparently, because that could be a component of the so called "wage gap", ie men have very important reasons to make more money/status.]

…and the silliness of the feminist narrative about the “patriarchy”:

Science is descriptive, not prescriptive. It also goes against the feminist narrative that the patriarchy stops women from succeeding. No, men simply have more incentive to work high effort/high status jobs. Therefore the priorities of women and men are different.

Naama Kates #sexist incel.blog

The “Misogynistic Spectrum”

The manosphere today is considered a hotbed of radicalization, a misogynistic spectrum of which incels represent the most violent and toxic extreme, due mostly to their reckless online rhetoric and the heinous actions of a few. But incels are a large and diverse group, united more by their lack of contact with women than their hatred for them.

One of the most pervasive misconceptions about incels’ unique brand of misogyny, and incels themselves, is that it’s primitive and superficial, all about sex. The way they talk about the body, rank attractiveness, and promiscuity — it smacks not just of resentment, but common depravity.

Furthermore, they objectify women, reducing them into little more than potential conquests to reflect their own status, a prize of masculine achievement.

Though fewer than their masculine counterparts, the words available to describe females abound, and they range from the comical to the cruel: a “Stacy” is an extremely attractive, top-tier female, while a “Becky” is something of a Plain Jane. Certain characteristics are usually associated with these respective designations — Stacies are generally considered vacuous and traditionally feminine, while Beckies are pseudo-intellectual or rebellious, usually feminists. But these opinions vary and are often the subject of some debate. The categorization is based primarily on physical beauty. There are also overweight “landwhales,” and a variety of ethnic epithets such as “noodle-whore” as a complement to those that exist for men.

The most ubiquitous of these neologisms, of course, is “femoid,” often shortened, simply, to “foid.” Cold and medicalized, the word suggests some kind of automaton or lower-order primate, devoid of consciousness and driven entirely by a set of instructions or urges compelling it to eat, drink, and “fuck Chad.”

And indeed, in incel spaces, female behavior is often explained as exactly that, with references to a growing body of work from social scientists, clinical psychologists, and neurologists who agree that the majority of our idiosyncratic human routines can be understood as basic survival skills which date back hundreds of thousands of years. So it would follow that one should “never trust foids,” who can’t help their treachery, their laziness, their lust or their greed, because it is hardwired.

However, a deeper look into the etymology of the word reveals a more complicated relationship with actual women and femininity. If we parse the term down, we find the root “femina” from the Latin for “woman,” followed by the suffix “-oid,” also from the Latin, which is used to form adjectives and nouns denoting form or resemblance. Thus, the term is not an indictment of women themselves, but rather of these women, these cheap imitations, these imposters, that look and act like the real deal but lack any soul or humanity. Modern women, the women that reject and object, that taunt and betray, that exploit both the beta males and their own sexuality for profit — these are the femoids, the objects of derision and contempt. According to incels, foids are often cruel to them, demonstrating their inability to feel compassion or think abstractly by laughingly dismissing them and using the term as a pejorative. They refuse to acknowledge the incels’ humanity, thereby proving that they lack it in themselves. As an observer, I can confirm that this occurs a lot in online spaces, where we increasingly spend our time.

But back to “feminoid.” I don’t believe in linguistic coincidences, and the word reveals that on some level, for incels, actual women represent something good or at least neutral. Actual women are coveted, as is actual intimacy, while meaningless sex is generally considered an excess and an aberration.

Such paradoxical nuance is present throughout the black pill or incel “ideology,” which is basically, like most philosophy, a broad critique of modern society — our lack of community, of spirituality, of authenticity. It is a criticism of the narcissism, greed and insincerity required to navigate the world with our FaceTuned, filtered avatars instead of ourselves, to exist in a virtual marketplace where sex still sells better than ever, often traded for doses of influence or attention. Is such criticism really undeserved?

Incels’ brand of misogyny lauds the loudest and the lewdest, but also presents respect for intellectual rigor. This worldview is not benign, but it’s also nothing new. Misogyny exists at the core of most hate-based ideologies and a great deal of violent crime. It also exists, however, in the volumes of most religions, scientific works, and revolutionary political treatises, if one looks back into the past. (And if women are mentioned at all, which they usually are.) We have evolved, in large thanks to the antiquated systems of the past, and to the tireless curiosity and dedication of those thinkers who sat off on the sidelines and observed their fellow humans as they danced their strange ritualistic dance. They bucked at the social consequences of turning inward and asking why, and for that, we owe them a debt of gratitude.

Not every incel is on a noble quest for understanding, but some are. Not every normie is obligated to understand incels, but maybe more of them should try. Because we are all human, behind the keyboard, and the filters, and the fifty dollar words.

BummerDrummer #sexist #conspiracy #psycho incels.co

A big war is actually ideal, but will not happen because the main goal is passive subduing

A big internal war in which Massive sides fight, wether that be the political parties or the people who favor gun rights vs not gun rights or rural vs city or traditionalism vs modernity or a race war would actually be the best ideal scenario, but it isn’t going to happen because a big war could lead to margin of errors for the elites (they spark a war and lose).

what’s going to happen instead is something even more unsettling because it’s not something you can shoot at or fight against. It’s just passive subduing that (once you notice) eats at you.

men are going to get more cucked, women are going to get more rights, more and more immigrants will pour in and globalization, surveillance and government power will increase and there’s nothing you can do about it because there will never be a kick off to a conflict.

Any individual who is able to start a war like the ones I listed are already dead and killed by glowniggers (Harold covington, George Lincoln Rockwell, etc.) There’s not going to be a war, just a whisper and appeasement until there’s nothing left to appease.

it’s over when the best chance this world right now has to return to a semblance of common sense is to fight it out and it’s impossible to do that because the elites have human history for the next hundred years already planned out :feelsrope: :feelsrope: :feelsrope:.

2 mini coons #racist niggermania.net

Unfortunately, I often have to eat nigger-handled dull food on the base nigger-infested dfac everyday to save money until I move off base. Most cooks in the military cooks are niggers, for obvious reasons, and I can't stand it. They constantly have inappropriate ghetto music blaring throughought this supposed professional dining facility, from the speakers, As if they really think humans want to hear that garbage. At least 90% of the staff are unbecoming affirmative action niggers, with the few humans there carrying most of the weight.

Every heard a sheboon laugh? The one were they laugh so hard they show they teef? Yeah, I'm wearing earmuffs next time I go in there. The sheboons that prepare and cook the food are simply unattractive, devoid of grace, and monstrous; completely in stark contrast to the dainty feminine human girls there. Every chance I get, I buy food from the grocery store and prepare it myself in one the cooking facilities.

Even off base, Virtually all the resturaunts are nigger-fuxated 24/7!! The few times I've been in em they were chaotic and disorderly; niggers joking around and babbling while a lines formed up to the doorway. It's truly an unnatural disgusting sight, to walk into a run down Mcdonalds and see nothing but 10-15 dark spotted snaggle toothed std infested niggers swarming the work area behind the counter, That's just fucking unacceptable. I've started leaving reviews online in nigger infested places to warn anyone with sense of to be aware nigger activity in these food places.

And niggers wonder why there are no nigger run businesses in ghetto! Because nigger workers are filthy lazy bastards incapable of providing satisfactory service. A good business nigger would do wise to only hire humans. But then again, Why bother supporting your community when it's full of theives, scum, and murderous crackheads who will steal from you and shoot your employees for personal gain? Indians, Koreans, and Arabs only do that to survive, the last place they want to be is in a concrete jungle.

Giovanni Scuderi #fundie pmli.it

Scuderi: Let us support the Islamic State against the imperialist holy alliance

An imperialist holy alliance is born to fight and destroy the Islamic State fighting against imperialism. Of course, the PMLI cannot be part of it. Our natural stand point is together with those who fight against imperialism, that is the common enemy of all the peoples of the world.

The Islamic State does not want imperialism to be the master of Iraq, Syria, Middle East, North and Central Africa, Afghanistan and Yemen. We do not want it either, therefore we cannot but support it. As said again by the Political Bureau in its historic document issued on 10 January, “Every people has the right to self-determination, to independence, and to settle their internal contradictions by themselves.”

An immense gulf divides us from the Islamic State in the spheres of ideology, culture, tactics and strategy, and we do not agree with all its fighting methods, actions and goals. But we have an essential point in common—the unwavering struggle against imperialism. This point at the moment transcends any other difference that may exist, and it is the pivot of our de facto anti-imperialist alliance.

Alliances are made with the forces currently on the field, regardless of their characteristics, ideologies and strategies. These forces are as they are, we cannot shape them as we see fit, after abstract models. They depend on existing circumstances and on the main contradictions in a certain moment.

Just as Stalin allied with US and British imperialists to defeat Germany’s aggressive imperialism, just as Mao allied with the Kuomintang nationalists to force Japanese imperialist aggressors out of China, so we must necessarily ally with the Islamic State, otherwise we will side with imperialist aggressors. There is no other anti-imperialist alternative, including neutrality. Moreover, this is happening in a moment when inter-imperialist contradictions are sharpening over the control of Syria and Iraq, possibly leading to a world war that we oppose with all our strength.

We are on the side of all the peoples fighting for national liberation, starting from the Palestinian people who fight against Israel’s Zionist, Nazi and imperialist invaders. And we support their ongoing Intifada. At the same time, we condemn the state massacre in Ankara against the Kurdish people.

New Duce Renzi’s Italy is part of the imperialist holy alliance, it has a military presence in Iraq and Afghanistan, and it is ready to use Tornado fighters to bomb the Islamic State in the territory it has taken away from Iraq. It is only waiting to have in return the prize it is longing for—the leadership of the military mission in Libya.

We must oppose it in any possible way, denouncing it on “Il Bolscevico”, in workplaces, schools, universities, cities and squares. We must convince our people to refuse to be cannon fodder for Italian imperialism. In case Italy should take part at a possible world war, we must convince our people to rise in arms, if necessary, to prevent it.

Imperialism is showing all its claws, it is right for people who do not want to be dominated by imperialism to do the same.

Down with imperialism and imperialist wars! Long live the struggles for liberation and the struggles of oppressed peoples and nations! Let us support anti-imperialist Islamic movements! Long live proletarian internationalism! Let us overthrow New Duce Renzi’s imperialist and interventionist government! United, filled with fighting spirit, with the Teachers and the PMLI we shall win!

CH #fundie heartiste.wordpress.com

Remember when the Left used to advocate for the working man and against Big Business? Yeah, I don’t either. It’s been so long all I know of the Left is that they’re globalist bug-shills for MegaTech, international finance, and race replacement. In the Left’s collective consciousness, allying with predatory billionaire monopolists is worth it to stick the knife deeper in Whitey’s back.

But given that leftoids LOVE LOVE LOVE our modren day capitalist oligarchs because the omnipotent fat cats can be counted on to stream anti-White poz 24/7 into the eyeballs of Heritage America and to fund open borders advocacy NGOs, it’s full speed ahead with the violations of workers’ rights and basic humanity. “WTF I love robber barons now!”

The Left isn’t unprincipled; its core principle is power, by any hypocritical contradiction necessary. We won’t crush the Left by reminding them that they once, a long time ago, championed the oppressed worker. They’ll just shrug that off with a snarky riposte fed to them by John Oliver and carry on virtue shrieking until their enemies are silenced and their livelihoods destroyed. The Left will only be crushed by crushing them….ousting them from power.

The Left hasn’t forgotten that open borders means in practice population churn, social disintegration, consumerist escape, rapacious multibillionaires importing scabs to displace American workers and gut their wages, and rapacious multimillionaire politicians importing ringers to displace American voters and gut their electoral power.

The Left hasn’t forgotten that open borders amounts to greedy fat cat CEOs running an arbitrage scheme on American native workers in which the former have all the leverage provided by millions of third world peasants willing to work for pennies in bezosian slave labor camps while the latter have to bend over and accept rock bottom wages, shitty workplace conditions, and low morale.

They haven’t forgotten any of it.

They have chosen to ignore it.

In service to their overarching desire to snuff out White Heritage America and morally preen on its smoldering ruin.

Still, BI also learned that with [Bezos’] OTS system, Whole Foods might be on track to saving $300 million in costs by 2020.

Cheer up, SWPL shitlibs, with those cost savings you can afford a Whole Foods artisanal cheese block as you scurry out the store trying not to look any of the employees in the eye.

Moshe Kelstein #crackpot #fundie #sexist returnofkings.com

(Submitter’s Note: A lot more quackery is omitted for the sake of brevity.)

A Scientific Review of RoK’s Community Beliefs.

Moshe Kelstein
Moshe is a man on a mission. A mission to defeat degeneracy once and for all!


I discovered Return of Kings on Facebook when an acquaintance shared the community beliefs (http://www.returnofkings.com/about) on her profile. She was mocking them, as if these beliefs had no value. I commented that these beliefs were empirically supported or derived from empirically supported principles.

An army of offended females and betas was unleashed upon me. I wasn’t hoping for much from the girls, but I could only feel sad to see that many guys were naively supporting them.

Going to the research

I realized that most people have no first-hand contact with scientific knowledge. Literature on our community beliefs is not only existent, but extensive. I decided to use my academic knowledge to give support to the ROK community.

Many of the authors you will read about here are some of the most famous academics in behavioral sciences (Google scholar citations: Baron-Cohen[https://scholar.google.nl/citations?user=4GAQ-RUAAAAJ&hl=en]: 96 020, Buss[https://scholar.google.nl/citations?user=wrmnCfsAAAAJ&hl=en]: 39 524, Baumeister[https://scholar.google.nl/citations?user=ShSEUuoAAAAJ&hl=en]: 87 528). I do not claim that these summaries and articles will help you in arguments. We live in some sort of ochlocracy where we risk intimidation by hordes of angry women or betas if we hold beliefs congruent with scientific evidence. I remember a feminist saying something along the lines of: ”Nothing like good old scientific facts to justify your sexism.”

This research is usually not spread too much, especially in undergraduate programs, but really informative. Let us now examine what science has to say about each point in our community beliefs list.

2. Men will opt out of monogamy and reproduction if there are no incentives to engage in them

The psychological literature refers to this concept as Sexual Economics[http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/15582858], when referring to the investment that a male is ready to make in order to ”buy” a woman’s sexuality. Women sell sex, and men buy it. This investment varies between cultures and periods.

There was a time when years of courtship and long term financial investment were necessary to obtain sex from a woman. Not anymore. The invention of contraception multiplied the offer of sex tenfold. Women together manage the worth of sexual acts, and it might explain why women despise prostitution and pornography, and slut-shame each other. An average girl who asks a price that is too high for the sexual economy will not find a buyer.

If a woman’s sexuality has been offered a lot, the value of the offer will decrease. This means that a woman’s sexuality is non-renewable. Women will try to protect their sexual reputation and to make others believe that their sexuality is exclusive.

3. Past traditions and rituals that evolved alongside humanity served a clear benefit to the family unit

Until the latest decades, culture was a tool for the genes to be passed on. The maturation of humans is extremely long compared to many other species, which shows the importance of upbringing and learning the norms of a social group. Most traditional sex roles can be seen as a way to assess the best mates among men and women.

Men would benefit the gene pool by passing genes with agentic traits to lead the group to higher goals, whereas women displayed feminine qualities to display nurturing qualities to attractive males. The opposite was inconceivable because men outperform females in literally any sort of competition, and women are better at nurturing children and showing empathy[http://cogsci.bme.hu/~ivady/bscs/read/bc.pdf]. Naturally, the most successful male picked the most attractive female and both offered the finances and care a child needed. It was beneficial to the family unit, which was in turn beneficial to the continuity of the society.

Now, people are mysteriously invested in the mission of destroying gender roles, cheer on parents who crossdress their children and encourage companies to advertise toy trucks with girls. Everyone wants to eliminate gender roles but no one really knows why. Meanwhile, masculine men are still more desirable[http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC1087598/] and successful and feminine women more attractive [http://www.robertburriss.com/pdfs/burriss_11_paid.pdf] (although this relationship is a little more complicated). Women’s self-rated attractiveness[http://alittlelab.stir.ac.uk/pubs/Vukovic_08_selfrate_att_voices_PID.pdf] is strongly linked to attraction to masculine faces[http://alittlelab.stir.ac.uk/pubs/DeBruine_10_faceconfounds_JEPHPP.pdf], and prefer vocal masculinity. Denying these preferences will only prevent you from getting laid. Even though we are waging war against gender roles, women still apply them when choosing mates. (Interestingly, there is a negative relationship between physical self-evaluation and the number of sexual partners[http://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/016230959390015A] in women.)

4. Testosterone is the biological cause for masculinity. Environmental changes that reduce the hormone’s concentration in men causes them to be weaker and more feminine.

Testosterone masculinizes both behavior and physical appearance, as stated above, and lack thereof feminizes them. However these environmental forces obviously refer to something of which I have no awareness of. Didn’t they fix the problems with plastic feeding bottles already? Or do you call ”environmental change” the emasculation of teenage boys in cathedral choirs until about a hundred years?


6. Elimination of traditional sex roles and the promotion of unlimited mating choice in women unleashes their promiscuity and other negative behaviors that block family formation.

The chances of fertilization are higher in one-night stands, and men’s sperm count is higher when they are away from their long-term partner for a while. The human penis might have been shaped to remove competitor’s sperm [http://www.epjournal.net/wp-content/uploads/ep021223.pdf] out of the vagina. Women experience more orgasms with masculine [http://www.putslab.psu.edu/pdfs/Puts%20et%20al%202012%20Evol%20Hum%20Behav.pdf] and attractive men, who have qualities sought for short term mating. Many benefits exist to short-term matings for women, such as resources, mate switching or manipulation.

All of these examples suggest that women did not evolve a preference for monogamous, long-term relationships. Click here [https://www.psychologytoday.com/blog/sexual-personalities/201501/women-want-short-term-mates-too] for evidence that women are designed for short-term mating.


7. Socialism, feminism, cultural Marxism, and social justice warriorism aim to destroy the family unit, decrease the fertility rate, and impoverish the state through large welfare entitlements.

Complying with feminist demands is as close as a society can get to cultural and ethnic suicide. Historically, intrasexual (male) competition always benefited the group. The feminist sentiment rose to power when outcomes were not shared with the the whole group, and rich people would get rich at the expense of others without paying taxes.

Women, depending on a single provider, began experiencing the variable outcomes that men have gone through for thousands of generations. That is why they support financial entitlement measures. The benefits they could get out of their sexuality became as variable as men’s outcomes. Now, they can have the best genes by engaging in short-term mating, and their basic needs paid for by millions of anonymous working men.

Later they will fight for their right not to be judged on their sexual past, and when they will realize the hardships of a working life or just get bored and have children, they will get support from the state. Men are backing them up in every step of the way.

Cultural marxism is the greatest ideological battle of the Western world at the moment. We are paying people to fight against manspreading, or funding university research that operationalizes sexism with agreement to items like ”Women, compared to men, tend to have a superior moral sensibility.”[http://www.researchgate.net/profile/Peter_Glick/publication/232586301_Ambivalent_sexism/links/02e7e52e69acf151c8000000.pdf]

Few academic researchers would support prescriptive conclusions based on their research, even though we can use their results to justify our beliefs. Even David Buss, who studies sex differences and evolutionary psychology, calls himself a feminist and does not see sex differences and feminism as incompatible.[http://www.bradley.edu/dotAsset/196924.pdf]

I don’t think anyone who believes in any form of biological determinism is compatible with the blank-slate perspective of SJWism. We don’t have popular support, but we have plenty of scientific evidence backing us up.

Llewellyn H. Rockwell Jr. #fundie mises.org

Feel Sorry for BP?

It was 21 years ago that the Exxon Valdez leaked oil and unleashed torrents of environmental hysteria. Rothbard got it right in his piece "Why Not Feel Sorry for Exxon?"

After the British Petroleum–hired oil rig exploded last week, the environmentalists went nuts yet again, using the occasion to flail a private corporation and wail about the plight of the "ecosystem," which somehow managed to survive and thrive after the Exxon debacle.

The comparison is complicated by how much worse this event is for BP. Eleven people died. BP market shares have been pummeled. So long as the leak persists, the company loses 5,000–10,000 barrels a day.

BP will be responsible for cleanup costs far exceeding the federal limit of $75 million on liability for damages. The public relations nightmare will last for a decade or more. In the end, the costs could reach $100 billion, nearly wrecking the company and many other businesses.

It should be obvious that BP is by far the leading victim, but I've yet to see a single expression of sadness for the company and its losses. Indeed, the words of disgust for BP are beyond belief. The DailyKos sums it up: "BP: Go f*** yourselves." Obama's press secretary, Robert Gibbs, said that the government intended to keep "its boot on BP's neck."

How about reality? The incident is a tragedy for BP and all the subcontractors involved. It will probably wreck the company, a company that has long provided the fuel that runs our cars, runs our industries, and keeps alive the very body of modern life. The idea that BP should be hated and denounced is preposterous; there is every reason to express great sadness for what has happened.

It is not as if BP profits by oil leaks, or that anyone reveled in the chance to dump its precious oil all over the ocean. BP gains nothing from this. Its own CEO has worked for years to try to prevent precisely this kind of accident from occurring, and done so not out of the desire to comply with regulations, but just because it is good business practice.

In contrast to those who are weeping, we might ask who is happy about the disaster:

the environmentalists, with their fear mongering and hatred of modern life, and
the government, which treats every capitalist producer as a bird to be plucked.

The environmentalists are thrilled because they get yet another chance to wail and moan about the plight of their beloved marshes and other allegedly sensitive land. The loss of fish and marine life is sad, but it is not as if it will not come back: after the Exxon Valdez disaster, the fishing was better than ever in just one year.

The main advantage to the environmentalists is their propaganda victory in having yet another chance to rail against the evils of oil producers and ocean drilling. If they have their way, oil prices would be double or triple, there would never be another refinery built, and all development of the oceans would stop in the name of "protecting" things that do human beings not one bit of good.

The core economic issue concerning the environment is really about liability. In a world of private property, if you soil someone else's property, you bear the liability. But what about in a world in which government owns vast swaths, and the oceans are considered the commons of everyone? It becomes extremely difficult to assess damages to the environment at all.
"The liability for environmental damage should be 100% at least."

There is also a profound problem with federal government limits on liability. That is central planning gone mad. The liability for environmental damage should be 100% at least. Such a system would match a company's policies to the actual risk of doing damage. Lower limits would inspire companies to be less concerned about damage to others than they should be, in the same way that a company with a bailout guarantee faces a moral hazard to be less efficient than it would be in a free market.

But such a liability rule presumes ownership, so that owners themselves are in a position to enter into fair bargaining, and there can be some objective test. There is no objective test when the oceans are collectively owned and where huge amounts of territory are government owned.

And it is precisely the government and the Obama administration that gain from the incident. The regulators get yet another lease on life. They are already sending thousands of people to "save" the region. "Every American affected by this spill should know this: your government will do whatever it takes for as long as it takes to stop this crisis," Obama said.

Are we really supposed to believe that government is better able to deal with this disaster than private industry?

Meanwhile, the Obama administration must be thrilled to have an old-fashioned change of subject, so that we don't have to notice every single day that its economic stimulus has been an incredible flop, with unemployment higher today than a year ago and the depression still persisting.

And why, by the way, when every natural disaster is hailed by the Keynesian media for at least having the stimulative effect of rebuilding, is nothing like this said about the oil spill? At least in this case, losses seem to be recognized as losses.

The abstraction called the "ecosystem" — which never seems to include mankind or civilization — has done far less for us than the oil industry, and the factories, planes, trains, and automobiles it fuels. The greatest tragedy here belongs to BP and its subsidiaries, and the private enterprises affected by the losses that no one intended. If the result is a shutdown of drilling and further regulation of private enterprise, we only end up letting the oil spill win.

Time Transportal #ufo #crackpot #conspiracy #dunning-kruger timetransportal.com

Notes from Ancient Astronauts
Imagine you're in a spacecraft in orbit around the planet Earth.
The time dimension in your spacecraft is different compared to Earth's time. A few minutes in your time dimension is one year on Earth.
To adjust and navigate your position and time and space on Earth you make some notes on the planet surface. Lines etched in the ground.

Photo: Machu Picchu in Peru.

And you choose a mystical place with strong energies that will keep your notes safe for a long period of time, in Earth years.

You make sure that your etched notes are in Sacred geometry images. Resonating with the human subconscious mind. Geometric lines. A bird, spider and some abstract looking patterns.

And when you're busy for fifteen minutes in your spacecraft making an etched note on Earth, the geoglyph will appear in a blink of an eye, in Earth time on the ground, because of the time difference.

And the lines can function as a form of space traffic signs for other crafts to navigate to different places. The people on the surface of the planet will not notice your spacecraft in orbit. They will see a star shining bright in the night sky, as it was always there before. This could be an artistic approach as well. May be Mona Lisa on the moon knew more about this. <...>
What About Time Travelers?
We mean human time travelers, from a distant future, the past or a different timeline.
Etching timeline keyframes in the desert of Peru. Knowing that their lines will last a long time. And eventually they add some new lines. Creating a form of time capsule of symbols and signs. Perhaps some ancient tribes and cultures added some lines as well.

Making it complicated for us to find out what was going on there.

It has happened before in history. The Pyramids in Egypt may be a good example. Created by a very ancient culture. And later on some other cultures added their own elements and removed things from the original design. Could this be the same with the Nazca lines?

Stargate Technology
The lines are old. They stand the sands of time, literally. And the desert is a bit empty.
Was it always like this? So much space. An interesting location for some objects that can have a synergetic alignment with the Nazca lines. A (temporary) stargate or time portal. Perhaps these are objects outside the human perceptions. A stargate hologram. Only to be activated with certain rare Earth minerals. Or de-activated, especially with all those rare Earth metals in cellphones. That's why E.T. used standard kitchen equipment to build his communication device. On the other hand; what does it matter or anti-matter what 21st century technotronics can do, when you have ancient stargate tech that works with Orgone or other exotic strange things.

Michael Anissimov #fundie archive.is

Principles of Reactionary Thought

1. People are not equal. They never will be. We reject equality in all its forms.
2. Right is right and left is wrong.
3. Hierarchy is basically a good idea.
4. Traditional sex roles are basically a good idea.
5. Libertarianism is retarded.
6. Democracy is irredeemably flawed and we need to do away with it.

______

1. People are not equal. They never will be. We reject equality in all its forms.

This is the most basic tenet of Neoreaction/Reaction. Equality is a lie. Neoreaction and Reactionary thought are fundamentally opposed to it. Aristotle said, “The worst form of inequality is to try to make unequal things equal.” The idea of equality ruins organic differentiation and makes humanity into a uniform, grey mass. Inequality does not necessarily mean “superior” or “inferior” (though it very well may), but it does mean different. Things which are different are not equal. They can never be. Equality is a failed ideal. It destroys excellence. We could not be more fundamentally opposed to the notion of equality. Evola was extremely clear on rejecting equality in favor of authority and auctoritas. In Men Among the Ruins, he said:

Let us begin with the egalitarian premise. It is necessary to state from the outset that the “immortal principle” of equality is sheer nonsense. There is no need to comment on the inequality of human beings from a naturalistic point of view. And yet the champions of egalitarianism make equality a matter of principle, claiming that while human beings are not equal de facto, they are so de jure: they are unequal, and yet they should not be. [...]
I believe these are mere empty words. This is not a “noble ideal” but some-thing that, if taken absolutely, represents a logical absurdity; wherever this view becomes an established trend, it may usher in only regression and decadence. [...]
From both perspectives, it is rationally well established that the “many” not only cannot be equal, but they also must not be equal: inequality is true de facto only because it is true de jure and it is real only because it is necessary. That which the egalitarian ideology wished to portray as a state of “justice” is in reality a state of injustice, according to a perspective that is higher and beyond the humanitarian and democratic rhetorics. In the past, Cicero and Aristotle argued along these lines. Conversely, to posit inequality means to transcend quantity and admit quality. It is here that the two notions of the individual and the person are differentiated.

If Reaction/Neoreaction is against anything, it is against equality. If someone argues for equality, they are not a reactionary/neoreactionary, but something else.

2. Right is right and left is wrong.

To reactionaries, this is axiomatic. The phrase was popularized by Erik von Kuehnelt-Leddhin, who along with Carlyle and Evola, is part of the central canon of neoreactionary thought. If someone disagrees with this phrase, they may be a perfectly delightful person, someone I’d enjoy having tea with, but they would not be a reactionary. Moldbug cites this phrase in his “Journey from Mises to Carlyle” post. In “A Gentle Introduction to Unqualified Reservations,” he says:

On the other hand, it is also quite easy to construct a very clean value system in which order is simply good, and chaos is simply evil. I have chosen this path. It leaves quite a capacious cavity in the back of my skull, and allows me to call myself a reactionary. To you, perhaps, it is the dark side. But this is only because the treatment is not yet complete.

Again, basic stuff. He also writes:

The left is chaos and anarchy, and the more anarchy you have, the more power there is to go around. The more orderly a system is, the fewer people get to issue orders. The same asymmetry is why corporations and the military, whose system of hierarchical executive authority is inherently orderly, cluster to the right.

3. Hierarchy is basically a good idea.

In general, hierarchy promotes stability, order, direction, cohesion, and so on. Reactionaries object to the rigid hierarchies of totalitarianism, which turn men into cogs in a machine. (See Fascism Viewed from the Right by Julius Evola for a reactionary critique of fascism, or chapter four of Men Among the Ruins.) If you have trouble distinguishing reactionary thought from fascism, you must read chapter four of Men Among the Ruins, or you will never get it. Rather than advocating rigid hierarchies that crush human autonomy, reactionaries support the “organic State,” which Evola describes:

Every society and State is made of people; individual human beings are their primary element. What kind of human beings? Not people as they are conceived by individualism, as atoms or a mass of atoms, but people as persons, as differentiated beings, each one endowed with a different rank, a different freedom, a different right within the social hierarchy based on the values of creating, constructing, obeying, and commanding. With people such as these it is possible to establish the true State, namely an antiliberal, antidemocratic, and organic State. The idea behind such a State is the priority of the person over any abstract social, political, or juridical entity, and not of the person as a neuter, leveled reality, a mere number in the world of quantity and universal suffrage.

The goal of the organic State is to foster “a process of individuation and of progressive differentiation” of persons, rather than a universalist, leveling aesthetic. Some people are natural leaders, others are not. This is not about all reactionaries fantasizing ourselves to be natural leaders, destined for a spot up the totem poll Come the Revolution. The idea is creating a society that offers a pleasant differentiation and individuation from top to bottom. There are reasons why this actually makes being at the bottom a better and more interesting experience than it is now, but that’s a whole 'nother topic.

4. Traditional sex roles are basically a good idea.

It’s tiresome to go into this one, since the feminists are so rabid about it, but reactionaries basically approve of traditional sex roles. In traditional societies, women did in fact take on some jobs and roles that might be considered careers by today’s standards. They were not all stay-at-home wives, and even if they were, many were extremely industrious. I’m not sure why staying at home, making clothing, cooking, gardening, and raising children is any less empowering or worthwhile than male activities like digging ditches, welding, or sitting at an office desk on a computer all day.

Conversely, if a man chooses to stay home and raise children, many other men will think less of him. No amount of progressive propaganda and reeducation camps will change this, because it’s hard-coded into our brains through millions of years of evolution. Men respect other men who go out into the world and do masculine things. Similarly, the pressure to conform to gender norms is stronger in all-girl schools than in mixed schools, exploding the myth that it is men who instigate and police gender norms, to the detriment of women. People can and do create bizarro-world bubbles where these roles are turned upside-down, but they are not very stable.

Women are less happy today than they were 40 years ago, despite all the alleged advances made by feminism during that time. One reactionary woman I’ve spoken with has said that feminism is fundamentally dishonest because it is a movement for women without children, while it portraying itself as helpful to all women. Another woman says, “I would prefer that norms strongly support functional families and that anyone who wants to do something else has to swim upstream”, which is a fair summation of the reactionary position.

5. Libertarianism is retarded.

Many reactionaries are post-libertarians, i.e., not libertarians. A rite of passage into reaction/neoreaction is the renunciation of libertarianism. I was never a libertarian, so it’s taken me a bit of time to fully understand the relationship between libertarianism and neoreaction, but I understand it now. Libertarians make personal freedom axiomatic, and refuse to consider the negative externalities of that freedom to traditional structures like society and the family. This is anathema to reactionaries.

Neoreaction has a close relationship with traditionalism, which upholds social obligations, norms, some degree of group conformity/homogeneity, and so on. Neoreaction has libertarian qualities, such as advocating for a smaller government and the exclusion of government from traditionally private spheres, but rejects libertarianism overall.

Libertarianism, if it could work at all, would only be suitable for a portion of the population, maybe 15-20%, who are willing to go Galt and lock themselves in a metaphorical fortress against the world. If a libertarian society would leave many out in the cold, libertarians seem not to care. Meanwhile, reactionaries foster community, family, and social cohesion. A couple months ago, I stated, “The “socialism” that traditionalism advocates is family and friends helping each other of their own free will.” That sums up the reactionary position on mutual assistance, which is theoretically compatible with libertarianism, but is not compatible with the mood and spirit of libertarianism as it is in fact lived and practiced. Also, reactionaries tend to view libertarians as excessively materialistic.

For a final tidbit of food for thought on this one, someone on Twitter said, “if you took libertarianism but made the basic social unit the family rather than the individual you would come close to what neoreaction is”. Debatable, but interesting.

6. Democracy is irredeemably flawed and we need to do away with it.

Democracy has been a disaster. Read Democracy: the God That Failed for an explanation. If you have not read at least some of this book, you will be lost. At the very least, reading some of it will give you exposure to serious academic discourse on the failure of democracy. Dismissing anything anti-democratic as “fascism” simply marks you as an idiot, a man of no intellectual depth. At least people like Scott Alexander are capable of going a little deeper and providing a defense of democracy that avoids relying on the fascist boogeyman.

That’s it.

I considered including “opposition to the Cathedral,” here, but decided to leave it out since “Cathedral” is just a lame neologism to outsiders, and I want my posts to be digestible by normal people with no prior exposure to reactionary thought. Also, the question of what the Cathedral is, exactly, is a very complicated one.

I limit the premises to six because I want them to be definitional and exhaustive — anyone who does agree with all six of these premises is almost certainly a reactionary, or at least on the Far Right, while anyone who disagrees with any one of them is almost certainly not a reactionary. We have to draw the line somewhere. Having in-groups and out-groups is another premise of reactionary thought.

(Emphasis original)

czakal #fundie diversitymachtfrei.wordpress.com

The quest for knowledge, the passion for discovering objective truth, seems to me the most fundamental characteristic of Europeanness, one that we can already see apparent in the Ancient Greeks. Aristotle, for example, wrote a book that was just an objective description of all the animal species he knew about. No philosophy, nothing abstract. Just the facts. That’s Europeanness right there, thousands of years ago.
Ultimately, it was our civilisation’s passion for investigating objective truth through science that took it to global dominance. And it is our current fixation on the subjective – on psychology, emotion, motivation – that will be our downfall. Unless we can cure ourselves of it.

Rational debate about our future has become impossible due to the charges of impure motivation that are immediately flung at anyone who attempts to engage in it: racism, islamophobia, antisemitism, etc. Implicit in these charges is the idea that impure motivation invalidates everything a person says. The criterion of objective truth is disregarded.

We should never forget where this curious notion comes from: the Talmudic legal system and its obsession with the purity of a witness’s motivation.

More generally, non-Europeans, have played a critical role in pushing the obsession with the subjective upon us. The Jewish pseudoscience of psycho-analysis cast a long shadow over the 20th century, one whose influence is still with us today even though its “science” aspect has now been utterly discredited.

Tobias Langdon #transphobia #wingnut #racist #pratt #dunning-kruger unz.com

image

Sex and race are, to the left, mere social constructs, abstract systems of delusion and injustice that can be overturned by human will and social engineering. It follows, then, that leftists will support and celebrate men who reject the social construct of sex and claim to be women. And leftists do support and celebrate such men.

Triumph of the Trannies

It also follows that leftists will support and celebrate Whites who reject the social construct of race and claim to be Blacks. But leftists don’t support and celebrate such Whites. Quite the contrary. While Bruce Jenner, a man claiming to be a woman, is worshipped and rewarded, Rachel Dolezal, a White claiming to be a Black, is ridiculed and punished. Steve Sailer and others have drawn attention to this contradiction, but I don’t think they’ve properly explained it.

Why do leftists cheer when men cross the border between the sexes, but jeer when Whites try to cross the border between the races?

I pose those questions deliberately in that form to draw out the links between the left’s love of transgenderism and the left’s love of open borders. The Jewish libertarian Murray Rothbard (1926–95) described this aspect of leftist ideology very well in this passage of an otherwise long-winded and boring essay:

The egalitarian revolt against biological reality, as significant as it is, is only a subset of a deeper revolt: against the ontological structure of reality itself, against the “very organization of nature”; against the universe as such. At the heart of the egalitarian left is the pathological belief that there is no structure of reality; that all the world is a tabula rasa that can be changed at any moment in any desired direction by the mere exercise of human will — in short, that reality can be instantly transformed by the mere wish or whim of human beings. (Egalitarianism as a Revolt Against Nature, Modern Age, Fall 1973)

Rothbard was right in general about leftism, but failed to explain that highly significant exception: why does the “exercise of human will” allow Bruce Jenner and others to become women, but not allow Rachel Dolezal and others to become Blacks?

Sex and race are both aspects of reality, but the left believes that only one of those aspects “can be instantly transformed by the mere wish or whim of human beings.” Why so? I would explain it by supplementing Rothbard’s explanation. Yes, he’s right when he says the left have a magical belief in the reality-transforming power of “human will,” but he doesn’t discuss what happens when there is a clash of wills.

The high and the low

Let’s look at transgenderism first. Men like Bruce Jenner and Jonathan Yaniv (pictured) have “willed” that men can become women and must enjoy unrestricted access to all female spaces. At the same time, some women — the so-called Trans-Exclusionary Radical Feminists or TERFs — have “willed” that men can’t become women and must keep out of female spaces. There is a clash of wills that is settled, for the Left, by the status of the opposing sides. In leftist eyes, the men have higher status than the women, which is why the men’s will prevails and the women’s will is rejected. But hold on, you might be thinking: How can the men have higher status than the women in leftist eyes? It’s easy: the transgender men have cleverly aligned themselves not with men in general, who are indeed of lower status than women, but with homosexual men, who are of higher status than women.

Trangendered men are part of the “LBGTQ+ community,” which lifts them above women in the leftist hierarchy. Take Jonathan Yaniv, the perverted and probably Jewish male, who claims to be a woman and has been suing female cosmeticians in Canada for refusing to wax his fully intact male genitals. If Yaniv spoke the truth, he would admit that he is a heterosexual male who seeks perverted sexual pleasure by passing himself off as a woman and receiving Brazilian waxes or entering female toilets to share tampon tips with under-age girls, etc. Obviously, then, Yaniv can’t admit the truth. Heterosexual men are wicked in leftist eyes and are well below women in the leftist hierarchy. Heterosexual men definitely cannot pass themselves off as women in pursuit of perverted sexual thrills.

Actual authentic lesbians

Yaniv and other “trans-women” must therefore align themselves with homosexuals to pass leftist purity-tests. As trans-women they claim to be members of a sexual minority, which triggers the leftist love of minority-worship. Indeed, Yaniv and some others go further than simply claiming to be women: they claim to be actual authentic lesbians. A pinned tweet at Yaniv’s Twitter account states that he is “One proud lesbian. I’ll never give up fighting for human rights equality. #LGBTQoftwitter.” Yaniv isn’t a lesbian, of course. Real lesbians — that is, real women who are sexually attracted to other real women — quite rightly reject fake lesbians like him, so the fake lesbians exploit leftist ideology again and accuse real lesbians of bigotry and hate.

Feminism has the concept of the “glass ceiling,” whereby women are unjustly prevented by sexist men from reaching the highest positions in politics, business and academia. Inspired by this, the fake lesbians have invented the concept of the “cotton ceiling,” whereby men like Yaniv are unjustly prevented by real lesbians from removing the underwear of said lesbians and having sex with them. Here is a trans-lesbian activist lecturing a sceptical TERF (i.e. Trans-Exclusionary Radical Feminist for those not up on the latest jargon) on the injustices of the cotton ceiling:

Trans women are female. When our female-ness and womanhood is denied, as you keep doing repeatedly, that is transphobic and transmisogynist. As I said earlier, all people’s desires are influenced by an intersection of cultural messages that determine those desires. Cultural messages that code trans women’s bodies as male are transphobic, and those messages influence people’s desires. So cis queer women who are attracted to other queer women may not view trans women as viable sexual partners because they have internalized the message that trans women are somehow male.

The comparison to what cis males say also makes no sense. What trans women are saying is that we are women, and thus should be considered women sexually, and thus be considered viable partners for women who are attracted to women. What cis males are saying is that queer women shouldn’t be exclusively attracted to women, which is completely different. (The Cotton Ceiling? Really?, Femonade blog, 13th March 2012)

It’s not “completely different,” of course. In both cases, people with penises are “saying” (and willing) that real lesbians should have sex with them. In both cases, real lesbians would be encountering the male genitals of real men. But the trans-activist believes in an act of verbal transubstantiation whereby a trans-lesbian possesses a “female penis” that, despite all appearances, is “completely different” to the nasty and objectionable penis of a “cis male.”

Aspects of religious psychology

I use the term “transubstantiation” deliberately. It’s a term from Catholic theology that refers to the supernatural process whereby wafers and wine transform into the flesh and blood of Christ during the celebration of Holy Eucharist by a priest. No physical or scientific test can detect this transformation, and to all appearances the wafers and wine remain unchanged. But traditionalist Catholics will insist that the wafers and wine are now truly Christ’s flesh and blood. If you disagree, you’re probably safe nowadays, but you wouldn’t have been in the past. It was very unwise to openly deny, let alone ridicule, transubstantiation in Catholic nations during the Middle Ages. And disagreements over the concept were central to the murderous hatreds of the Reformation. Those who believed in transubstantiation got very angry when it was denied.

This anger, which is part of the odium theologicum, is an important aspect of religious psychology, whether overt or covert — leftism can in fact be explained as a mutation of Christianity and Judaism. Overt and covert religions gain power by demanding belief in things that defy everyday reality, because such belief is difficult and requires a greater emotional investment. When we invest more in a belief, we have more incentive to protect it more strongly. And it is precisely because concepts like transubstantiation and the “female penis” are absurd that they are powerful. When we have an emotional investment in something we can’t prove, we react strongly when it is denied or ridiculed. That applies even more when we ourselves are subconsciously aware or afraid that our beliefs are baseless or false. Crushing external heresies can be a way of stilling internal doubts.

The “female penis” vs the “unisex brain”

And so religion and other forms of ideology can gain power by their contradictions and absurdities. However, in the clash between transgenderism and feminism, both sides believe in absurdities: the trannies insist on the concept of the female penis, just as the feminists insist on the concept of the “unisex brain,” namely, that there is no genuine difference between male and female brains. These two concepts are both biologically absurd: there is no such thing as a female penis, but there is such a thing as a female brain. However, if transgenderism and feminism are both powered by absurdities, why have trannies been winning the battle over the TERFs? Well, it’s partly because the trannies have the bigger, and therefore better, absurdities. For example, the “female penis” is an obvious absurdity, the “unisex brain” is much less so. Penises are out in the open, after all, whereas brains are hidden behind the skull.

And there is a continuum between a typically male brain and a typically female brain that doesn’t exist between male genitals and female genitals in the vast majority of cases. The psychological differences between men and women are a question of averages and tendencies, but the physical differences are generally stark and obvious (inter-sex individuals are rare). A certain group of trannies also have the stronger male will-to-power and love of battle, which is another reason they are winning the battle with lesbians. All this explains why the left supports and celebrates trannies as they cross the border between male and female. As a sexual minority, they have higher status than ordinary women. As a novel and exhibitionist sexual minority, they also have higher status than lesbians, who also have less will-to-power.

Better than Black

Indeed, as I pointed out in “Power to the Perverts!,” transgenderism has allowed some White heterosexual men to leap above the Black-Jewish lesbian feminist Linda Bellos in the leftist hierarchy. The White men are “transgender” and Bellos, although Black, is a TERF. In current leftism, transgender trumps TERF. Leftists therefore support the border-abolishing White men and not the border-erecting Black woman.

However, leftists would instantly support Bellos if those White men were claiming to be Black rather than female. Leftists want the border between male and female abolished, but not the border between Black and White. Why so? Again I would argue that higher and lower status settle the clash of wills. Rachel Dolezal “willed” that she was Black, while Blacks “willed” that she wasn’t. Dolezal was trying to abolish a border, Blacks were trying to maintain one, so a naïve reading of leftism would say that leftists should support “trans-racialists” like Dolezal just as they support transgenderists like Bruce Jenner. But leftists didn’t support Dolezal, and Blacks easily won the battle of wills. The border between Black and White stayed up, and Dolezal was ridiculed and punished, despite being more convincing as a Black than most transgenderists ever are as women.

{Submitter’s note: Langdon rants on and on… see the source link if you’re really interested about the rest of it}

GINGERBEARDMAN #sexist gingerbeardmansite.wordpress.com

Assalaamu Alaykum wa Rahmatullahi wa Barakatuhu,

Jumping straight in: ISLAM IS A PATRIARCHY

Now some of you will be having a hard time accepting that statement, that’s OK so I am just leave it out there for now and going to ask you to read on and I’ll explain why I said it but for many of you, Islam = Good, Patriarchy = Evil. If after reading this post you still disagree with me feel free to say so in the comments, write your own thoughts on it elsewhere, unfollow, or just generally be mean to me. Don’t worry I won’t cry and I grew up in a time when we were able to disagree without the need for anyone needing a safe place.

It’s pretty clear that in it’s use in academia, the media and the workplace that patriarchy has become this big, evil, dirty word in modern Britain, as well as the rest of the world. It shuts down discussion, prevents dialogue and I would argue stops us getting to the root of problems and having a go at solving them in matters of gender relations. Sadly many Muslims including I assume some you who are reading this post have adopted this use of the word, and the ideas that follow from feminists along with other aspects of ‘progressive’ ideology from the media, fellow race / equality activists, education, especially higher education or just general society around us.

To see if you’re one of these people, read the following three statements and decide whether you agree with the traditionalist Muslim in the dialogue or the progressive one.

Traditionalist Muslim: “Sister’s shouldn’t travel without a mahram.”
Progressive Muslim: “That’s patriarchy!”

Traditionalist Muslim: “Hijab is about behavior not just what you wear.”
Progressive Muslim: “Don’t tell women how to behave or dress, that is patriarchy!”

Traditionalist Muslim: “Any woman who gets married without the permission of her guardian, her nikkah is invalid, her nikkah is invalid, her nikkah is invalid…”
Progressive Muslim: “How dare you tell women who we can or cannot marry, THAT’S PATRIARCHY!”

If you find yourself agreeing with our progressive Muslim brother in the above three dialogues then you have a problem, actually you have two problems. The first is you probably assumed it was a female making the argument, which is really sexist of you, shame on you and your sexist views as there are men and women on both sides of the discussion.

The second problem you have if you agree is that all of them in isolation are statements of truth, Islamic teachings which as a believer you should not be digressing from and the last is even a sahih hadith from the Prophet Muhammad (Sallallahu alayhi wa salam).

(..)

So as for the rest of us Muslims, we’ll not be changing Islam to suit whatever the prevailing tendencies in society are from decade to decade.

Now if we’re going to have committees to run our institutions I’m all in favour of appointing women to these governing bodies as long as gender relation etiquette is observed as we need to listen to those voices, value their opinion and point of view but don’t come saying we need to appoint female imams, or try to say a woman can run the state or some such other modernist idea.

Muhammad (Sallallahu alayhi wa salam) and the rightly guided khulafa used to make shura (consultation) with the women, listening to their views, valuing those views as valid and worthy of consideration.

We adapt ourselves and our society to and around Islamic teachings, we do not change or bend Islamic norms to suit ourselves and our society and Imam Malik (Rahimahullah) was correct when he said:

“Nothing will rectify the last part of this Ummah except that which rectified its first part.” (i.e. the Book of Allah and the Sunnah of the Messenger of Allah Sallallahu alayhi wa salam)).
— Imam Malik (rahimahullah)
Reported by Ibn ‘AbdulHadi, in Tanqih at-Tahqiq 2/423

We should as believers stand firm in justice and truthfulness, standing up to the tyrants in people’s homes even, who are usually (but not always) men abusing their spouses, producing further dysfunctional people to raise more dysfunctional families of the future ummah.

O you who have believed, be persistently standing firm in justice, witnesses for Allah, even if it be against yourselves or parents and relatives. Whether one is rich or poor, Allah is more worthy of both. So follow not [personal] inclination, lest you not be just. And if you distort [your testimony] or refuse [to give it], then indeed Allah is ever, with what you do, Acquainted.
Quran translation, Surah an-Nisa (the chapter of Women, 4:135

Umar ibn al Khattab (Radiallahu anhu), the second khalifa, the one about whom Rasoolullah (Sallallahu alahi wa salam) said: “If there were to be a Prophet after me, it would be ‘Umar ibn al-Khattab” was a man who used to walk the streets day and night, and when he heard problems in people’s households he would deal with them justly, just as our Nabi (Sallallahu alahi wa salam) did in his time.

When we look at the examples of their lives, we see strong men able to deal justly with strong women taking a full role in accordance with their nature in society around them, not men feeling they can only be strong by forcing down women into a lesser role and the sooner we return to something like that as our target the better for us and the rest of society around us.

We see in the early days of Islam the natural role of women being valued, treasured and there are many evidences to attest to this such as the Sahabi being told to give good company to his mother three times more than his father. Men are men, women are women. We are mentally, emotionally, physically different and we cannot change biology or ignore it, nor should we if we are true to ourselves.

The problem with feminism, especially second and third wave feminism is that it tries to force women to match men or even beat men at their game, rather than getting society to change to value and respect the role and nature of women. That would be true liberation. Promoting the Islamic view point of the true role of women is the way to move forward, a constructive message of productive gender relations to those around us, as well as forbidding the evils of many men both within and without the Islamic community is the way we as Muslims need to go in combating misogyny.

You (true believers in Islamic Monotheism, and real followers of Prophet Muhammad and his Sunnah) are the best of peoples ever raised up for mankind; you enjoin Al-Ma‘roof (i.e. Islamic Monotheism and all that Islam has ordained) and forbid Al-Munkar (polytheism, disbelief and all that Islam has forbidden), and you believe in Allah. Quran translation, Surah Al e ‘Imraan, 3:110

I say within as well as without the Muslim community, as we have to admit to have a problem and that as we’ve so many things we’ve strayed far from the Sunnah when it comes to gender relations and there is a middle path between the free mixing and other sins of the modernists and liberals and the almost absolute and total gender segregation practiced by most traditionalist and salafi communities here in the UK.

Likewise I cannot believe that our Nabi (Sallallahu alayhi wa salam) would allow the practices of marriage bandits, the wife beaters and oppressors, those who refuse to care, maintain and financially support their spouses to go unchallenged if he was with us today as many Imams and activists do by staying silent on these matters.

In this I would urge all the brothers and sisters out there to correct themselves, their families and the community around them. Many revert sisters speak of how they liked the Islamic viewpoint of women’s rights, sadly most of them are disappointed about how we practice that in reality in our daily lives and marriages.

If we can do this, then I believe there will be no reason for even non-Muslims to believe in feminism, never-mind Muslims and we can do it all through the Islamic system, a Patriarchy.

Scrod #sexist #psycho mmo-champion.com

If the girl is conscious, in my opinion it's up to her to say no. Does it mean that if she doesn't say no, it's always ok? No... it's a grey area and might be a really dick move. But at the same time, think about the punishment for rape - it is basically that your life is over. I'd prefer to err on the side of not destroying lives than potentially destroying the life of someone who's innocent.

Was the girl who didn't say no "Asking for it?"... nah. I'm just more of the belief that stuff happens and to convict someone of an incredibly serious crime should require something obviously over the line.

Are you intentionally leveraging their inebriated state for sex? Because, if that's a yes, it's pretty much the same thing as drugging them for sex.

Major, major difference here - "drugging them for sex" usually means it is without their knowledge. Much different from them getting drunk themselves... if they consciously put themselves in a state where they make decisions they wouldn't make when they were sober (even if the guy is the one giving them the drinks) - yeah there's a good chance the guy is an asshole, but again I don't think it warrants ruining the guy's life.

So... If the girl you want to have sex with is wasted, but still vaguely coherent... If 'taking advantage of her' (aka get some when you know you'd have no chance normally) is OK, Is it also OK to take all the money out of her wallet? She normally wouldn't just you have $200, but hey... She didn't say not to.

That's a specious argument. Stealing is always bad. Violence is always bad.

With most crimes, the act itself is the problem - you steal, you commit violence. Sex is usually an enjoyable act, unlike getting punched in the face or having your money stolen. What makes sex complicated is its an act that often people enjoy sharing with each other but sometimes is a crime. You can't compare it to most other crimes because consent matters.

By the way - I'm specifically opposed to charging someone with rape in this instance. Remember - rape means years in jail. It means registering as a sex offender and being unable to live in many areas for the rest of your life. It means never being able to get a job because you have to admit to a felony. It means, basically, your life is utterly destroyed. Does it really make sense to do this to someone who was (probably drunk himself) and unable to infer whether the person was having sex just because she was drunk? I'm ok with sending them to counselling, or requiring they don't drink for a while, community service, whatever. I just think rape needs to be saved for more serious offenders.

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.

kalidurga #wingnut #fundie en.kalitribune.com

Political correctness is rightly considered to be a vague term. However, this by no means warrants anyone to infer that it doesn’t exist and sway our lives to an enormous extent. The very point of deeming something inexistent by pointing out that it is vaguely defined is a tell-tale sign of the real root of what we call “Political Correctness.”

Namely, the idea that morality is purely a matter of strictly systematized application of language stems from the age old principle of what philosophers call nominalism, the doctrine that assumes that cognitive process is nothing but the apprehension and conceptualization of sense data.
While this process is at work in everyday experience, nominalists omit one extremely important – in fact essential – element inherent in human knowledge, namely: that things themselves have essences or “natures” which mold our notions about them.

By denying the necessary, or indeed: any, intrinsic substantial nature to beings, nominalism empowers it’s adherents to define and redefine them at will.

This is a true meaning of so-called “Occam’s razor”, a method named after a Medieval English Franciscan philosopher William of Occam, stating that, in paraphrase, “any multiplications of beings unnecessary to satisfactory explanation is false”.

Of course, nominalists are not prone to examine their own assumptions and they take for granted that what we see, hear, touch, smell or taste is all there is to know, not taking into account that very principles they profess cannot be based on this, because they are meant to apply to all conceivable instances.

If all knowledge is a cognition of perceivable individuals – of manifold chaos with no intrinsic unity – how can then anything be applied to all conceivable instances?

It can’t.

In the series of podcasts we hereby present, the political correctness is defined as an instance of extreme moral nominalism. Namely, there’s a one characteristic feature of nominalist minded people: while denying anything remotely spiritual in this world, they at the same time tend to deny all substance – even the matter itself, while making their own notions about reality absolute.

It’s a kind of magical thinking where words are considered to have a power over reality.

This is by no means surprising, because real knowledge is based on concepts and not on sense experience and if we cannot rely on our notions, we can really rely on nothing at all. Things we perceive are in eternal flux and if there’s no unity in them, then there’s no stability which could provide us with certain knowledge.

Like averybody else, nominalists want to have certain principles and moral rules they can rely on. But given that they deny the possibility that world itself provides us with them, they venture to make them up themselves.
And when they succeed at imagining them, they have a compulsive need to impose them upon the world and other people, because that is the only way left open for them to make sense of it.

The things have to conform to the labels nominalists paste upon their surface.
Sounds familiar?

Gender quotas, humanitarian bombing, redefining oneself’s sex, humans merging with the machines, sanctioning of all things possibly offensive, safe spaces in Universities … being called a bigot because you accidentally looked at someone sideways?

If it is, then you are on the right track because you’re not living under the rock. Political correctness is an inherently totalitarian system of moral nominalism, where words and labels are everything, because all else is deemed unreal. It is an utmost and to date the most perfect system of essentially denying the very possibility of morality.

Therefore, it is an elaborate, well thought out, system of evil.

In this three-part podcast, we’ll explore how moral nominalism functions, why is it always accompanied with the compulsive need for strict legalization of it’s principles and how it in effect serves to destroy the language.

A nominalist cookbook

In the first part we explore why is PC so hard to define and why no knee-jerk reactions to it are really valid. While standard fare PC phenomena irritate the hell out of people, when interrogated as to why they get so irritated by, say: legal proscription of three or more different gender toilet labels, they are usually at the lack to give a satisfactory explanation of their dissent.
This is one of the main strengths of PC, namely that it’s adherents can use slurs, memes and emotionally charged rhetoric, while the only weapon at the disposal of it’s opponents is an act of analytical discernment which can be very demanding and never provides one with flashy phrases and one-sentence answers.

We propose that the reason for this is nominalist principle of reduction of reality to utterly simple, atomic, facts that can only be reflected in simple language. Thence follows the famous Occam’s razor dictum that only simple answers are the right ones.
So, for instance, there’s no use to suppose that 9/11 was an elaborate operation, perpetrated by whole network of vested interests, because the idea that it was perpetrated by few amateur pilots of Arabian descent is much simpler and therefore true.
On the other hand, this approach allows promulgators and adherents of PC enormous freedom in defining their concepts which need not relate to anything but “atomic facts” of reality. We illustrate this point by example of Richard Dawkins and his statement that “there’s nothing morally reprehensible in eating human roadkill”.

As nominalism takes into consideration only atomic facts “roadkill” and “eating”, while “human” is only a subjective qualification on the same level as “animal”, there’s no difference in cooking and eating the dead animal and dead human.

All this stems from inability of nominalists to affirm existence of anything that is not based on simplest sense perceptions. And human nature, which is the thing forcing us to essentially discern animal from human, is something you cannot perceive by senses.

The result is that political correctness becomes moral system completely detached from moral reality which seeks to make itself absolute. In order to do that PC individuals are forced to seek it’s legalization, i.e. to turn their ever expanding principles into laws.

Armchair Psychologist Award

TheGuruLikes #transphobia reddit.com

Trans identifiers who claim to be homosexual on the basis of the sex they identify with are immaturely and pathologically focused on physical attributes at the expense of the substance of homosexuality.

Through spreading rhetoric of "genital preference", they're regressing the public debate back to a time when society framed the nature of our relationships only in shallow terms of sexual activity. It's a manipulative misappropriation of public sentiment via a childish form of retribution for an apparent lack of self esteem. What's most insidious is how their tactic sows confusion, misunderstanding, and self-doubt around the nature of our sexuality among naive homosexuals.

How many of us homosexuals have put much thought into considering what it truly means to be oriented to intimacy with a partner of the same sex?

I see the fundamental essence of homosexual attraction as an emotional connectivity with one other's biological sameness. External body parts and secondary sex characteristics merely touch the easily observable surface, but since that's the maximum extent by which a heterosexual trans identifier can relate, they are limited to a superficial and inadequate set of assumptions about the nature of homosexual orientation, much less heterosexual orientation. It's ignorance. Our easily manipulated gay brothers and lesbian sisters are also ignorant. Their minds are so consumed by underclass ideology that they've no capacity left for realizing that the alphabet diversity game is stripping us of our shared yet individually born identities.

Attraction to same sex physical features are an outer layer of our sexuality whereas desiring same sex romantic intimacy is fulfilling an innate psychological impulse to be unified with the same sex. Only same sex partners can provide the necessary relativity to each other's mutual homosexual desire. The same applies to heterosexuality in the inverse. Heterosexuality and homosexuality are opposite sides of a complex coin. It would be far more appropriate to place those two phenomena in a box together than it is to group either with sex identification. Gender theory further distorts and unnecessarily complicates the distinction.

Trans identifiers are at most a novelty in terms of sexual experience. It doesn't matter much that they approximate the look of the other sex. In the end, the state of knowing that person is biologically the same forms the fundamental basis of an emotional connection with a same sex partner.

Hopefully a silver lining to the the rise in trans theory lunacy is that it will catalyze more of us to better understand what defines our sexuality, thereby helping truth to ultimately contain this public mental health crisis.

MariaDesu #sexist reddit.com

Before porn, I wanted to get married one day. Now I want nothing to do with men in a sexual way because of the way I see men treat women in porn. It just makes me wonder if all men are like this, especially since most men watch porn. I hate pornography so much that it makes me feel like exploding. - The way female pornographic actresses are treated -The way sex is portrait as a form of dominance. - The cursing -The perversion of it all I HATE IT. It scarred my teenage brain, and I can never go back in time to undo that.

A lot of women find it degrading and humiliating to them. Several studies have examined the violence against women in porn and all have come up with numbers in the 80% range of porn videos that show violence in some form against women. The other frightening end of that spectrum is that fewer than 5% of these videos show women responding negatively to violence, the overwhelming response by women to violence is neutrality or pleasure.

I do not know the situations of the people involved. I have heard too many stories (both first hand and not) from too many people about actors getting the raw end of the deal. Even supposedly female friendly suicide girls really screws the women in the contracts. One example is the Suicide Girls. Supposedly feminist-friendly porn, yet still screws the girls in the contracts. In addition to money problems, I do not know if these people consented to doing this pornography and then even if they did consent to a degree, how much further were they pushed? How were they treated? And I can't get off and think all that at the same time. That would be disgusting for me

And i will never date a man that watches porn. I look at it as i would look on any other relationship dealbreaker. if he thinks so much of his freedom to consume porn, and doesnt value my thoughts and opinons on the matter, he is free to choose porn and wave goodbye to me. i want to be in a relationship with a human being that has respect and sensitivity for other human beings. I dont consider porn consumption to be an indication of a caring, sensitive individual. I would never 'put up' with anything that went against my core values to make anyone else happy.

regardless of wether it makes it virtually impossible to find a man to be with. Some things are important enough to me to take a stand on. i canot love or respect a man who wants to be all nice and caring with me, then slink off to furtively watch some obnoxious objectifying, dehumanising depictions of women as sex toys. i find that kind of duplicity to be almost schizotypal,. a split between the mans brain where he displays caring, equanimitous behaviour to a partner, then shuts that off to 'enjoy' watching depictions of other women as toys, to be used for sexual gratification. I find that ability to split his mind, quite disturbing. And creepy in the extreme.

I do believe that most men, not all, in this world, hate women. Like probably 70% of the population. It really scares me, that's why I want to be alone instead and never be with one. Men around the world (mostly in Africa, Asia and the Middle East) dominate women, they rape them and stone them to death, mutilate their bodies. Women are not even allowed o go school in some parts of the world, not allowed to drive, vote, speak up but just be slaves for men. It may not be in developed countries but globally, I do believe most men hate women.

Parents would abort female babies because they are unwanted, Not that many women are in politics, business, science, engineering, it's mostly men. You could say men are better and intelligent than women,thanks for the discouragement and stuff but it's not scientifically proven men are more smarter than women. Even on the Internet almost every man I've met thinks "women" + "kitchen." Even after this, I think most of them will call me cunt, slut, bitch.?

My views on porn have been posted elsewhere,.its a frustrating subject, because if someone is pro porn, then they will be entrenched in that position, no matter what points you endevour to show them.

UNreal #conspiracy egi.fakeologist.com

Conspiracy theories and alternative research is a minefield where good information is hard to find and misdirection guaranteed. One of the facts we will have deal with sooner or later is that alternative research was not invented by truth seekers – the origin of conspiracy theory comes from the perpetrators themselves who have been well versed in tactical warfare from the get-go. To gain complete control the Elite (or whatever we might call the power-structure/hidden hand) appear to always have the ambition to control every side of any conflict or topic. To be able to do so, they design their own resistance with as much care (or even more) than their official and admitted roadmap. We might call this state of affairs a perpetual state of Psychological Operations or Controlled Opposition – you might not always see it but whenever you look closely, it is rarely missing in action.
–
The Elite seem to be the ultimate control freaks and leave no field of human activity untouched. Wherever the ‘Nutwork’ have their hands, disinformation follow. What this means for the tiny fraction of alternative researchers that are not covertly part of the power-structure is that we are inundated with new conspiracies and psyops. By now most of us have probably made that very observation; wherever we look closely, things are not what they seem from the outside. It is very effective tactics – we loose our motivation and focus as the rabbit holes get more plentiful, disturbing and ever deeper. This psychological strain makes anyone who offer a way out look attractive and gatekeepers thrive in such scenarios. The temptation is hard to resist, and many buy in – they close down their inquisitive mind. But they are played. To stop any inquiry because of the presence of disinformation is a logical fallacy the Elite incites us to make and that they have planned for us specifically. DBA (discredit by association) is an example of a fallacy that build on Conspiracy Fatigue (CF) and act to end even the most resilient researchers quest: CF is a graveyard of independent thought. And we might all have smelt the seducing perfume of resting within our own conspiracy comfort zones – only we forget this is not how we got to where we are in the first place.

SEEMS LIKE A JOKE TO ME
How is looking at a bunch of photographs and video clips of celebrities and then claiming each one is the opposite gender an investigation? This is obviously intellectually dishonest and it obviously requires us to have absolutely no real experience with members of the opposite sex in real life, no understanding of how biology works, an unwillingness to do a simple Google search to see how and why this is just fallacy, and a complete willingness to suspend all disbelief and believe whatever a voice on a screen tells us. – AA Morris (citation from article)

“A PROPER GANDER: Let’s All Commute To A New Future”

The “Alberta EinSTEIN – Theory of TRANNYTIVITY”: Is This Really Meant To Be Taken Seriously?
www.aamorris.net/properganderatpropaganda/2017/5/8/is-this-really-meant-to-be-taken-seriously

EGI is an observable fact we can verify by ourselves esoterically and (more strenuously) esoterically. Bruce Jenner, Bradley Manning, Chaz Bono and other celebrities represent the exoteric side of Elite Gender Inversion while Zeke Smith, Jenna Talackova, Caroline Cossey illustrate the most accessible esoteric side to Elite Gender Inversion. The existence of EGI both openly and covertly is in itself not really a matter of opinion – it is factual. However, many alternative researchers still choose to ignore or attack the research into EGI and/or expect there to be fair play at hand devoid of any contrivances. If anyone is in doubt by now – sex and gender are major parts of warfare and so is transgenderism. There is no fair play in sight and there is a coordinated effort by the Elite to control both sides of the current dialectic – both the open and the hidden agenda of EGI are targeted. As expected, unless you fold in to the fallacies and fear of gatekeepers using DBA or Conspiracy Fatigue to their advantage – then of course you might regress back in time to another comfort zone or just ignore new information and ‘move on‘. Like many serious researchers moved on from the Flat Earth and now once again are comfortably seated on with Max Igan’s Q27 flight around the spinning globe destined for unknowingness (and yes, i do include Jeran on that ‘double Zayin’ flight).

Fakeologist EGI Forum Thread (11 pages and some 200+ posts)
Attacks on Fakeologist.com EGI research is mostly done indirectly with help of the many YouTube channels that are trying to ‘out’ secretly transgendered celebrities by way of their Transvestigations. Many alternative researchers conveniently choose to mix the Fakeologist EGI research together with more eccentric Youtube channels in a targeted effort to discredit us and the topic itself. I invite anyone of these critical minds to discuss factually about Elite Gender Inversion – although i’m keenly aware that much of their noise is coming from a deceptive or biased (CF) angle focusing on to the sensational side and not what is brought up in detail on the forum-thread and Fakeologist audio content.
–
Relating to the criticism made in the (anonymous*) AA Morris article it is clear that Fakeologist once again is put in the same basket as popular Youtube Channels and indirectly ridiculed, in this case by way of using past radio guest Jon Humanity’s channel and his video of Albert Einstein in his heeled women’s sandals and appearance. While Jon Humanity has many flawed opinions on a wide range of topics, he still has the merit of doing in-depth analysis of celebrities anatomy and raise many pertinent question regarding Elite Gender Inversion. Regardless, it is quite deceptive to imply that this site and members share all or any of Jon Humanity’s opinions – when he’s referenced on this site it is regarding EGI – not his speculation on the Mudflood, Giants or the White Right.
–

Elliot Bougis #conspiracy conservativedailypost.com

EVIDENCE: Hillary Now Confirmed To Have Kuru Disease From Cannibalism

Here is what we know so far:

First, Hillary Clinton clearly has serious medical problems and is receiving unknown or inexplicable treatments for it.

Second, her health problems mainly manifest as speech problems, uncontrollable coughing, or inappropriate laughter, problems walking, and a bizarre tongue ulcer.

Third, she is professionally and personally connected to Marina Abramovic, a bizarre performance artist, and therefore has a surprising number of connections to the occult and to the satanic art/magick ritual known as Spirit Cooking.

Fifth, the usual assumption is that she has Parkinson’s disease, or might simply be a functioning alcoholic who stumbles and acts out in public.

But there is another possibility.

According to Wikipedia, “kuru” is a rare, incurable neurodegenerative disorder (aka, brain disease) which was prevalent among the Fore people Papua New Guinea in the 1950s and 60s. Kuru is a type of transmissible spongiform encephalopathy, caused by prions, which cause abnormal folding of specific proteins mostly found in the brain. In this respect, kuru is very similar to Creuztfeldt-Jakid Disease (CJD), better known as “Mad Cow Disease”.

Don’t worry about the medical jargon; the point is that there is a very unpleasant disease called kuru that is transmitted by ingestion of human blood (specifically the “prions” in the blood). These prions then cause more and more deformities in the brain’s proteins over time, ultimately leading to death.

...In any case, the term kuru derives from the Fore word kuria or guria (“to shake”), a reference to the body tremors that are a classic symptom of the disease. It is also known as the “laughing sickness” due to the pathologic bursts of laughter which are a symptom of the disease. It is now widely accepted that kuru was transmitted among members of the Fore tribe of Papua New Guinea via funerary cannibalism. Kuru causes physiological as well as neurological effects that ultimately lead to death.

Neurological disorders?

Check!

Bodily tremors?

Check!

Laughing fits?

Check!

Ritual consumption of human tissues?

Check!

Kings Wiki #sexist en.kingswiki.com

The 1-to-10 scale is used to rate women's physical attractiveness. Tuthmosis states, "I use halves (.5s) to achieve a little more precision. The idea is that a girl who’s almost at that next level—but doesn’t quite have it takes to get the rating outright—will get a .5. I’ll also occasionally grant (or deduct) halves for “intangibles”—things like extraordinary sweetness (or bitchiness), a sexy vibe (or awkwardness), or a personal preference (though I’m quick to disclose the latter)."[1]

Tuthmosis has argued that the scale is pointless because "It seems we have to account for taste after all. . . . Guys rate their own catches high and others' low. Big-ballerism is rampant. . . . Most guys can't extrapolate. . . . Conversely, guys are easily fooled by camera tricks. . . . It's mental masturbation that breeds pointless arguments."[2] General Stalin notes, "Unfortunately, and I hate to say it, the 1-10 scale is difficult in practice. Generally men can agree whether or not a girl is attractive or not, but to get specifics on how attractive, as Tuth said, calls upon a lot of discretion. Using objective and universal characteristics like symmetry, physical fitness, hip-to-waist ratio, hygiene, etc. are decent points to go on, but everyone has a particular level of preference and ego that makes true objectivity impossible. Men have been referencing the 1-10 scale for an awful long time so I don't see it going anywhere and everyone has a general understanding of it. Dispute over specifics is where men just get into a pissing contest."[3]

MrXY writes, "A 7 is a girl I would describe as being 'pretty'. A 6 to me is 'cute' and an 8 is 'beautiful'".[4]

General Stalin writes:[5]

6/10 is average OK looks. Bangable and respectable but nothing to write home to mom about (not that you should be writing letters to your mom about your conquests)

7/10 is sort of perfect "girlfriend" territory. Where the girl is good looking enough to keep you interested in the long term, but not too good looking where she has a crazy ego or you get anxious about having to mate guard when you go out.

8/10 is where a girl is good looking enough to be able to start making money on her looks. Could be a stripper, bartender, IG hoe, fitness chick, etc. These girls are often crazy, especially where they live a fine line between normal and glamorous life style.

9/10 is a stunner. Model good looks. Gets tons of attention everywhere she goes because of her beauty. Can make a good living off of her looks alone. Most women at this level of physical beauty tend to shack up with wealthy/famous men because they can.

10/10 doesn't exists. No one is perfect. The idea of a "10" would be a girl that has something that a 9 has that makes her specifically more attractive per your personal tastes. Maybe you really fucking love gingers and this girl is a 9 who happens to have long red hair and freckles. There is your 10.

Hume's cheat sheet

L D. Hume notes that the appropriate level of investment in a girl?? depends on her rating:[6]

<table>

Rating Long term relationship Short term relationship Fuck buddy Booty call One night stand
1-4 No No No No Rarely
5 No No No No Sometimes
6 No No Sure I guess Yes Yes
7 No Yes Yes Yes Yes
8-10 Yes Yes Yes Yes Yes

Scale

0

Tuthmosis states, "No Such Thing. Has a dick."

1

Tuthmosis states, "Hideously Unattractive. A monster. Disfigured or irretrievably mutilated. Has two heads, is missing an eye, etc."

2

Tuthmosis states, "Very Unattractive. Disproportionate, morbidly obese."

3

Tuthmosis states, "Unattractive. Ugly, fat, and/or old."

4

Tuthmosis states, "Almost Bangable. But definitely doesn't pass the boner test. Still not good-looking." According to L.D. Hume, girls 4 and lower on the scale are suitable only for one night stands, and even then only when blackout drunk or when one has had sex with fewer than five girls in one's life and is trying to gain experience.

5

Tuthmosis states, "Merely Bangable. Barely passes the boner test. You’d be pretty embarrassed to be seen with her." Hume notes that having sex with such girls is "Almost always a result of excessive, yet not blackout amounts of alcohol. The 'last call at the club' slut coupled with a dry streak."

6

Tuthmosis states, "Almost Cute. She might be cute if one or two things were different, but they’re not. You may not be super-embarrassed to be seen with her, but you certainly wouldn't be proud, and you definitely wouldn't willingly bring her around to anything." Hume describes this as "actually the most dangerous category. The 6s are the most likely to finagle you into a relationship. The sheer number of 6s means you are bound to run into some that have a decent personality, or amazing blowjob skills. Your male hamster will start spinning, thinking about how her tight body overlooks the weird haircut and acne she has. Or how her cute face overrides her baby fat."

7

Tuthmosis states, "Solidly Cute. Zero embarrassment, even some nascent pride in being seen with her. You could bring her to things without looking bad, or losing any of the luster on your game." Hume notes that they are suited for short-term but not long-term relationships:

As to why they are not suited for a long term relationship, the reason is simple—there is just better out there in the world. There are 8s and above. So why, even though she is a cute girl and may have the personality traits to go along with it, settle for a 7? It’s a very very tough thing to advise against and even harder to put in practice. I’ve fallen into the trap myself several times.

The answer of course lies in something that most men have yet to experience. The feeling of dating an 8, which is exponentially better (though admittedly harder to pull off) than a 7. I’ve dabbled in this before and it does make a difference. Try to keep the 7s at bay for the short term relationships and everything below. Instead, use the time you would put LTR’ing a 7 into bettering yourself for the 8.

8

Tuthmosis states, "Hot-Cute. Would be straight-up proud to be seen with her or bring her to things. This is often the sweet spot for long-term relationship material."

9

Tuthmosis states, "Smoking Hot. This is a girl who can easily monetize her beauty. You’re going out of your way to be seen with her."

10

Tuthmosis states, "Perfection. A theoretical abstraction that only exists in the laboratory." Athlone McGinnis agrees.[7] According to Donovan Sharpe, tens don’t get hit on as often, are much more pleasant than you think, are extremely insecure, are so-so in bed, and are people too.[8]

Alternative Scales

philosophical_recovery notes, "The 1-10 as a rating scale will be debated until people stop using it. It's been pointed out before that a much better scale is something more like WNB->WB->WHR->WI, or, Would Not Bang -> Would Bang -> Would Hit Raw -> Would Impregnate".[9]

The late comedian Patrice O'Neal devised a thirty-point scale, with 0-10 being degrees of "ugly looking women", 11-20 being degrees of "alright looking women", and 21-30 being degrees of "beautiful women."[10]

Roosh mentioned both the 1-10 scale and the "binary scale" (with 0 being WNB and 1 being WB) in an early article.[11]

AbysmalDescent #sexist reddit.com

Re: 'Shy and awkward’ student, 19, who googled 'how to make a friend' then touched a schoolgirl, 17, on her arm and waist while trying to chat to her faces JAIL after sex assault conviction

Imagine a world where men could send women to jail just for touching them. Like, just permanently end their future(judicially, professionally and socially destroy them) and incarcerate them(with other far worse criminals no less), just because of a touch. No violence. No ill-intent. No danger. No harm. Literally just light tactile contact(not even skin-on-skin).

Imagine a world where men could actually think this is an appropriate and equal response to a woman touching them. I can't even imagine such a world and, yet, this is what is considered normal when the genders are reversed. It is just insane the level of power that women have, and the level of hatred and disregard that exists for men(regardless of their intent or the circumstances placed upon them) for this to even be possible.

This also wouldn't even have happened if it was another woman who had touched her, nor would it happen if it was a man touching another man or a woman touching a man. At best they would think "oh, that's a bit awkward/inappropriate" and then moved on. They wouldn't see themselves as victims or respond with violent anger. The only punishment I could even justify in this scenario is a course in etiquette, and even that seems excessive given the circumstances.

I've been touched without consent by females ever since high school. One even grabbed my dick during a pair assignment while the teacher was out of the room. Everyone thought it was funny. Her only punishment was not being paired with me again. Such male privilege. And don't get me started on parties and bars.

I've had women grab my ass when I worked at a bar, and they weren't doing it in a nice way at all, and yet the thought of sending them to jail was not even remotely on my list of responses. There was no response of anger, vitriol or violence.

To me, this would be as much of an over-reaction walking on the street and having a stray dog come up to me, looking for food, and poking me with its nose(with no sign of violence whatsoever), and then me going "that dog needs to be put down, it's oppressing me".

If a woman attacked violently, then I would consider pressing charges because she is a danger to herself and others(ironically, she would probably still not face any jail time because she's a woman).

”Imagine a world where men could send women to jail just for touching them.”

Yeah, on the waist, without saying a word, and the girl having said "stop" before.

Pretty sure that is not how it went down but, even if it was, that still doesn't justify the type of overreaction it got.

It's not normal to go up to someone, touch them on the waist without saying anything, and leave.

It doesn't matter whether it's normal or not, the point is the type of response you would have to it and why you have that response. If a woman touched you on the waist, under any circumstance, you would not consider sending her to jail for it. You would also not just presume the worse of intensions against her character either.

If a stray dog came up to me on the street and touched my knee with his paw, that wouldn't be "normal" but it also would justify me kicking that dog or calling for that dog to be put down either. And, people are capable of basic empathy or sympathy for a dog, surely they are capable of doing the same for an awkward, sheltered and inexperienced teenage boy too.

lmao imagine actually defending this.

Are you are not familiar with the concept of critical thought? I understand how fair judgement and fair treatment might seem like radical concepts to you, at least when it comes to men, but surely these concepts aren't beyond your comprehension. I also understand how ingrained misandry is into our daily thinking and rationalizing, which these types of cases exemplify perfectly, which is why I pointing these things out.

A woman can never be too cautious with a man who touched her fucking waist without permission.

"can never be too cautious"? What are you even talking about here? Are you going to instantly die from someone touching you? Are you going to fall ill or be crippled from a light touch? Or are you just speculating and escalating on other shit that didn't happen? if someone walks next to me, does that give me the right to punch them in "self-defence" because "you can never be too cautious"? And, yes, you can be too cautious how how you exercise that caution is overt and detrimental to others.

A man doesn't have a "right" to touch any woman like that.

Who said anything about having a "right" to anything? Is this another projection? You can certainly say "hey, don't touch me" to anyone you like and you can communicate that clearly and constructively to anyone. You can certainly take some steps to prevent it from happening, including removing yourself from the situation or removing them from the situation. The's not the point. The point is the type of reaction you have being disproportionate and targeted. It's like no one has the "right" to insult me or "offend" me, and yet that doesn't mean I get to assault them or send them to jail if they do.

I'll concede that the punishment is disproportionately severe, but he deserved to be punished nonetheless.

Do you think a woman would warrant that type of punishment if she touched another woman? Or if a woman touched a man? Or if a man touched another man on the waist? How is it that you can only truly justify this type of overt vitriolic reaction when it comes to men, and only men, touching a woman?

Maybe a fine + hours of community service and some classes on how to not creep women out.

Have you ever considered the possibility that the way women see/treat men, or how easily/quickly women can be "creeped out" by men(and only men) might also be majorly detrimental or inherently bigoted? That, maybe, society is teaching women to have an irrationally negative disposition towards men or a strong prejudice against men that is just culturally accepted. What if, for example, it was a black person touching white person, and then that white person had an overly-violent reaction to being touched by a black person because they are black, and then called for jail time or "community service and classes on how not to creep white people out"?

devoid #racist vnnforum.com

How the Jews poison the "White goyim" (MUST READ)

I hope this information does not get censored, because I believe this is something ground breaking, as most WN's have no clue about this, but when you read the information/links I'll present to you, you'll finally get a better picture of what's really going on.

It seems like most WN's think Jews are killing us by massive non-white immigration, psychological warfare/brainwashing people, but I have information that should make everyone's jaw drop.

We are literally being exterminated - and the white demographic is being completely destroyed, in a way that you would have never thought was possible.

Psychiatric drugs. In short, psychiatric drugs are chemical lobotomies in a pill. The way the work is by completely destroying the brain, and by turning you into an apathetic, brain dead, passive zombie. How can you fight or defend tyranny if you do not have the mental capacity to think critically, nor have the ability to function.

Jew puppet psychiatrists are practically legal executioners. Once you read the links I am going to present to you, you will understand everything, you will get the full picture, and understand how Jews are destroying white people, and western civilization/society from all angles.

Now you think you're safe if you stay away from those psychotic and demented freaks, but that's where you're all wrong. A lot of family doctors or general practitioners hand out psychiatric drugs like CANDY. This is how desperate the Jews are on completely exterminating us!

Don't believe me? You a disbeliever? You can't grasp the concept that everything in society has been compromised by the Jews, and everything is being used against us, even murder us?

Type in on Jewgle: "Doctors give SSRI's out like candy" and you'll see for yourself.

THIS is how bad it really gets. You think these psychotic doctors/psychiatrists are destroying the minds and lives of normal healthy people because of depression? Wrong. They now push Jewish psychiatric poison for things like INSOMNIA, SMOKING, MIGRAINES etc.

They are pushing these chemical lobotomy pills on AS MUCH people as POSSIBLE. Ladies and gentlemen, these Jews are responsible for causing many deaths, many mass shootings (I'll get into that in a second), suicides (these poisonous pills are designed to make people suicidal, psychotic, to destroy society)... and then when people become psychotic because of Jewish psych pills, and go on mass shooting sprees. the Jews use this as an excuse to take your guns away from you!

All of this has been planned/engineered. This is a plus in every possible way for the Jews; it destroys the minds of the white goyim, it turns them into mentally disabled handicaps, less white children (psych drugs cause full blown permanent impotence in men), it literally kills them (lots of people have committed suicide because of these pills), and a lot of people go full blown psychotic thanks to these Jewish poison... which end up going on mass shootings - which the Jews can use this as excuse to take away your guns, and finish you off!

Most doctors are incompetent. The only push pills on you, and they think they're oh-so intelligent by being pill pushers. Doctors are not doctors anymore, as Jews have corrupted the health/medical industry as well.

Vaccines (which is an entirely different subject) is also no longer safe. Jews control EVERYTHING - do you want to trust these Jews with your health? Just because it was originally the white man's invention, DOES NOT mean it is safe anymore. Vaccines have been HIJACKED by the Jews, they put poison in it to destroy the white goyim masses.

Wonder why those Jews keep encouraging you to get those yearly flu shots on the radio/TV/newspapers? This is all engineered to exterminate us.

I believe the #1 poison is psychiatric drugs, because its INSTANT. It causes instant catastrophic damage. I'm not sure if this the right term (I may be wrong) but it causes complete and total collateral damage. Pure destruction. If you wanted to subvert a society and completely destroy it, this would be a fantastic way of doing so. Drug the population, damage their brains, and society becomes broken. Mass shootings, psychotic people, stupid people from brain damage, etc... everything just falls apart.

Now here are the facts. If these facts do not give you the full picture of how hellbent the Jews are on exterminating us, or the millions of lives they have destroyed, nothing will. If these facts do not send chills down your spine, or even shock you, nothing ever will.

------
1. SSRI's cause permanent subtle cognitive damage (this can be said of ALL psychiatric drugs)

2. Most people who take SSRI's do not know that they have been
damaged
3. Most p-docs will advise you to increase your dosage if you
complain to them that you have suffered brain damage from SSRI's usage
4. Most p-docs will tell you that your damage is due to DEPRESSION,
even if you insist that you feel your cognitive ability has not been
the same since taking and consequently STOPPING the use of SSRIs.
5. Most p-docs get their information directly from the pharmaceutical
companies themselves, who fund the conferences, lectures, and
symposiums that they attend
6. Most pharmaceutical companies skew their research results to make
a profit, and virtually no long-term research is done to determine
whether SSRI's cause long-term damage to the brain
7. The most troubling permanent lasting adverse neurological effects
you may experience after prolonged SSRI usage (and consequent
STOPPING) are :
a). Word finding troubles
b). Absolute emotional flatness and deadness
c). Permanently reduced sex drive
d). An odd, pervasive social anxiety/awkwardness
e). Trouble with coordination
f). Bad memory
g). Trouble retrieving words
h). Overall paucity of thought and expression
i). Lack of creativity and intellectual fluidity (mental fog)
j). A lack of ability to "steer" or control the tone of your voice
(I've noticed this- that I sound shaky and agitated no matter what my
mood is, and people think I'm upset when I'm really not)

8. After these brain damaging effects have sunken in, you may have
great difficulty finding support anywhere. Talking to a p-doc may be
an exercise in futility. They will want to protect their own interests
and shield themselves from a possible lawsuit, hence you may be told
continually to get back on meds/up your dosage. The more you protest,
the less credibility you have, thus the more evidence in your p-doc's
mind that you need to go back on SSRIs.
9. Once you realize the extent of the damage, and it sinks in beyond
the denial you may initially face, it will be hard to explain to
others exactly why you are not the same person you used to be. The
damage is similar to a TBI (Traumatic Brain Injury) yet it might be
better termed DBI (Diffuse Brain Injury).

--------
1 in 5 American adults are currently taking mind-altering psychiatric drugs such as antidepressants.
1 in 10 Americans are on antidepressants, maybe even more. That's 1 in 10 people who are having their brains destroyed, but most don't even know they have been damaged.


1 in 5 Adults have been lobotomized/brain damaged by the Jews. Most are NOT aware they have been brain damaged, some people know something is wrong, few found out the truth.

"The government gives psychiatry its fake legitimacy. The government blesses the medical licensing boards that award psychiatrists permission to drug your children, alter their brains, poison them, and of course make all the fake diagnoses in the first place. Without the government, these fakes would sink into the waves and be gone forever. Nobody in his right mind or wrong mind would ever step into a psychiatrist’s office. It would be like volunteering to stumble out on to a mine field seeded with explosives.
It’s fiction. It’s a billion-dollar fiction. There is not a single diagnostic test for any so-called mental disorder. Never has been. No blood test, no urine test, no saliva test, no brain scan, no genetic test. No science. The drugs are brain poisons.

Psychiatry hasn't been destroyed and outlawed because there is money in it. Pharmaceutical money. And because the public is in a trance. Mothers and fathers are quite willing to take their children to these brain poisoners…lambs to the slaughter."

Psyche Drugs and School Shootings

In virtually every mass school shooting during the past 15 years, the shooter has been on or in withdrawal from psychiatric drugs. Yet, federal and state governments continue to ignore the connection between psychiatric drugs and murderous violence, preferring instead to exploit these tragedies in an oppressive and unconstitutional power grab to snatch guns away from innocent, law-abiding people.

Neuroleptic Drugs

The neuroleptics or antipsychotics are the most frequently prescribed drugs in mental hospitals, and are widely used in board-and-care homes, nursing homes, institutions for people with mental retardation, children's facilities, and prisons. They also are given to millions of patients in public clinics and to hundreds of thousands in private psychiatric offices. Often they are prescribed for anxiety, sleep problems, and other difficulties in a manner that runs contrary to the usual recommendations. And too often, they are administered to children with behavior problems, even children who are living at home and going to school. Rather than treating a disease, the neuroleptics create a disease. The neuroleptic drugs are chemical lobotomizing agents with no specific therapeutic effect on any symptoms or problems. Their main impact is to blunt and subdue the individual. They also physically paralyze the body, rendering the individual less able to react or to move. They produce a chemical lobotomy and a chemical straitjacket. The drugs are also the cause of brain damage that afflicts up to half or more of long-term patients. The original ones, including Thorazine and Mellaril, are called phenothiazines.

----

JEW SHRINK DRUG PUSHERS KILL CHRISTIAN KIDS WITH DEADLY DRUGS – THEN SUPPORT TREASON AGAINST OUR SACRED USA CONSTITUTION!

Every mass school shooting has resulted in lots of treasonous talk about taking our protection away. ALL of those scum ARE the mortal deadly enemies of you and your family from the jew who runs your life and pollutes the innocence of your children like Fox News Media If these scum do not succeed this time – be assured that there will more and more and more shootings. Every mass school shooting in American has involved the use of psychotropic drugs. Since the jew psychoquacks now have one in six Americans hooked on psychotropic poisons ( according the jew psychoquack David Cohen) – we will have an inexhaustible supply of potential psychotic killers. Jew here have more American children hooked on their poisons than in the entire Continent of Europe!
Fact: Despite 22 international drug regulatory warnings on psychiatric drugs citing effects of mania, hostility, violence and even homicidal ideation, and dozens of high profile shootings/killings tied to psychiatric drug use, there has yet to be a federal investigation on the link between psychiatric drugs and acts of senseless violence.
Fact: At least fourteen recent school shootings were committed by those taking or withdrawing from psychiatric drugs resulting in 109 wounded and 58 killed (in other school shootings, information about their drug use was never made public—neither confirming or refuting if they were under the influence of prescribed drugs.)
Fact: Between 2004 and 2011, there have been over 11,000 reports to the U.S. FDA’s MedWatch system of psychiatric drug side effects related to violence. These include 300 cases of homicide, nearly 3,000 cases of mania and over 7,000 cases of aggression. Note: By the FDA’s own admission, only 1-10% of side effects are ever reported to the FDA, so the actual number of side effects occurring are most certainly higher. One of their victims is my own son – so I know – firsthand!
Fact: Virtually ALL of the criminals involved with the administration of these deadly poisons are jews. Jews DOMINATE the false medical profession of psychiatry. Ruining the life of a Christian goy is very very profitable . Even though only less than 2% of the population – these criminals comprise over 65% of all the psychoquacks in their horrid criminal endeavors. (... continued)

[...]

I have tried to put this information together coherently, and to the best of my ability. Jewish psychiatry has also completely destroyed my life as well, and these jew poisonous/murderous pills have completely wiped me out as a human being.

Imagine the brain is a hard drive.... these pills completely destroy/reformat the brain. Completely wipes out everything. At the age of 14, a very traumatic event happened in my life, it was so tragic, it traumatized me. My life was destroyed at the age of 16 by a non-white psychiatrist. I wished I could back in time, and prevented this all from happening. It's been 7 years, and I'm still a complete vegetable. I haven't recovered, but only deteriorated. I cannot call this a life, because a life is what I used to have. This is an existence without a life, and this is what happens to all people who become lobotomized by Jewish psychiatric drugs.


Because of this experience, I connected the dots, and have become a WN.
-----

Most white nationalists are not aware about this, and how the psychotic, demented, and pathological criminal Jew are exterminating us by psychiatric drugs (which is being pushed on many people, being giving out like candy, FOR LITERALLY ANY "CONDITION"!)


Most white nationalists think they are simply brainwashing us/bringing massive amounts of 3rd world immigration (this is true and part of it), however most white nationalists do not know they are literally exterminating us, destroying the white demographic in a way no one would have ever known, and they are getting away with this.

I hope I have opened many eyes to the truth. Thank you for reading.

HumanSockPuppet #sexist reddit.com

Good day, class. This will be a recap (and expansion) of my original guide to bitch management. In it, you will learn how to manage your bitch(es) by turning your relationship into a game she plays - winning prizes of intimacy for good behaviour, and getting punished with demotion or exile if she fails.
Additionally, this guide will also cover:

What it means to manage a bitch, and the challenges you will face
Why bitch management is ultimately YOUR responsibility
Relationship strategies for maximizing happiness and minimizing drama
How to turn those strategies into lasting positive lifestyle changes

This guide will begin with some basic theory, describing why men are the arbitrators of relationships. It will then establish some common definitions and lay the groundwork for the strategy section afterwards.
As you read this guide, bear in mind that it is a model, not an absolute treatise. You are free (and encouraged) to modify any part of it to suit you. But for the most part, the principles outlined here should be fairly universal.
We say AWALT for a reason.

Disclaimers:

1) In order to sustain a prosperous relationship with a girl, you MUST be comfortable with bossing her around - being a bonafide Patriarch™.
You don't have to be a master of your emotions yet. But at the very least, you must be willing to be firm with her, give her orders, and tell her "no", even against a flood of her tears.

Why? Because ultimately, women get their behavioural cues from men. Remember, women are children: mentally, behaviourally, evolutionarily. They are not like us. They don’t think like us, or have the same deep sense of personal responsibility.

Even the most sociopathic man will intuitively know when he has crossed a boundary and offended another man. Whether or not he feels guilty about it is a different issue, but he at least knows he’s done something wrong. Evolving this instinct was the key to a man’s ability to either strategically make enemies or avoid unwanted conflicts.

Women, on the other hand, evolved no such instinct. On the contrary, women evolved the instinct to push a man’s buttons as a way of testing his willingness to face conflict head-on (what we call shit-testing). A man who is willing to fight against her will also fight FOR her. Likewise, a man who caves before her will most certainly cave before his enemies.

This is why bossing her around is key. She is evolved to push the boundary by picking fights with you. So unless you are strict with your girl, she will become as selfish and insufferable as you let her get away with.

2) A long-term relationship CANNOT be your end goal. You can only be OPEN to the possibility of having one.
Men are the gatekeepers of relationships. Since a relationship is what you have to offer, you mustn’t just give it away. It must be a reward she earns in small doses for inspiring your trust and devotion.

I understand that many of you want a LTR with a good girl – sometimes a series of flings isn’t enough to fulfill you. Believe me, I sympathize.
But winning a LTR is HER problem, not yours. Handing a girl your devotion won’t magically make her worthy of it. When you WANT a LTR too badly, you place your focus on the idea of having a relationship instead of evaluating the girl. You become fixated on your fantasy relationship and selectively ignore the things happening right in front of you: her deep character flaws, her indiscretions, and the red flags.

You must regard women as candidates applying for the job of being your girlfriend – a supporter, a lover, a comfort away from the everyday battles. Don't just hire a bitch because you want the position filled. Make sure you vet your candidates fiercely and hire the right girl for the job.
This guide will help you do just that.

3) This guide will be far less effective if you’re already married.

As a man, your ONLY power in a relationship is the power to revoke your attention, validation, and your time by walking away – sometimes for good. It’s the only strategy you have, but it’s a potent one, and for a very specific reason:
You may want a woman, but women NEED you. The problem with marriage is that it strips you of the ability to completely walk away. Sure, you can still get a divorce, but not without shooting yourself in the foot, possibly losing your children and a significant portion of your hard-earned assets in the process.

Our current social climate is not amenable to marriage. If you’re already married, you have my condolences. If you’re not married but plan on it, then you’re a moron and you have no one to blame but yourself when your mistake comes back to bite you in the ass. And bite you it will.

Theory: The Fundamental Principle of Sex and Relationships

The Fundamental Principle states that women are the gatekeepers of sex, and men are the gatekeepers of relationships. You should be familiar with it by now. If not, educate your ass here.

Beyond a man's Relationship Gate lies a paradise that every girl wants to live in. It is a magical place where pickle jars are opened, spiders are squished, rides are given, appliances are fixed, cuddles are administered, encouragement is provided, and order is firmly established. And all of that requires a man’s time and effort.

As a man, your time and effort is your most valuable asset. You use it to get shit done – most often shit that’s related to Your Mission. When you give that time to someone else, it is a tremendous gift which should be appreciated and respected. This is the key principle behind bitch management. You must demand that a girl appreciate and respect your time.

Some men don’t demand respect for their time. They are too liberal with who they let through their Relationship Gate. They've got no border patrol, no review process. Just a country full of free benefits for anyone who crosses over. These are the beta-orbiters, and they are constantly beset by every vagrant vagina and panhandling pussy that bats its attached eyelashes.

Other men are too strict about admission. They only issue temporary sex visas, and they often deport women without notice. These are the uninterested lone-alphas, and they have chosen a lifestyle of banging and then flying solo. YOU, on the other hand, are open to a LTR with a bitch – IF she earns it.Managing your life and your bitches comes down to awarding her ONLY the time that she has earned. You can decide just how much of your time a bitch has earned by assigning her with a “rank”.


Definitions: An Overview of "Ranks"

We use a lot of terms for describing a relationship with a girl: girlfriend, fiancee, one-night stand (ONS), plate, friend-with-benefits (FWB), etc.
But what do these terms really mean?
From a male perspective, each term implies a different level of investment in the girl – an investment of time, effort, emotions, and other precious male resources. As such, they can be arranged as ranks in order of how much investment each term implies.

Here is a list of ranks we will use (along with working definitions) ordered from least to greatest:
Level 0: One-Night Stand -or- Pump and Dump. You throw a fuck into this girl and never see her again (unless she reaches out to you). It is a single encounter that is casual, sexual, and impersonal. You may or may not have met her before the encounter, and you may or may not even know her name. She is a one-time answer to a physical necessity - nothing more.
Requires no maintenance and a very low investment of time.

Level 1: Plate -or- Fuck Buddy. You have sex with this girl more than once. You will know her name and just enough about her life so you can schedule sexual encounters. You may also know a little bit about her personally, so you can help her rationalize being your fucktoy, assuming she's uncomfortable about the idea of being one. Otherwise, she's down with it and you're both satisfied with being casual. She is a temporary answer to a physical necessity.
Requires some maintenance and a low investment of time.

Level 2: Friends with Benefits. You have sex with this girl more than once - typically as often as mutual convenience allows, but perhaps even when it's not completely convenient for her (because she likes you enough to go out of her way). You also spend non-sexual time with this girl, like eating out or pursuing activities of mutual interest. You know more about her personal life, and she knows more about yours, and as a result the two of you exchange mutual, non-sexual favours from time to time. You will most certainly have good memories of non-sexual time spent with this girl, which will lead to positive emotional investment in her, making her more than just an answer to a physical necessity.
Requires moderate maintenance and a moderate investment of time.

Level 3: Significant Other -or- Girlfriend. The highest level of intimacy a girl can earn. You have sex with this girl often, usually more often than you do any of your other girls. You also spend a considerable amount of non-sexual time with this girl, resulting in many shared memories and a deeper emotional investment. At this level, there is significant mutual concern for the other's well-being. The girl in particular will feel a great dependence on your direct and involved guidance in her life (rather than simple stoicism and confidence). Emotions are strongly felt at this level: affection is especially sweet, and betrayal can be especially bitter.

Requires significant maintenance and a significant investment of time.

Strategy: How She Plays the Game

The game itself is quite simple:
A girl begins the game at Level 0 or Level 1, depending on the context in which you two met.
If you met in a club, or began as total strangers grinding against each other at a house party, she's Level 0.
If you two met in a slightly more sociable manner - perhaps introduced by mutual friends, or she impressed you with her pleasant demeanour after you opened her at the local cafe, she's Level 1. She can also bump up from Level 0 to Level 1 if she reaches out and maintains pleasant and reasonable contact with you after a casual sexual encounter.

From that point on, a girl must perform NON-SEXUAL services for you in order to advance in rank.
These services can include, but are not limited to:
Cooking you a healthy meal. Either at your place or by invitation to hers.
Treating you out some place. A restaurant or an activity of interest to YOU. Bonus points if you've never done the activity but it looks like fun - that means she's really thinking about you.

Buying you a well-thought-out gift. Not just a random thing, but a gift which demonstrates an effort to understand your life and interests (example: therapeutic shoe insoles for a guy who likes running, or high-quality ear buds for a music-lover). The accuracy of her insight is more important than the cost of the gift.

Hand-making you an artistic gift. These might include a picture or painting, a poem, a knitted scarf, a calendar of her photography, and the like. The more personalized the gift, the better. A hand-made gift doesn't have to be highly useful (since making useful things is tough), as long as the gift shows patience, diligence, and an attention to detail.

The greater her investment of time and effort in the gesture, the more credit she earns with you. Eventually, if she shows a consistent pattern of investing effort in you, she can advance in rank by one level.

As previously stated, a girl must invest time and effort in you in order to get your time and effort in return.

Why Do the Services Have to Be Non-Sexual?

Simple. Because a girl doesn't have to exert any effort at all to have sex. If she is attractive enough, all she needs to do to get sex is show up. Someone will fuck her if she makes herself available.
This game only rewards effort. You should also remember this: sex is the most fundamental pre-requisite of any non-platonic interaction between a guy and a girl. You'll never find yourself in a situation where a girl is giving you gifts and cooking you meals, but NOT having sex with you (unless you’re both a coward and too daft to read the signs). If sex isn't happening, then something is terribly amiss and you must either correct it or next her. Which brings us to our next section...

Strategy: Punishment and Demotion

There are many ways in which a girl can make a mistake and upset you. Maybe she starches your shirts too much, or she burns the dinner she was making for you. These kinds of mistakes should not be punished with demotion because, despite her mistake, she is investing time and effort in you. You can think of a suitable punishment and repayment for your lost shirt without going to the extreme of knocking her down a rank.
Instead, demotable offenses should be offenses that are an affront to your dignity, your authority, or to the time and effort you have invested in her.
Offenses can be intentional or unintentional.

Unintentional offenses will usually come in the form of some indiscretion on her part, as she slowly loses attraction for you, her conscious effort wanes, and she slips back into her natural hypergamous state.

Some examples of unintentional offenses are:
Unconsciously being too flirty with another guy (shit-test, can occur at any level).
Failing to keep an important promise (usually by neglect or poor-planning), the consequences of which cost you a substantial amount of money or ANY amount of reputation (failing of respect, this offense will happen at Level 2 or above, since you don't entrust these matters to girls below Level 2).
Neglecting some important duty that you have assigned to her (failing of respect, typically occurs at Level 3).

Frequency of sex decreases, and she absently evades when you try to initiate sex (loss of attraction, can occur at any level).
Committing an unintentional offense should typically result in the demotion of the girl by one (1) rank.
Intentional offenses are far more vulgar than their counterparts. Intentional offenses are usually targeted shit-tests meant to re-assess your fitness. In some extreme cases they might even occur in the presence of friends and family, making them vindictive attacks against your reputation or dignity.

Some examples of intentional offenses are:
Consciously flirting with another guy, trying to arouse jealousy in you (shit-test, can occur at any level).
Openly insulting you (shit-test, can occur at any level).
Frequency of sex decreases, and she consciously and vehemently evades when you try to initiate sex or talk about it (loss of attraction, can occur at any level).
Committing an intentional offense should result in the demotion of the girl by two (2) ranks. Committing a vindictive attack against your reputation should result in a loss of three (3) ranks.

Now, this next part is important, so pay attention:
Once a girl has been demoted, her current level becomes the maximum level she can ever be again. She can only climb the ladder as long as she is flawless in the execution of her womanly duties. Once she commits a serious offense, she is demoted, and she can never rise again.

Some examples of transgressions and appropriate punishments:
A plate (level 1) who fails to provide sex on demand drops one rank to level 0, and she is replaced by a plate who will.
A friend-with-benefits (level 2) who remorselessly loses your expensive digital camera drops one rank and becomes a plate forevermore.
A girlfriend (rank 3) who drunkenly humiliates you in front of your friends at a party drops three ranks to level 0, and you quietly disappear and move on.
Now, I know what you’re thinking. Permanent plate status? Walking away for good? Aren’t these punishments pretty severe?

In reality, the offenses outlined above will generally only occur for one of two reasons:
You’ve slipped up in your duties as a Red Pill man and her attraction for you is beginning to wane.
She doesn’t have the sense to recognize her unworthy behavior because of a failure of parenting that occurred long before you met her.
If it’s reason 1, then you’re at fault, and you’re better off starting from scratch with a new bitch then trying to salvage a relationship that’s on a downward slope. If it’s reason 2, then the girl was never worth your time to begin with, and you simply didn’t know it until now. You can’t turn a ho into a housewife, so don’t even bother trying to reform her.

In general, you must be uncompromising whenever you punish your bitch. Remember what we’ve already established: girls look to you for cues on what’s okay. If you don’t crack down on bad behavior when it happens, a girl’s only assumption is that you are perfectly okay with whatever she’s done. Hypergamy is selfish by nature, and it shows no mercy. Tough love is the only effective response.

There’s also another benefit to being ruthless: meting out uncompromising punishment helps to keep you in abundance mentality. An uncompromising approach helps you to avoid the risk of developing oneitis, and it prevents you from being manipulated by women who are all too good at tugging at your sympathy to get just one/two/five more chances.

Keep your life drama-free by dropping troublesome bitches. With so many eligible bachelorettes out there looking desperately for a strong man like you, no single one of them is worth your grief.

Strategy: Naturalizing the Process

As you learn the rhythm of using rewards and punishments to keep your bitch enthralled, you’ll develop an intuition for how to play your part of the game. The process will become second-nature to you. You’ll naturally become bored with women who fail to show you the proper appreciation, and gravitate towards the ones who make your life more pleasant.

That’s the ultimate goal here: to make you a natural. You’ll never say to your bitch “You’re a level 1 plate now!” or “You’re going down a rank for that shit!” This system is for YOU – so you can have an abstract model with which to understand the game, until managing bitches becomes as natural to you as breathing or blowing a load on her face.

Final Thoughts

The key trait of the modern western woman is her absolute lack of concern for the desires of men. Our cuckold state has all but replaced men as husbands and providers, and so it would seem like the traditional relationship is basically obsolete – that women will never again need to concern themselves with OUR wants. Nothing could be further from the truth.

Though a woman can subsist off the benefits paid for by our taxes, the government cannot give her the love, the attention, the stability, the masculine reassurance, and direct intervention that are so crucial to her emotional well-being. A woman feels vulnerable in a role of leadership, and she feels lost without a masculine leader to boldly claim responsibility for confronting all of the challenges that terrify her. No government can provide that for her. For that, she must come to us.

And for that, we must demand a price.

My hope is that this guide has helped you realize just how much leverage you have in the sexual dynamic – much more than you once thought. Let this guide help you to capitalize on that leverage – for the sake of your happiness, and for the happiness of any woman who works hard enough to earn your time and effort.

Bennett Lee Ross #crackpot #conspiracy bennettleeross.com

We are immersed in microwave frequency spectrums 24/7
This steady stream of artificial radiation
Damages the organs and the eyes
And affects brain waves.

Commands can be put into these microwave pulses.

At first there will be checkpoints
Perimeter security
And patrol protection.

Because of the neurotic belief in the non existent corona virus
People are going to think this lockdown/quarantine/martial law is a good thing.

Everyone is already submitting to the laser gauge
That radiates your forehead while reading your temperature.

When someone sees the 5G being set up and inquires
They will be told it is for fumigation of the corona virus
They will then go on their merry way.

5G emits hydrogen cyanide
And absorbs water and oxygen in your cells
It is also for surveillance.

The mandatory biometric entry exit tracking system will come into play
It will be for area denial
And cover land, sea and air.

The entry exit tracking system will be based on your social credit score
Which will be based on your position within the system
And on how obedient you’ve been.

The lower your score the less access you have to other areas.

Then there will be the implementation of Active Denial
Restriction zones surrounded by highly charged energy
A forcefield with perimeters that can be set up anywhere.

Similar to the dome that covers our plane.

It will also be able to project a beam covering your whole person
At a range up to a kilometer or over half a mile.

It will detect and access all human activity
And scan a forest to locate body temperature
And ascertain what is in your purse or pockets.

Smaller cells will be activated
Keeping you restricted to your neighborhood
Or locked in your house.

It will be able to kill you on the street.

But you will not go near the perimeter
Because it will cause you intense pain.

Stephen A. Coston, Sr #fundie jesus-is-savior.com

"Royalty, Rumors and Racists"

BY STEPHEN A. COSTON, SR.

AUTHOR OF THE NEW BOOK:

KING JAMES
The VI Of Scotland & I Of England
Unjustly Accused?

The character assassination of His Majesty King James VI & I is an ongoing evolving process that has matured in this present day to a sort of "open season" of differing opinions variously setting forth different theories and hypotheses on the whys, hows, and ifs of the alleged "homosexuality" of King James VI & I. Part of the reason for so many differing opinions is that many historians and would-be historians have forsaken fact for fictional accounts on the life of King James VI & I. Without facts to restrain the imagination the investigative process turns into a rumor mill and as such is an aberration of the historical process. Often these highly speculative accounts, contemporary or modern, are based not on the actual life and words of King James VI & I but on what these individuals THINK what King James VI & I said and did meant. Honest professional historians are beginning to admit this and this is most welcome; however, King James VI & I still has his ardent critics.

More often than not even when actual facts of King James VI & I are presented they are subjected to interpretive twists designed to give the reader the impression that the words and deeds of King James VI & I support the allegations commonly leveled against him. Case in point, it is a known fact King James VI & I was handicapped from birth with weak limbs and injured himself many times. This caused him to have an unsteady gait. To compensate for this King James VI & I often leaned on his most trusted councilors and friends which also happened to be members of his personal staff, individuals critics freely term "favorites." It is often stated that "James was fond of leaning all over his beautiful young favorites" giving the reader the impression King James VI & I did so not because of a physical handicap but because of sexual attraction to same. Nothing could be farther from the truth. Further, it is also freely alleged that King James VI & I "passionately kissed" his "favorites" in public.

Critics of King James VI & I are fond of inferring from the above that King James VI & I engaged in the "French kissing" of his "favorites." They then use this assumption as yet another "proof" to support their contention that King James VI & I was indeed truly a "homosexual."

What the detractors of King James VI & I utterly fail to realize; however, (to their detriment) is the fact that the accounts responsible for popularizing this characterization were penned by individuals who hated not only King James VI & I as a Scot, but the whole country of Scotland as well. They were some of the most militant racists of the time of the most vicious type. Some of their contemporaries knew this and railed against them and defended King James VI & I and it is quite the mystery why modern critics seem not to know this.

Another point that critics of King James VI & I fail to recognize relative to this issue of kissing is that King James VI & I "slobbered" when he ate his food, consumed his drink, or even when he "kissed" someone's hand or cheek. Are we to infer then that King James VI & I passionately kissed inanimate objects, foods and drinks and bodily extremities? What about the widely accepted practice of a monarch's kiss at court to show the King's favor upon an individual? Besides that what of the British acceptance of public kissing for all kinds of events and circumstances. Are we then to infer that the whole island of Great Britain was a hot bed of homosexuality?

It is also inferred that because some individuals rejoiced to have King James VI & I's "legs soon in their arms" upon their return to court that this is somehow indicative of a reference to a sexual position. However, there exist many woodcuts depicting just this position of many noble and common men in with King James VI & I at court. It was customary to prostrate oneself at the feet of the monarch when allowed so close to His Majesty's person to receive a welcome, greeting or honor. King James VI & I's own son, the future King Charles I, himself was in just this position at the feet of his father when he returned from Spain. It is amazing that such shallow reasoning can be allowed to be pawned off as legitimate historical analysis.

Finally, much is made of King James VI & I articulating in his writing that he "loved" someone of the same gender giving the reader the mistaken belief that "love" stood for a sexual attraction and thus yet another "proof" of the "homosexuality" of King James VI & I. Also, it is alleged that King James VI & I "justified homosexuality many times" in his writings.

The most common offered "proof" of this mistaken assertion is a quotation from King James VI & I's speech to Parliament which is violently ripped from its intended meaning and context. For an in- depth refutation of this form of argument the diligent reader is referred to my book King James VI Of Scotland & I Of England - Unjustly Accused.

The Reverend Barrie Williams sums up the desperation of this reasoning:

"... there must be many besides myself for whom nine short words of the King are sufficient: 'Jesus had His John, and I have my George.' King James was in every estimate a devout protestant, and anyone who can believe that he would cast aspersions on the moral integrity of Our Saviour would have no difficulty in believing that the world is flat."

The sheer etymological ignorance of this type of argument is astounding! In my book King James VI Of Scotland & I Of England - Unjustly Accused I examine the widespread and commonly accepted practice of men and women writing to each other in loving terms and expressing their "love" for one another. Such Jacobean stylistic expressions of this kind were in no way indicative of sexual attraction or homosexuality.

I believe Lucius Annaeus Seneca said it best when he wrote:

"... they refute their case by means of the very passages which lead them to infer it."

Certain revisionist historians would have you believe otherwise and advocate the use this method to prove Biblical characters were likewise "homosexuals" to include Jesus Christ, David and Jonathan. These types of evidences, if you can call them that, are the types of things that critics of King James VI & I use to validate their claims. When they can't force King James VI & I to say what they want they simply make him "mean" what they want. Or, in other words, what they can't find stated they simply infer is there and place between the lines even though it is not "in the lines." However, if King James VI & I did not mean what he wrote then who is anyone to tell us what he actually meant?

As far as "witnesses" go, critics can only cite a handful of contemporaries of King James VI & I and most of these were men fired from office (sour grapes), or were political or religious enemies of the King, or they were otherwise disgruntled courtiers with an ax to grind and none ever were eye witness to any overt sexual acts on the part of King James VI & I.

Not only this but I have not found one yet that ever formally accused King James VI & I of directly being a homosexual and brought his case before any legal or religious body not to mention attempting to obey the precepts of Scripture in making such outlandish claims. For an in- depth examination of the charges commonly leveled at King James VI & I the careful reader is referred to my book mentioned previously.

It is obvious that myriad are the claims leveled at James Charles Stuart's (King James VI & I) moral character or lack thereof. However, out of this great sea of negative opinion the tide is fortunately turning away from the shores of libel and gossip and heading towards the calm home port of objectivity and evidentiary concerns.

Historians like the rest of our society are not immune from the influences of modern faddish trends and regrettably King James VI & I has suffered more than his share of diatribes that are directly due to a falling away from classical objective interpretive methods that were long indicative of the traditional historical method. Recent trends have captivated modern historians and led them to experiment with eisegetical techniques and to put it colloquially "tabloid style journalism." Therefore, much that has been written regarding His Majesty King James VI & I has not been the result of a balanced exegetical method.

Further complicating the situation and making matters worse has been the regrettable over reliance by historians on certain scurrilous sources that were produced in an era when libels of the Stuarts and the Monarchy were at a premium in general and whose opinions were motivated by a distrust and outright hostility to the noble Scots as a nation and King James VI & I in particular. King James VI & I being the first Scot to sit on the English throne and the natural father of the last Stuart King to reign in England before the regicide of The Royal Martyr, King Charles I, King James VI & I was naturally a prime target for abuse.

Making an easy target for his pursuit of peace and his many physical handicaps, King James VI & I was and is ill treated by many who venture to put pen to paper with a view to ruminating on the character of this much misunderstood Monarch. Like all of us in the course of King James VI & I's life he made enemies, and as king he had more than his share. Not only this but King James VI & I had to deal and overcome outright racism against his home of birth, Scotland. It is a sad fact that most of King James VI & I's contemporary critics were either disgruntled courtiers who were removed from office by King James VI & I himself or otherwise suffered loss of political or peerage advancement under King James VI & I or were haters of the whole Scottish nation!

Much indeed has been written on King James VI & I and because of this plethora of information a few researchers when doing analysis on King James VI & I simply refer back to past popular and easily obtainable sources rather than expending time and effort in obtaining rare and difficult to find first hand accounts of either the critical or ameliorative sources. Most indeed who have written about King James VI & I have never actually sat down to read what he actually wrote. This environment has created a prime climate for the kind of slanders and libels King James VI & I has been subjected to.

In my years of research on the life and character of King James VI & I, I have found that there is a great reluctance on the part of some of the more militant and bellicose of modern day critics of King James VI & I who claim to have facts to prove (beyond what they assert in their books) King James VI & I was a homosexual.

They seem unwilling to stand up to investigative criticism of their conclusions. They speak of research but balk at detailing the fruits thereof. They are fond of citing whole volumes of books and articles which they claim validate their assertions but refuse to justify any conclusions or data found therein. Some of the more extreme "Christian" critics of King James VI & I are extremely reticent about applying Biblical injunctions against gossip and rumor to their sources or even allow King James VI & I the protection of Scripture as found in Deut. 19:15 or I Tim. 5:19. Further, some are found to deny King James VI & I even professed to be a Christian! I find this extremely curious that such individuals who claim to be "Christians" would ignore Biblical injunctions on falsely accusing a brother and the evidentiary requirements to sustain charges of the type they advocate.

Thankfully, modern secular critical opinion on King James VI & I is reevaluating the negative assertions of his moral character and moderate critics of King James VI & I are now admitting that these charges are basically OPINION not historical facts! As noted above, only a few extremist and militant and the most ardent of King James VI & I's critics are espousing some of the most vociferous and invectively rancorous libels of King James VI & I.

I have also found in the course of my research a most curious phenomenon, that there is almost a total vacuum of consideration of what King James VI & I actually wrote or what he believed outside of a few brief excerpts of his writings which are more often than not stripped from their context or misinterpreted almost beyond recognition. Great weight almost to the point of complete dependence is attached to the writings of a few disgruntled courtiers, racists and bigots (Sir Anthony Weldon, Francis Osborne and Sir Edward Peyton and a few others).

The writings of Peter Heylyn, Sir William Sanderson, Bishop Godfrey Goodman and Anthony A. Wood and others (not to mention King James VI & I himself) are almost totally forsaken thus creating an unbalanced view of King James VI & I as viewed from contemporary accounts. Similarly, most modern works which discount the critical view of King James VI & I are also almost completely ignored by those who wish to paint King James VI & I as a homosexual.

When authors are unduly influenced by the scandal value of such poor sources they tend to rely on them in extreme and thus forsake detailed historical research and ignore the principles of evidentiary preponderance of evidence and thus sacrifice this for the propensity of our frail human nature in its attraction for dirt and scandal. Contradictory applications of principles and imbalanced research techniques can only result from a defective research method. Unfortunately this type of phenomenon has run rampant and caused many such evaluations to run amuck of the facts concerning King James VI & I.

I have not found any persons yet who libel King James VI & I as being a homosexual who are willing to allow themselves to be judged based on the same lines of evidence and principles upon which they unjustly convict King James VI & I .

All these factors coupled with the cultural and etymological ignorance prevailing in our day and the outright historical bias of some against King James VI & I have produced a situation where King James VI & I's accusers have played free with the actual historical facts and in some cases invented more ingenious eisegetical interpretations than any stretching of the imagination could ever produce. Thus the facts of history have been traded for the inventions of the imagination and regrettably there has of yet been no limitation to the unbridled attacks on the ever blessed memory and reputation of His Majesty, King James VI & I. When such pseudo-history is accepted for the real thing and we refuse to be bound to actual historical facts and opinions are masqueraded in place of reality then no valid conclusions can ever be reached.

In my attempts to request evidence that is commonly purported to exist by the sternest critics of King James VI & I sadly I have found that this evidence is often elusive and at best highly speculative. Instead what I have been offered in place of hard data from King James VI & I's militant and extremist critics is sarcasm, evasion, ridicule, rudeness and outright refusal to provide the requested information.

From King James VI & I's more mild critics they are at least recognizing the fact that their opinions have led to incorrect assumptions that accusations of homosexuality leveled at King James VI & I are factual, which they are not, and are based on speculation and opinion. Many are even willing to entertain the belief that King James VI & I might not have been homosexual at all. This is something that King James VI & I's hard line critics have yet to do and seem dead set against.

The personal slanders and racially motivated innuendoes and epithets were indicative more of the declarant's anti-Scottish bias and resultant dislike of King James VI & I than they were etiologically the result of actual facts. Thus, the scandalous artifacts which have been so carefully exhumed setting forth the "dirt" of the matter are in need not of study but of burial. These slurs are only allegorically and vaguely implying misdeeds on the part of King James VI & I in the most indirect manner and should be highly suspect. Often by their own account imagination played a key role in their assertions and this was based on their own particular interpretation (not provable facts) of the actions of King James VI & I. It is highly coincidental that the promoters of the charges were those who either bore no good will to the Scots or otherwise had a grudge to bear against their King. So, like irreverent grave robbers having no respect for the dead they attempt to steal that which does not belong to them and not content with desecrating the memory and honor of King James VI & I they also trample under foot his blessed memory. This ought not be so!

There seems to be a divergence of opinion amongst King James VI & I's critics. This is indicative of the fact that modern attitudes on King James VI & I are changing and the hard liners are refusing to budge. So far factual rebuttals of the hard line opponents of King James VI & I have had little effect as the pugnacious critics are refusing to yield to the actual evidence and are holding on to the rumors of the past. Such is the decline and decay of our society when we will allow the least of us, those who cannot defend themselves, to be thrown to the wolves if you will and be unjustly accused. In our passive acceptance of this injustice I see the fate of us all in that one day we may all find ourselves the target of false accusers. Where have moral and historical ethics gone!

The sheer bankruptcy of the critical case should be evident to any sincere lover of history. To those who will convict King James VI & I on the scantiest of evidence it must be seen that these individuals will thus embody the demise of all true history. The plethora of moral indictments and claims against King James VI & I's character are not historical facts but rather in all actuality primarily unjust criticisms which are commonly mistaken for facts.

Serious dialogue seems to have been relegated to the museum of ancient history and fallen into disuse. However, the criticisms of King James VI & I actually reveal more about our society's preoccupation with scandal and dirt than they do about the life and character of King James VI & I . We can no longer allow lopsided research to overpower the facts of history.

The best advise and observation on this sad situation ironically comes from King James VI & I himself. As His Majesty King James VI & I noted almost prophetically long ago:

"And principally exercise true wisdom in discerning wisely between true and false reports. First concerning the nature of the person reporter; next, what effect he can have in the well or evil of him whom of he maketh the report; thirdly, the likelihood of the purpose itself, and the last the nature and past life of the delated person ... "

And:

"They quarrel me (not for any evil or vice in me) but because I was a king, which they thought the highest evil, and because they were ashamed to profess this quarrel they were busy to look narrowly in all my actions, and I warrant you a moat in my eye, yes a false report was matter enough for them to work upon."

His Majesty King James VI & I,

Basilicon Doron

David Chase Taylor #conspiracy sites.google.com

The Masonic Order
The Masonic Order, otherwise known as Freemasonry, is a global fraternal organization which allegedly traces its origins to stonemasons. It currently exists in various forms around the world with an estimated membership by the United Grand Lodge of England at around 6 million. Freemasonry describes itself as a “beautiful system of morality” that is, “veiled in allegory and illustrated by symbols”. In short, the Masonic Order is composed of non-Jewish members and therefore receives nearly all the publicity in respect to orders and secret societies of the Roman Empire. In other words, Freemasonry is a smokescreen which enables Jewish-Roman orders (e.g., Dominicans, Franciscans, Rosicrucians, etc.) to operate freely out in the open with litter or no mind. Because Freemasons are considered goyim (non-Jews), they are expendable and therefore are assassinated, set up, or used as patsies in various schemes. Although Masonic Lodges are allegedly independent and sovereign bodies that govern Freemasonry in their respective country, state, or geographical area, modern historical accounts emphatically state that “There is no international, world-wide Grand Lodge that supervises all of Freemasonry. Each Grand Lodge is independent, and they do not necessarily recognize each other as being legitimate”. Translation: There is a global organization which governs all Freemasons. Although the United Grand Lodge of England, which has over .25 million members meeting in over 8,000 Lodges, is publically touted as the largest and most powerful Masonic Lodge, the CIA of Switzerland is ultimately responsible for moving the pawns of Freemasonry around the chessboard of the underworld. Thus, all of Freemasonry is in fact part of centralized entity acting in a unified manner at the behest of the Holy See (i.e., CIA).


Freemason Symbology
The logo of the Masonic Order boldly depicts the letter “G”, an acronym for Greenland which is currently home to the Roman Empire. It also contains a square in the shape of the letter “V”, an acronym for Victoria, the Roman goddess of victory. The square, which is a 90° angle which, numerology speaking, numerically represents “Greenlandia”, the original name of Greenland whose digital sum is 90 (i.e., the digit sum of “Greenlandia” is calculated as 7+18+5+5+14+12+1+14+4+9+1 = 90). Furthermore, the digital root of 90 is 9 (i.e., the digit root of 90 is calculated as 9+0 = 9) which is representative of the letter “R” (i.e., “G”) in the Roman Score (i.e., the Roman alphabet), an acronym for Rome. Greco-Roman symbology such as arches, columns, crescents, crosses, eagles and stars, as well as the Eye of Providence, are rife throughout Freemasonry as evidenced in "The Structure of Freemasonry".

Origins of Freemasonry
According to the book “Cracking the Freemason's Code” (2006) by Freemason historian Robert L.D. Cooper, the earliest known Masonic rituals were held on the porch of King Solomon’s Temple in Israel. As evidenced by the arches, columns and domes found in artistic renditions of Solomon’s Temple in Jerusalem, it is clearly Greco-Roman in nature. The notion that the Roman Empire would allow the Jews to build their city and temple using Roman architecture in the region of the Mediterranean which was under Roman control is preposterous. Therefore, it can be ascertained that history of the Jews, King Solomon’s Temple included, has been fabricated order to give the Jewish race the necessary historical narrative in order to cover for the Roman Empire which has since vacated to Greenland. Consequently, Scottish writer and Freemason James Anderson states that it is possible to trace Freemasonry back to the Greek mathematicians Euclid and Pythagoras, all the way up through Moses, the Jewish Essenes and to the Culdees of the Middles Ages. In other words, Freemasonry is Greco-Roman in origin. Curiously, Anderson describes Masons as Noachides which was extrapolated by Albert Mackey, ultimately putting the Biblical Noah into the equation. Anderson’s account appears to be a veiled reference to the Royal Antediluvian Order of Buffaloes (RAOB) which was founded in England after the alleged Fall of the Roman Empire and whose seal contains a depiction of Noah’s Ark. This notion is further corroborated by Sottish writer and original Freemason Andrew Michael Ramsay who stated that the Masonic Order started with the Druids, the high priests of the Imperial Cult of Rome. There have also been allegations that Freemasonry is linked to the Roman Collegia and the Comacine masters who coincidentally specialized in Roman architecture. German Masonic historian Joseph Gabriel Findel reportedly sought to link the origins of Freemasonry to Roman Catholic cathedrals which are responsible to this day for instituting Freemasonry on a local level. Regardless of which origin of Freemasonry is to believed, they are all Greco-Roma in nature. In other words, all roads of Freemasonry lead to Rome.

Freemasonic Tools
Historically speaking, Freemasons have been used to found countries (e.g., the United States), hold office during economic collapse (e.g. Franklin D. Roosevelt), and take their respective countries to war (e.g., George Washington, Franklin D. Roosevelt, Winston Churchill, etc.). Freemasons are chosen premeditatively so that there is no Jewish connection to the bloodshed and economic chaos which generally ensues these historic milestones. Any sort of political backlash or blowback is subsequently blamed on an individual Freemason or Freemasons rather than on the CIA of Switzerland and its minions which are ultimately responsible. Consequently, over the years, thousands of members of the Masonic Order have been used by the Roman Empire as pawns for various deeds on the grand chessboard of the underworld. For example, Freemason Roald Amundsen (1872-1928) was a Norwegian polar explorer who allegedly discovered the South Pole, a continent which does not exist in reality. Also, Freemason Bernt Balchen (1899-1973) was an aerial navigator and military leader who, along with Admiral Richard E. Byrd, allegedly dropped Masonic flags over the North Pole in the Artic and the South Pole in Antarctica. This of course was impossible unless they dropped the flags over Mt. Zion in Greenland and Ayers Rock in Australia, the respective North and South poles of the Earth. Although just a microcosm, Amundsen and Balchen are examples of how Freemason tools are used in order to create fraudulent history and shape public opinion. The list of famous Freemasons who have been used for various ends is extensive and staggering to say the least. It includes congressmen, governors, judges, lawyers, presidents, and prime ministers from almost every nation on Earth. Although just a microcosm, the following list of presidents and prime ministers from 26 countries shows how Freemasonry is used on a global scale: Australia: Prime Minister Edmund Barton, Prime Minister George Reid, Prime Minister Joseph Cook, and Prime Minister Robert Menzies; Argentina: President Domingo Faustino Sarmiento; Belgium: Prime Minister Camille Huysmans; Canada: Prime Minister John A. Macdonald, Prime Minister John Abbott, Prime Minister John Diefenbaker, Prime Minister Mackenzie Bowell, Prime Minister R. B. Bennett, and Prime Minister Robert Borden; Chile: President José Miguel Carrera, and President Salvador Allende; Coast Rice: President Bernardo Soto Alfaro; Congo: President Pascal Lissouba; Czechoslovakia: President Edvard Beneš; Ecuador: President Eloy Alfaro; Finland: Prime Minister Johan Wilhelm Rangell, and President Risto Ryti; France: Prime Minister Émile Combes, and President Jules Grévy; Gabon: President Omar Bongo; Honduras: President Francisco Bertrand (2x); Iceland: President Sveinn Björnsson; Italy: Prime Minister Francesco Crispi, and Prime Minister Silvio Berlusconi; Japan: Prime Minister Ichiro Hatoyama (3x); Mexico: President Antonio López de Santa Anna, President Benito Juárez, President Miguel Alemán Valdés, and President Plutarco Elías Calles; New Zealand: Prime Minister Francis Bell, and Prime Minister Richard Seddon; Peru: President Remigio Morales Bermúdez; Philippines: President Emilio Aguinaldo, President José Abad Santos, and President José P. Laurel; Romania: Prime Minister Alexandru G. Golescu, Prime Minister Alexandru Vaida-Voevod (3x), Prime Minister Constantin Argetoianu, Prime Minister Dimitrie Bratianu, Prime Minister Dimitrie Sturdza (4x), Prime Minister Gheorghe Grigore Cantacuzino, Prime Minister Ion C. Bratianu, Prime Minister Ion Ghica (2x), Prime Minister Mihail Kogalniceanu, Prime Minister Miron Cristea, Prime Minister Octavian Goga, and Prime Minister Titu Maiorescu; Spain: Prime Minister Práxedes Mateo Sagasta; Turkey: President Süleyman Demirel; Venezuela: President Antonio Guzmán Blanco (3x), and President Ignacio Andrade; United Kingdom: Prime Minister George Canning and Prime Minister Winston Churchill; and the United States: President George Washington, President James Monroe, President Andrew Jackson, President James K. Polk, President James Buchanan, President Andrew Johnson, President James A. Garfield, President William McKinley, President Theodore Roosevelt, President William Howard Taft, President Warren G. Harding, President Franklin D. Roosevelt, President Harry S Truman, President Gerald Ford, and President Lyndon B. Johnson.

Masonic Founding of America
The Founding Fathers of the United States such as George Washington, Benjamin Franklin and James Monroe were almost all Freemasons, further confirming that the American Revolution against the British Empire was staged, albeit elaborately so. According to reports, at least 9 Freemasons signed the U.S. Declaration of Independence, at least 13 Freemason signed the U.S. Constitution, and there were at least 33 Freemason generals in George Washington’s army that won the American Revolutionary War, including Washington himself. In other words, the American Revolution and the subsequent creation of the 13 Colonies which eventually became the United States, an allegedly free, independent and sovereign nation, were completely fabricated. Aside from the Masonic Founding Fathers, at total of 15 out of 44 U.S. Presidents have thus far been Freemasons (i.e., George Washington, James Monroe, Andrew Jackson, James Buchanan, Andrew Johnson, James A. Garfield, William McKinley, Theodore Roosevelt, William Howard Taft, Warren G. Harding, Franklin D. Roosevelt, Harry S Truman, Gerald Ford, and Lyndon B. Johnson). It is imperative to note that the Freemasonic loyalties of a politician are generally only revealed years after said politician has died. Therefore, the total number of Freemasonic U.S. presidents may be much higher. In other words, U.S. Presidents such as Ronald Reagan, Jimmy Carter, Bill Clinton, and George W. Bush may have been Freemasons but it won’t be publically disclosed for years. The same goes for the presidents and prime ministers of other nations.

Freemasonic Treachery
In order for Freemason presidents and prime ministers to betray their respective counties (as they routinely do), they are basically taught a religion of treason. In short, Freemasonry teaches its members to hold back from fully committing to their respective nations, enabling those in political office to do unspeakable things to their fellow citizens. Compared to Operative Masonry's clear denunciations of treachery, Speculative Masonry (instituted after 1723) is far more ambiguous, ultimately allowing for treason. According to the Old Catholic Encyclopedia, Masonic disapproval of treachery is not on moral grounds but rather on the grounds of inconvenience to other Masons. In other words, it’s not morally wrong for Masons to commit treason; it’s only wrong for Masons to betray fellow Masons who are generally giving the orders to commit treason. The Old Catholic Encyclopedia argues that "Loyalty to freedom overrides all other considerations”, ultimately justifying treason. Freemasonic historian Albert Mackey corroborated this notion when he stated, "... if treason or rebellion were masonic crimes, almost every mason in the United Colonies (America), in 1776, would have been subject to expulsion and every Lodge to a forfeiture of its warrant by the Grand Lodges of England and Scotland, under whose jurisdiction they were at the time”. The fact that the definition of treason in respect to Freemasonry is found in the Old Catholic Encyclopedia shows exactly whom Freemasonry ultimately serves—Rome. Nevertheless, as a legal disclaimer, Freemasonry officially states in respect to treason that, "In the state you are to be a quiet and peaceful subject, true to your government and just to your country; You are not to countenance disloyalty or rebellion, but patiently submit to legal authority and conform with cheerfulness to the government of the country in which you live”. Consequently, a number of governments have publically suppressed Freemasonry due to its secret nature and international connections. After the founding of the modern Masonic Order in England dates back to 1717, numerous European cities and states have banned or restricted Masonic lodges, including but not limited to: Austria (1795), Baden, Switzerland (1813), Bavaria (1784), Berne, Switzerland (1745), Geneva, Switzerland (1738), Holland (1735); Italy (c. 1738), Pakistan (1972), Portugal (c. 1738), Russia, (1822), Spain (c. 1738), Sweden (1738), and Zurich, Switzerland (1740). Needless to say, the very public persecution of Freemasonry was designed to convey the notion that the Masonic Order is not a government entity organized and funded by the Roman Catholic Church. The bans in Switzerland are especially curious considering that the CIA of Switzerland ultimately has command and control over Freemasonry, hence the very public attempt to separate itself from it.

Rosicrucian Freemasonry
According to British historian David Stevenson, Greco-Roman-based Rosicrucianism has been very influential to Freemasonry. This notion was later corroborate by French writer Jean Pierre Bayard who stated that two Rosicrucian-inspired Masonic rites emerged towards the end of 18th century (i.e., the Rectified Scottish Rite, and the Ancient and Accepted Scottish Rite). Led by Johann Christoph von Wöllner and General Johann Rudolf von Bischoffwerder, Masonic lodges were reportedly infiltrated, eventually succumbing to the control of the Rosy Cross. In time, many Freemasons became Rosicrucianists and Rosicrucianism was subsequently established in numerous Masonic lodges. Consequently, the 18th degree of Freemasonry is now entitled Knight of the Rose Croix, a tribute to Rosicrucianism. The Rosicrucian symbol of the Rose Cross is coincidentally also the official symbol of Freemasonry. It is used in certain Masonic rituals which require candidates to be Master Masons. Lastly, the Great Architect of the Universe, a Rosicrucian conception of God, is also the Masonic conception of God. Therefore, in deity, title, ritual and symbol, Freemasonry mimics Rosicrucianism.

Jewish Control of Freemasonry
According to Adam Weishaupt, the alleged and founder of the Order of Illuminati, Freemasonry is a secret society created within the secret society of the Illuminati. In reality however, Freemasonry is a secret society within a secret Jewish society which is (albeit unwittingly) ultimately controlled by the Roman Empire in Greenland. In other words, Freemasons have no real power; they are just tools which are routinely used and disposed of by the CIA of Switzerland. Because Freemasonry is a secret society for goyim (non-Jews), its initiations revolve around the construction of the Temple of Solomon, a mythical Jewish temple that allegedly once stood on Mt. Zion in Jerusalem. Consequently, attacks on Freemasonry as being a tool of Jewish control in the underworld are predictably labeled “anti-Semitic”. British professor Andrew Prescott of the University of Sheffield states, "Since at least the time of the Protocols of the Elders of Zion, anti-Semitism has gone hand in hand with anti-masonry”. Despite its critics, the Protocols detail exactly how and why the Jewish power structure uses Freemasonic Lodges to attract public officials. As translated into modern English, the Protocols state : “We [the Jews] shall create and multiply Free Masonic lodges in all the countries of the world and bring all types of people into them – people who may become or who are already prominent in public activity. In these lodges we shall find our principal intelligence office and means of influence…. It is natural that no one else other than us should lead Masonic activities, for we know where we are heading…Gentile-based Freemasonry serves as a smokescreen for us and our plans. But the plan of action of our Force, even its very existence, remains an unknown mystery to the people…This has served as the basis for our organization of secret Freemasonry which is not known to, and has aims which are not even so much as suspected by, the Goy. These Goy cattle are attracted by us into the "show" army of Masonic lodges in order feel superior to, and look down upon their fellow Goys”. In order to fend off accusations that Freemasonry is nothing more than a Jewish front, the CIA has attempted to link those who espouse these viewpoints with Middle Eastern terrorists, all of which are coincidentally state-sponsored. For example, back in 1980, the Iraqi penal code was changed by Saddam Hussein's ruling Ba'ath Party, ultimately making it a felony to "promote or acclaim Zionist principles, including Freemasonry, or who associate [themselves] with Zionist organizations". The terror group Hamas states in article 28 of its Covenant that Freemasonry "work in the interest of Zionism and according to its instructions”. Since Israel admittedly spawned Hamas, it has command and control over its Covenant. Therefore, the aforementioned reference to Freemasonry is in fact true, albeit from the mouth of terrorists.

Catholic Church & Freemasonry
By far, the Roman Catholic Church has the longest history of public objection to Freemasonry. This is because Freemasonry is a tool of the Roman Empire and therefore it wants to publically distance itself from the Masonic Order as much as possible. Despite the attempted separation, Greco-Roman symbology such as arches, columns, crescents, crosses, eagles, stars, as well as the Eye of Providence, are rife within Freemasonry as witnessed in "The Structure of Freemasonry". Nevertheless, objections raised by the Church are based on the allegation that Masonry teaches a naturalistic deistic religion which is allegedly in conflict with the Church’s doctrine. In order to create the necessary narrative that the Church is diametrically opposed to Freemasonry (despite creating it), a number of rather bi-polar decrees, laws and letters have been issued since the early 18th century. Starting in 1736, the Inquisition investigated a Masonic Lodge in Florence, Italy for heresy, which it ultimately condemned a year later 1737. In response to this investigation, Pope Clement XII's issued a Papal Bull on April 28, 1738, entitled “In Eminenti Apostolatus”, the first official Papal prohibition on Freemasonry. The Church ban of Freemasonry was ultimately reiterated and expanded upon by Pope Benedict XIV (1751), Pope Pius VII (1821), Pope Leo XII (1826), Pope Pius VIII (1829), Pope Gregory XVI (1832), and Pope Pius IX (1846, 1849, 1864, 1865, 1869, 1873). The “Humanum Genus” (1884), a papal encyclical promulgated by Pope Leo XIII, states that Freemasonry is a dangerous sect (cult) and demands that all bishops be vigilant on its abuses. The Papal prohibition on Freemasonry was reiterated by Pope Leo XIII who issued a Papal Bull on October 15, 1890, entitled “Ab Apostolici”, further highlighting the Church’s negative stance on Freemasonry. In 1917, the Code of Canon Law explicitly declared that joining Freemasonry entailed automatic excommunication, and banned books favoring Freemasonry. In 1974, Cardinal Šeper, Prefect of the Congregation for the Doctrine of the Faith, sent a private letter which stated in part: "The Sacred Congregation for the Doctrine of the Faith...has ruled that Canon 2335 no longer automatically bars a Catholic from membership of masonic groups...And so, a Catholic who joins the Freemasons is excommunicated only if the policies and actions of the Freemasons in his area are known to be hostile to the Church." In 1983, the Church issued a new Code of Canon Law stating: “A person who joins an association which plots against the Church is to be punished with a just penalty; one who promotes or takes office in such an association is to be punished with an interdict." However, unlike its predecessor, the new Canon Law did not explicitly name the Masonic Order among the secret societies it condemns. Consequently, the letter by Šeper along with the new Canon Law led Catholics and Freemasons to believe that the ban on Catholics becoming Freemasons may have been lifted. However, the matter was quickly clarified in 1983 by Prefect Joseph Cardinal Ratzinger who, with the personal approval of Pope John Paul II, issued a Declaration on Masonic Associations, which reiterated the Church's objections to Freemasonry. The Declaration states in part: "The faithful who enroll in Masonic associations are in a state of grave sin and may not receive Holy Communion...the Church’s negative judgment in regard to Masonic association(s) remains unchanged since their principles have always been considered irreconcilable with the doctrine of the Church and therefore membership in them remains forbidden.” By officially maintaining that Freemasonry is evil and illegal, the Roman Catholic Church can ban, censor or shut down Masonic lodges if and when they ever get out of control. This is also why Freemasons allegedly worship a number of demons, devils and deities (i.e., Baal, Baphomet, Dajjal, Great Architect of the Universe (GAOTU), Jahbulon, Lucifer, Osiris, Rahu, Satan, and YHWH). By claiming that Freemasonry is Satanic in nature, any Freemason can be publically vilified by the Catholic Church at any time.

Nazi Freemasonry
According to modern historical accounts, the Nazis claimed that high-degree Masons were part of a Jewish conspiracy that resulted in Germany's defeat during World War I. While Freemasons likely played a role in Germany’s defeat, they also played a decisive role in the Nazi Party and Germany’s instigation of World War II. In other worlds, Freemasons were used in Germany by the Jewish power structure in both World War I and World War II. Nevertheless, in “Mein Kampf” (1925), Adolf Hitler wrote that Freemasonry had succumbed to the Jews and that it was being used as a tool to pull the upper strata of German society into Jewish schemes. Since Freemasonry has been an instrument of Jewish control over the goyim (non-Jews) since its inception, Hitler’s comments are both true and untrue at the same time. In “Mein Kampf”, Hitler states, "The general pacifistic paralysis of the national instinct of self-preservation begun by Freemasonry". In other words, Freemasonry was being used by the Jews to lure citizens into betraying their own country, an admitted tenant of Freemasonry. Considering that Hitler’s paternal grandfather was a Jew, which was later confirmed in 2010 by a DNA test which revealed Hitler’s Jewish decent, and he was married to Eva Braun who was also confirmed to be Jewish in 2014, everything Hitler stated in respect to Freemasonry and the Jews must, in retrospect, be reexamined for ulterior motives. In 1933, Reichstag President and founder of the Gestapo Hermann Göring stated, "…in National Socialist Germany, there is no place for Freemasonry”. Under the cover of the Enabling Act, the German Ministry of the Interior allegedly ordered the disbandment of Freemasonry on January 8, 1934, including the confiscation of all property and Lodges. Germans who had been members of Freemasonry when Hitler came to power in 1933 were allegedly prohibited from holding office in the Nazi Party or its paramilitary arms. Since the German Ministry of Defense explicitly forbade German officers from becoming Freemasons, those who were Masons were allegedly Masonic forced out, becoming ineligible for appointment in public service. Consequently, special sections of the German Security Service (i.e., the “Sicherheitsdienst des Reichsführers-SS”) and the Office of the High Command of Security Service (i.e., the “SS-Reichssicherheitshauptamt”) were allegedly established to eradicate Freemasonry in Germany. Shortly thereafter, Hitler announced in the “Voelkischer Beobachter” (i.e., the Nazi Party newspaper) the final dissolution of all Masonic Lodges in Germany on August 8, 1935. The article stated that a conspiracy involving the Masonic Order and World Jewry was seeking to create a World Republic. In 1937, propagandist Joseph Goebbels inaugurated an "Anti-Masonic Exposition" to display objects seized by the state. Similar exhibitions were reportedly held throughout the occupied countries of Europe. The preserved records of the Office of the High Command of Security Service (i.e., the “SS-Reichssicherheitshauptamt”) reportedly documented the persecution of Freemasons. During the World War II, Freemasonry was allegedly banned by proclamation in all countries that were either allied with the Nazis or under Nazi control, including Norway and France. As evidenced, modern historical accounts are filled with examples of Freemason persecution in Germany. However, as with much of modern history, the opposite is true. In other words, Germany was rife with Freemasonry, hence the extensive historical cover denouncing its role in Nazi Germany. Freemasonry was never more evident in Nazi Germany than in the case of German General Friedrich Paulus who was denounced as a "High-grade Freemason" when he surrendered to the Soviet Union in 1943. Paulus is infamous for leading Nazi Germany to its greatest defeat when 265,000 Axis allied troops were encircled and defeated in Russia. Of the 107,000 captured, only 6,000 survived captivity. Needless to say, Paulus’ treacherous actions are indicative of Freemasonry which is in essence a religion of treason. Therefore, like the Jews, the persecution of Freemasonry under the Nazi regime has been grossly exaggerated. In fact, the only reason that the Nazis were allowed to seize power in Germany and destroy much of Europe was due to Freemasons who, following the rules of Freemasonry as dictated in the Old Catholic Encyclopedia, held Freemasonry morally higher than their own country. Consequently, claims that Freemasonic concentration camp inmates were graded as political prisoners and forced to wear an inverted red triangle were likely fabricated. Claims that 80,000 and 200,000 Freemasons were murdered under the Nazi regime were also evidently fabricated in order to provide the necessary cover for the Freemasons which were instrumental in Nazi Germany which was untimely responsible for killing tens of millions of people across Europe.

Concentration Camp Freemasonry
In order to further sell the notion that Freemasons were banned in Nazi Germany, the elaborate story of Liberté chérie was created. According to modern historical accounts, on November 15, 1943, eight Belgian Freemasons (i.e., Amédée Miclotte, Franz Rochat, Guy Hannecart, Henri Story, Jean De Schrijver, Jean Sugg, Luc Somerhausen and Paul Hanson) founded a Masonic Lodge entitled the “Loge Liberté chérie”, meaning “Cherished Liberty Lodge” in French. They makeshift Masonic lodge was allegedly located inside Hut 6 of Emslandlager VII, a Nazi concentration camp in Esterwegen, Germany. In time, the group initiated, passed, and raised Brother Fernand Erauw, making for a total of 9 members. The number “9” is symbolic for it represents the letter “I” which is inherent to intelligence agencies (e.g., CIA, FBI, MI5, ISI, etc.). According to the story, a Catholic priest stood watch over the group so that they could hold their meetings in secret. According to Freemason Somerhausen, the lodge asked a community of Catholic priests for assistance "with their prayers" during their meetings which were reportedly dedicated to the symbol of the Great Architect of the Universe, the "The future of Belgium", and the, "The position of women in Freemasonry". Considering that 5 of the Belgium Freemasons admittedly had intelligence connections, it can be ascertained that the group, if it ever existed, served as an Jewish intelligence front: Franz Rochat reportedly worked for the underground press and the resistance publication entitled the “Voice of the Belgians”; Jean Sugg, along with Rochat, co-operated the underground press while contributing to clandestine publications, including: La Libre Belgique, La Légion Noire, Le Petit Belge, and L'Anti Boche; Jean De Schrijver was reportedly arrested on charges of espionage and possession of arms; Fernand Erauw was allegedly a member of the "Secret Army"; and Guy Hannecart was a lawyer and the leader of La Voix des Belges, a clandestine newspaper. Therefore, the Freemasons, the lodge and the story are not exactly what they appear to be. Had Freemasonry been illegal in Nazi Germany as claimed, these men would never have been allowed to practice Freemasonry in a concentration camp. Although only conjecture, the story of Liberté chérie appears to be a microcosm of how Freemasonry works in that is is watched over and controlled by the clergy of the Roman Catholic Church. After Freemasons have been used for a particular purpose, they are usually double-crossed and disposed of, as were a majority of the men from Liberté chérie.

secret wiki #conspiracy #magick secret-wiki.de

Magic works and is used in many ways, at times unconsciously, at times deliberately.

Prestidigitators, stage magicians and charlatans contributed to the image of magic being banished into the realm of illusion, tricks, deception, sorcery and fairy tales. With this, more or less fear was created or control over magic conveyed through exposing tricks.

The original meaning and the sense of magic were lost in the process. For distinction, Aleister Crowley introduced the term "magick" to distinguish stage magic, illusionists and pseudo-sorcerers from real sorcerers. This article is about this kind of magic, as there is no German equivalent for the English word "magick".

imageThe four elements and the magic mirror are fundamental to magic.

Is magic real?

The average citizen does not "believe" in it or at least speaks little about it, but an astonishing number of people practice magic.

It is important to realise that magic works and is used on a daily base. Its power and its use can be great and delivers tangible results, although only few can actually manifest it on a large scale. But every disciplined mind can learn and practice it.

Some of the real practitioners do not want the masses to know that and how well magic works because they would lose this advantage in power. Therefore, they spread the belief that it is nothing but tricks and magic effects are the delusions of crackpots.

Recently, the knowledge of magic and its effects has been returning more and more to normal society, but generally, it is not talked about much.
During Christianisation, this folk-knowledge was lost and remains only rudimentary in wisdoms. Thus it was forc-ed to only be preserved and practiced in secret societies or family tradition. Since recent decades, ever better literature on the topic is becoming available, but the area is still strongly dominated by half-knowledge.

The very materialistically or scientifically socialised part of the populace stays firm in their belief in the non-existance of magic or connect magic with superstitious practices divorced from reality.

Demarcations

With “magical thinking”, which is also a stage of development in toddlers, one refers cause and effect selectively to oneself. This means they produce a strong correlation between his own powers of realisation and an event that could just as well have happened completely independently of his thoughts. Experience is dominated by egocentrism and the impression of being the centre of Creation, the point of origin of the universe’s power of Creation.

Such thought-magic is considered a pathological loss of reality in the manic phase in Manic-Depressives. Magical thinking however has another foundation, than gaining awareness and thus is only very limited in its effectiveness (generally just self harming).

Blessings are not viewed in the sense of magic. Here, the focus lies on the Divine, not on the own goals and intentions.

Healers can use magical rituals.

Fundamentals

Magic is the art and the science of bringing about changes through altered states of consciousness in accord with the will.
- Frater V.D.

Magic is the wilful influence over reality or as Bardon writes, the sacred science of all knowledge.
It works through various techniques to accomplish definitive goals. In this, magic applies the general Laws of the Mind.

Here, magic is a took and, taken by itself, completely neutral. It is just an option which the practitioner can use in any way. It can be compared with a knife, with which one can prepare food or harm someone else. Its effectiveness can be enormous with good magical schooling and correct usage and should not be underestimated.

A large part of the known effects of magic is based on strong projection of the magician upon the energy field of the addressed one (others or himself), so that his sensations and perception are altered. In this, the self-energy is frequently augmented through rituals or external energies. This can also lead to altered resonances within the different energy bodies of a person that attract corresponding experiences, for example what was once commonly known as a “bad luck” curse.

The options for working magic are diverse, for example:
* Training intuition and willpower
* Energetic work (for example with the 4 elements, energetic body training)
* Thought concentration and focussing
* Working with the subconsciousness
* Usage of foreign energies and powers (angels, (Light-) Masters, demons etc.)
* Working with symbols, archetypes and rituals (candles, visualisations, certain sequences of motion) or usage of amulets
* Spells of banishment or magic, invocations
* Tarot can be used as a way of magical initiation, but the Tarot is not to be equated to magic.
* Esoterics work magic, as long as the intention is to influence or manipulate reality energetically or through willpower. Generally speaking, esotericism is a path to enlightenment and does not contain magic. It does, however deal with the same foundational principles that form the foundation of magic, and for this reason it can result from it. The magical path to enlightenment is more concrete and practical in focus than esotericism, which is focussed on developing consciousness in any form.

An important principle of working magic is formulated in ”To Know, To Dare, To Will, To Be Silent”, which is one of the reasons why only few practitioners speak about it. Silence is part of the power of the manifestation, whereas speaking can disperse this power and expose it to opposed forces.

The practice of magic means to influence, to deliberately change things through force of will and at one's own discretion. Characteristically, the main focus here lies in the power of the human will – as opposed to ways of knowing that merely recognise that which is without using this insight: here, the usage is left to the Divine and techniques that optimise the bodily/subtle-energy conditions for the purpose of perceiving personal enlightenment (such as Yoga) are not generally understood as magic/magical forces.

More on occult, magical abilities also in the article Esotericism,
more on techniques in the article Energetic Self-Protection
more on the functional foundations in the article Laws of Life
and even more on magic in a FAQ on magieausbildung.de

White and Black Magic
White magic refers to magic used to heal or to help others. It also includes using magic to protect oneself or others. The intention is to use Light and “good”, benevolent forces. Most witch-cults call themselves white-magical. White magic is also used for the purpose of enlightenment.

Black magic refers to magic used in the pursuit of selfish and self-centered goals, for example in order to gain more money, property, power and success. It is seen as acceptable or even intended that others are harmed or attacked by this. A famous example are voodoo techniques that these days are still used mainly in African countries. Black-magical practices are mainly based on greed, envy, jealousy, anger/hatred and/or lust for power.

From this area stem the attempts to oblige foreign or entire societies into certain rituals to draw power from them. Often enough, these tactics are successful. It is common to wrap dark magic in a nice package and thus deceive. Not everyone who enters dressed in White has honest intentions. Black magic in particular likes to use deception and illusion and does so extensively. Furthermore, it leaves its followers in ignorance and wins through intimidation: in Adepts (those learning the way of magic), to stay dominant, and in the deceived “good” people (who frequently do not have any idea who they serve) simply so that they do what they would not do otherwise.

Tarot Card The Magician
imageThe Sorcerer of the Crowley Tarot in his three manifestations

In the Crowley Tarot Deck, publisher Urania has added all three versions of Frieda Harris’s drawings of the Magicician: the white magician (golden, left), the black magician (with a dark shadow in the background, right), and the magician transcendent (the juggler, at the centre. Crowley, however, had only authorised the sorcerer transcendent back then, which was the form to strive for.

The white and black magician are part of the dual system, of the dual plane, whereas the juggler has integrated and transcended the dual magical forces. He can use both forces – not according to his own volition but in accordance to the divine will.

Transcended dealing with the magical abilities is attributed to spiritual Masters and points to a difference between spiritual Masters and magicians.

Protection Against Magic
The best defence against unwanted magical influences is gaining awareness of the way magic works
In the article Energetic Self-Protection, various options for protecting oneself and locations are described. For a start, everyone can pay attention to the resonance. The ones most likely to deal with deliberate magical ham are people who work magic themselves or who did it in a potential previous life. Old connection can appear or be activated during certain procedures or stages of development. Especially white-magically oriented people frequently challenge nether spirits in polarity. This can lead to the magician being disturbed or influenced by their dark power or to the spirits trying to subjugate him.

imageNo one should move glasses, conjure spirits/ghosts or “play” with comparable things for amusement. If it is done “correctly”, the summoned and unused entity will easily turn against the practitioner.
When a dark guest enters the channel in an ill-conceived attempt at channelling, it is not trivial to get rid of him and successful help is rare.

Ultimately, such “games” result in an increased resonance towards magic of the lower or dark kind, which follows one like a shadow and adds a subliminal bad taste to all good works.

* Against general magical mass-manipulation, a clear mind, a lot of water and a healthy body help. It is always the unaware and weak minds that are susceptible.
* In clubs, it can be problematic if one is the target of magic while weakened (for example by alcohol, tiredness, consumption of drugs). In such a case, the magic can even be effective afterwards, but is normally resolved with a lot of pure water and self-centering. In exceptional cases, external help ie needed, for example by an essence.
* Similarly, harmful energies can be taken with oneself unconsciously at mass events, especially in places where magic is performed in ignorance. Unfortunately, this very fact is not known to the visitors of such events. Then this can also include smaller meetings. The knowledge on how to protect oneself or a good connection to the Divine (or to a divine person) are the best companions.

Positions of power can be named as a further endangered group. In such circles – reportedly in lodges – black magic is used frequently to accomplish economical goals.

Where are magical procedures performed?
* Magically effective procedures and rituals are widely used in religions. This frequently happens without the faithful being aware of it, via rituals and prayers.
* The hypnosis of today supposedly originated in the magical tradition as well, it works with the Subconsciousness and influences it.
* Many circles, lodges, neopagans and cults such as witches practice magic and teach it. Among them, most of them are likely honourable and harmless.
* Tantra, which more and more people are discovering for themselves, was original a spiritual method of enlightenment. However, Tantra is also used frequently magically for the manifestation and deepening of a bond with the wish-partner. When used with this (manipulative) purpose, Tantra counts as sexual magic. As targeted built-up sexual energy has a strong effect, it was used against demons in the past. However, it is advised against manipulation of the Kundalini energy because it can also cause damage if impurities are present.
One example of a magical sexual procedure is here – (in English) – with further types of magic here. (Submitter’s note: Links broken)
* Magical techniques are also used for manipulation of the masses.
* For example through religious symbols on vertices of power that change the base structure of the regional energy. (Christian crosses on the summits of mountains, energy intersections and churches, with the effect of binding the populace to the material)
* Symbols of corporations, ideologies and flags
* Modern advertising, as it utilises originally magical ways to deliver information (advertising) into the Subconsciousness. This is exactly what a magician does with himself, it is just that he determines the content and thus the goal himself.
* The massive proliferation, for example printed-on skulls and bones on many products have magical meaning in regards to the manipulation of society as well (corresponds to Saturn and among other things the preservation of existing structures)

Magic & (World) Politics
Secret, very powerful lodges work in the background and supposedly influence politics, banks and the economy. It is known that very many politicians, magnates, nobility, musicians and bankers in some orders and lodges. At times, they may be harmless, at times subverted and at times indeed part of a powerful network of lodges.

Whether secret lodges do indeed rule the world, but some things indicate their heavy influence. Especially the fact that this topic is avoided in movies and media is conspicuous. In documentaries, it is mostly Rosicrucians and Freemasons are portrayed (for example the membership of most US presidents in the Masonic Lodge). It is at least within the realm of possibility and should therefore worth consideration.
For the study of this topic, the following literature could be helpful:
* Banks, Bread and Bombs – Volume 1 by Stefan Erdmann
* Secret Societies and Their Power in the 20th Century 1 & 2 by Jan van Helsing
* Secret Societies 3rd War of the Freemasons by Jan van Helsing
* And The Truth Shall Set You Free – Part 1 by David Icke
* 334 ‰ Lie by H.M. v. Stuhl

Learning Magic
It is harder to cast magic than to protect oneself against it. It requires disciplines and constant practice, as well as continuous development of character. Another perspective assumes that we only remember, skills we already mastered in earlier lives or as a soul.
The practice of magical procedures is always tied into development of character and a form of therapy.
The short, easy way, is generally called the dark one.

imageIn black magic circles, the learning one (adept) will normally surrender his control completely and entrusts himself completely to a master or to a community. Those who want to leave such a circle apparently frequently suffer worldly or magically induced accidents.
*Various circles offer magical training. As most of them are structured pyramidically, the initiate does not know what the intentions of those ranking above him truly are. Disciples are often monopolised and pay either with (a lot of) money or with his energy and magical work. Interested people should therefore inform themselves in advance and select carefully.
* There are small circles and societies, some of them are public or can be found with a serious search.
* One core are the Laws which should be part of everyone’s basic knowledge and are by themselves completely uncontroversial. These laws, however, also find application within magic, as they represent an instruction for reality.
*Books inform about the methods up to self-training via literature.

* School of High Magic by Frater V.D.
* The Way To The True Adept by Franz Bardon
* Transcendental Magic: Dogma and Ritual of High Magic by Eliphas Levi

Original German Magie wirkt und findet in vielfacher Weise Anwendung, teils unbewusst, teils absichtlich.

Taschenspieler, Bühnenzauberer und Scharlatane haben dazu beigetragen, das Bild von Magie in das Reich von Illusion, Tricks, Manipulation, Betrug, Zauberei und Märchen zu verbannen. Damit wurde mehr oder weniger Angst erzeugt oder durch Entlarvung von Tricks eine Beherrschbarkeit von Magie vermittelt.

Die ursprüngliche Bedeutung und der Sinn von Magie gingen dabei verloren. Zur Abgrenzung wurde daher von Aleister Crowley der Begriff "magick" eingeführt, der Bühnenzauberei, Illusionisten und Pseudomagier von echten Magiern unterscheiden sollte. Der Artikel handelt von dieser Art Magie, wobei es keine deutsche Entsprechung gibt für das englische Wort "Magick".
Magie
Die vier Elemente & der magische Spiegel sind Grundlage der Magie

Gibt es Magie wirklich?

Der normale Bürger "glaubt" nicht daran oder spricht zumindest kaum darüber, jedoch wenden erstaunlich viele Menschen magische Praktiken an.

Es ist wichtig zu erkennen, dass Magie wirkt und täglich angewendet wird. Ihre Kraft und ihr Nutzen kann groß sein und liefert handfeste Ergebnisse, wenn dies auch nur wenige in großen Ausmaßen manifestieren können. Doch jeder disziplinierte Geist kann sie erlernen und anwenden.

Manche der tatsächlichen Anwender möchten nicht, dass die breite Masse erfährt, dass und wie wirksam Magie ist, weil sie dann diesen Machtvorteil verlieren würden. Deshalb verbreiten sie, es seien nur Tricks und Spinner würden sich magische Wirkungen einbilden.

Neuerdings kommt das Wissen um die Magie und ihre Wirkungen mehr und mehr wieder in die normale Gesellschaft zurück, dabei wird in der Regel wenig darüber gesprochen.
Durch die Christianisierung ging dieses Volkswissen verloren und ist nur noch rudimentär in Weisheiten verfügbar. Dadurch wurde es gezwungener-maßen, nur in geheimen Vereinigungen oder durch familiäre Überlieferung gepflegt, benutzt und erhalten. Seit einigen Jahrzehnten ist immer bessere Literatur zum Thema erhältlich, trotzdem herrscht noch viel Halbwissen in diesem Bereich.

Der sehr materialistisch oder wissenschaftlich geprägte Teil der Bevölkerung hält an der Nichtexistenz von Magie fest oder verbindet Magie mit realitätsfernen, abergläubischen Praktiken.

Wo wohnen die Dämonen?: Was Sie schon immer über Magie wissen wollten* von Frater V.D.

Abgrenzungen

Beim "magischen Denken", das auch eine Entwicklungsphase des Kleinkindes ist, bezieht der Mensch selektiv Ursache und Wirkung auf sich selbst. Das heißt, er stellt einen extremen Zusammenhang her zwischen seinen eigenen Verwirklichungskräften und einem Geschehnis, was ebenso-gut völlig unabhängig von seinem Denken passiert sein kann. Das Erleben wird beherrscht von Egozentrik und dem Eindruck, der Mittelpunkt der Schöpfung, der Ausgangspunkt der Schöpferkraft des Universums zu sein.

Als krankhafter Realitätsverlust gilt solche Gedankenmagie in der manischen Phase von Manisch-Depressiven. Magisches Denken hat jedoch eine andere Grundlage, als die Bewusstwerdung und ist daher nur sehr begrenzt wirksam (eher nur selbst-schädigend).

Segnungen werden nicht im Sinne von Magie betrachtet. Hier steht das Göttliche im Vordergrund, nicht die eigenen Ziele und Absichten.

Heiler können magische Rituale benutzen.
Grundlagen

Magie ist die Kunst und die Wissenschaft, mit Hilfe von veränderten Bewusstseinszuständen im Einklang mit dem Willen Veränderungen herbeizuführen.
Frater V.D.


Magie ist die willentliche Beeinflussung der Wirklichkeit oder wie Bardon schreibt, die heilige Wissenschaft allen Wissens[1]
Sie arbeitet mit verschiedenen Techniken, um definierte Ziele zu erreichen. Die Magie wendet dabei die allgemeinen Gesetzmäßigkeiten des Geistes an.

Die Magie ist dabei ein Werkzeug und für sich genommen völlig neutral. Sie ist nur eine Möglichkeit, welcher der Ausübende auf jede Art nutzen kann. Vergleichbar mit einem Messer, mit welchem man Nahrung zubereiten oder einem anderen schaden kann. Ihre Wirksamkeit kann bei guter magischer Schulung und korrekter Anwendung enorm sein und sollte nicht unterschätzt werden.

Ein Großteil der bekannten Wirkung von Magie beruht auf starker Projektion des Magiers auf das Energiefeld des Adressierten (andere oder er selbst), sodass dessen Empfindung und Wahrnehmung verändert wird. Die Eigenenergie wird dabei gerne mittels Ritualen oder Fremdenergien verstärkt. Das kann in den verschiedenen Energiekörpern einer Person auch veränderte Resonanzen hervorrufen, die entsprechende Erfahrungen anziehen, wie zum Beispiel früher landläufig ein sogenannter "Pech"-Fluch.
Hier beruht die gemachte Erfahrung nach dem Gesetz der Anziehung (Resonanz-Gesetz) nicht auf eigenen Glaubenssätzen sondern auf projizierten, in die Aura platzierten Elementen (Introjekte).

Es gibt vielfältige Möglichkeiten, magisch zu arbeiten, wie zum Beispiel:

Intuition und Willenskraft schulen
Energetisches Arbeiten (zum Beispiel mit den 4 Elementen, energetische Körperschulung)
Gedankenkonzentration und Fokussierung
Arbeiten mit dem Unterbewusstsein
Nutzen fremder Energien und Mächte (Engel, (Licht-) Meister, Dämonen u.ä.)
Arbeiten mit Symbolen, Archetypen und Ritualen (Kerzen, Visualisierungen, bestimmte Bewegungsabfolgen) oder Verwendung von Amuletten
Bann- oder Zaubersprüche, Anrufungen (Invokationen)
Tarot kann als magischer Einweihungsweg Verwendung finden, doch ist das Tarot nicht mit Magie gleichzusetzen.
Esoteriker arbeiten magisch, sofern die Absicht verfolgt wird, energetisch oder mit Willenskraft, die Wirklichkeit zu beeinflussen oder zu manipulieren. Grundsätzlich ist die Esoterik ein Erkenntnisweg und beinhaltet keine Magie. Jedoch befasst sie sich mit denselben Grundprinzipien, die der Magie zugrunde liegen, weshalb es sich daraus ergeben kann. Der magische Erkenntnisweg ist konkreter & praktischer angelegt als die Esoterik, die sich auf Bewusstseinsentwicklung ausrichtet, auf jedwede Art und Weise.

Ein wichtiger Grundsatz der magischen Arbeit formuliert sich in "Wisse, Wage, Wolle, Schweige", was mit dazu führt, dass nur wenige Ausübende darüber sprechen. Das Schweigen gehört zur Kraft der Manifestation, während das Sprechen diese Kraft zerstreuen und Gegenkräften aussetzen würde.

Die Anwendung von Magie bedeutet, zu beeinflussen, gezielt Dinge durch Willenskraft und nach eigenem Ermessen zu verändern. Kennzeichnend ist hierbei der Hauptfokus auf die Macht des menschlichen Willens - im Gegensatz zu Erkenntniswegen, die lediglich das anerkennen, was ist, ohne die Erkenntnis zu benutzen: die Verwendung wird hier dem Göttlichen überlassen und Techniken, die die körperlichen/feinstofflichen Bedingungen zur Wahrnehmung der eigenen Erkenntnis optimieren (wie Yoga), werden im Allgemeinen nicht als Magie bzw. magische Kräfte verstanden.

Mehr zu okkulten, magischen Fähigkeiten auch im Artikel Esoterik,
mehr zu Praktiken im Artikel Energetischer Selbstschutz
mehr zu funktionellen Grundlagen im Artikel Lebensgesetze
und noch mehr zu Magie in einem FAQ von magieausbildung.de
Weiße und Schwarze Magie

Von weißer Magie wird gesprochen, wenn damit geheilt oder anderen geholfen wird. Auch die Anwendung zum Schutz für sich selbst oder von anderen zählt dazu. Die Absicht ist, Licht und "gute", wohlwollende Kräfte zu nutzen. Die meisten Hexen-Kulte bezeichnen sich als weiß-magisch. Weiße Magie wird auch zu Erkenntniszwecken genutzt.

Von schwarzer Magie wird gesprochen, wenn eigennützige und eigenwillige Ziele verfolgt werden, wie beispielsweise mehr Geld, Besitz, Macht und Erfolg zu erhalten. Es wird in Kauf genommen oder gar beabsichtigt, dabei anderen zu schaden oder anzugreifen. Ein bekanntes Beispiel dafür sind Voodoo-Praktiken, die heute noch hauptsächlich in afrikanischen Ländern praktiziert werden. Die Basis schwarz-magischer Praktiken ist im wesentlichen Gier, Neid, Eifersucht, Ärger/Hass, und/oder Machtstreben.

Aus diesem Bereich kommen die Versuche, fremde oder ganze Gesellschaften auf bestimmte Rituale einzuschwören um daraus Energie zu schöpfen. Oft genug sind diese Taktiken erfolgreich. Es ist gängige Praxis, dunkle Magie in schöne Verpackung zu schlagen und damit zu blenden. Nicht jeder, der Weiß gekleidet daher kommt, verfolgt hehre Ziele.
Gerade die schwarze Magie arbeitet gerne und ausgiebig mit Täuschung und Blendwerk. Überdies lässt sie ihr Gefolge gerne in Unkenntnis und gewinnt durch Beängstigung: bei Adepten (lernende des magischen Weges), um überlegen zu bleiben und bei den geblendeten "guten" Menschen (welche oft nicht einmal ahnen, wem sie dienen) schlichtweg, damit sie tun, was sie sonst nicht täten.
Tarotkarte Der Magier
Der Magier des Crowley-Tarot in seinen drei Erscheinungs-Formen

Im Crowley-Tarot-Deck hat der Urania-Verlag seit 1986 alle drei Versionen von Frieda Harris' Zeichnung des Magieres beigefügt: den weißen Magier (goldfarben, links), den schwarzen Magier (mit einem dunklem Schatten im Hintergrund, rechts) und den transzendenten Magier (den Jongleur, in der Mitte). Crowley hatte damals jedoch nur den transzendenten Magier autorisiert, welches die anzustrebende Form war.

Der weiße und der schwarze Magier sind Teil des dualen Systems, der dualen Ebene, während der Jongleur die dualen magischen Kräfte integriert und transzendiert hat. Er kann beide Kräfte verwenden - nicht nach Eigenwillen sondern im Einklang mit dem göttlichen Willen.

Der transzendierte Umgang mit den magischen Fähigkeiten wird spirituellen Meistern zugeschrieben und weist auf einen Unterschied hin zwischen spirituellen Meistern und Magiern.
Schutz vor Magie

Der beste Schutz gegen ungewollte magische Beeinflussung ist die Bewusstwerdung, wie Magie wirkt.

Im Artikel Energetischer Selbstschutz werden verschiedene Möglichkeiten beschrieben sich und Räumlichkeiten zu schützen.
Grundsätzlich kann jeder die Resonanz beachten. Wer am ehesten mit bewussten magischen Schädigungen zu tun hat, sind Menschen, welche selbst magisch arbeiten oder dies in einem möglichen Vorleben taten. Alte Verbindungen können auftauchen oder aktiviert werden bei bestimmten Praktiken oder Entwicklungsstufen. Besonders weiß-magisch orientierte Menschen fordern in der Polarität gern niedere Geister heraus. Dies kann dazu führen, dass der Magier von deren dunkler Macht gestört oder beeinflusst wird oder die Geister versuchen, ihn zu unterwerfen .
Ausrufezeichen.png
Niemand sollte zur Belustigung Gläser-rücken, Geister beschwören oder vergleichbares "spielen". Wenn es "richtig" gemacht wird, richtet sich die gerufene und ungenutzte Wesenheit leicht gegen den Anwender.

Kommt bei unüberlegten Channeling-Versuchen ein dunkler Gast in die Leitung, wird man diesen nicht mehr ohne weiteres los und erfolgreiche Hilfe ist rar.
Letztlich entsteht durch solche "Spiele" eine verstärke Resonanz zur Magie der niederen oder dunklen Art, die einem wie ein Schatten folgt und allem gutem Handeln einen unterschwelligen schalen Beigeschmack beifügt.

Gegen allgemeine magische Massenbeeinflussung hilft ein klarer Geist, viel Wasser und ein gesunder Körper. Anfällig sind immer eher die unbewussten und schwachen Geister.
Problematisch kann es in Clubs sein, wenn man geschwächt (zum Beispiel durch Alkohol, Müdigkeit, Drogenkonsum) Ziel von Magie wird. In so einem Fall kann die Magie sogar noch nachher wirksam sein, erledigt sich aber in der Regel durch viel reines Wasser und Selbstzentrierung. Im Ausnahmefall braucht es fremde Hilfe, zum Beispiel durch eine Essenz
Ebenso können durch Massenveranstaltungen schädigende Energien unbewusst mitgenommen werden, besonders an Orten, an welchen in Unkenntnis magisch gewirkt wird. Leider ist es genau dann den Besuchern solcher Veranstaltungen häufig nicht bewusst. Das kann dann auch kleinere Treffen mit einschließen. Das Wissen darum, wie man sich schützt oder eine gute Anbindung ans Göttliche (oder an eine göttliche Person) sind die besten Begleiter.

Als gefährdete Gruppe können noch Machtpositionen genannt werden. In diesen Kreisen wird - angeblich von Logen - öfter schwarze Magie angewandt, um wirtschaftliche Ziele zu erreichen.
Wo werden magische Praktiken ausgeübt?

Magisch wirksame Praktiken und Rituale werden vielfach in Religionen angewendet. Dabei geschieht dies für Gläubige häufig unbewusst, durch verschiedene Rituale und Gebete.
Auch die heutige Hypnose soll aus der magischen Tradition entstammen, sie arbeitet mit dem Unterbewusstsein und beeinflusst dieses.
Viele Zirkel, Logen, Neuheiden und Kulte wie Hexen wenden Magie an und lehren sie. Unter diesen sind wohl die meisten ehrenhaft und harmlos.
Die "Macht der Gedanken" zu nutzen ist eine magische Praktik, da sie darauf abzielt, die Wirklichkeit über den Hebel der Gedankenkraft zu beeinflussen.
Tantra, das immer mehr Menschen für sich entdecken, war ursprünglich eine spirituelle Erkenntnis-Praktik. Tantra wird aber vielfach auch magisch angewendet zur Manifestation und Vertiefung einer Bindung an den Wunsch-Partner. Mit diesem (manipulativen) Zweck ausgeübt wird Tantra zu Sexualmagie gezählt. D

Unknown author #fundie hizb.org.uk

Western notions of democracy have come to dominate all discourse on governance, government structure, justice and accountability. Despite this dominance, electoral numbers at elections, trust in politicians and the ruling classes is at an all-time low in the West. Some thinkers in the West, class their liberal democracies as universal and consider all opposing systems as dictatorships. With the Muslims world demanding more and more of Islam to be present in their politics the Khilafah’s ruling system is a viable alternative for many. A lot of this is due to the failure of democracy to cater for the needs of the Muslim world and its flaws can be seen from a number of areas.

Whilst all would agree that their leaders should be elected, the reality of democracy is that regular elections favour those with money and adversely impact tough long-term decision making. Politics becomes about serving the elite not the public. The problem with frequent elections is that the more elections there are the more there is a requirement for money. Money and politics is one of the major cancers in democratic politics.

In essence the more elections you have the more likely you are to poison your system with money and short term thinking. This is what we see in the West today, countries dominated by powerful interests, riddled by political corruption and with soaring deficits and other long-term problems left completely un-tackled.

An alternative to both democracy on the one hand and dictatorship or absolute monarchy on the other hand is an election of a ruler with no term expiry as exists within the Islamic political system. This allows people on the one hand to freely choose their leader but on the other allows that leader the time to take tough long-term decisions for the benefit of the people.

Legislative sovereignty is at the very heart of Western civilisation, the ability to create one’s own laws, change them, adapt them and suspend them is held in high esteem as one of the bedrocks of liberal democracies. This is why we find after the events of 9/11 Western Europe has suspended some key principles and rights. We have seen the suspension of the presumption of innocence, the right to a fair trial and the right to be aware of the evidence that is being used to imprison you. These key rights, enshrined in Western maxims and used to extract other laws have been altered at will, even though they are supposed to be the bedrock of Western political tradition. With secularism at the heart of Western legislation, laws can be changed and even suspended at a whim.

The protection of individual freedoms is the bedrock of Western civilisation. However, the dilemma secular legislators face is what is beneficial to one person is not necessarily beneficial to another. People’s interests overlap and as a result there exists a constant renegotiation of space, entitlement and privilege. More often than not, the underlying criterion for an action is self-gratification and fulfilment – ‘What’s in it for me?’

A society where an individualistic outlook is common can only decline into a virtual free-for-all, as everyone, including the government, would attempt to take full advantage of life. Freedom therefore leads to people seeking their own benefit and more often than not, those with political and/or financial clout have the upper hand. This produces a host of problems, not least the conflict of people’s freedoms.

One of the fundamental pillars of democracy is that legislation is arrived at through majority voting. In the absence of any divine text, the need to derive legislation must be sourced from elsewhere.

(...)

Secularism, the complete separation between God and governance has become established as the Aqeedah of Capitalism, legislative sovereignty of man over god is central to democracy however one defines it. Islam is on the diametrically opposite side of democracy. Islam makes the Islamic texts sovereign – the supreme reference, mankind plays no role in legislating, only implementing.

Islamic governance does not proceed upon the same route as Western legislation, where safeguarding individual freedoms is considered the basis of legislation. Islamic governance does not make freedom the subject of discussion; it does not recognise or reject freedom. Hence, Islamic governance does not look at humans from the angle of them undertaking or not undertaking actions on the basis of freedom.

Whilst Islamic governance has many details and has been written about throughout Islamic history, the following are its key aspects.

The current situation prevalent in the Muslim world, where ruling families decide the laws that society must abide by whilst they remain above the very laws they have created, is just the other side of the democratic coin.

In Islam Allah (swt) is sovereign as explained in the Qur’an:

???? ????????? ?????? ??????

“The rule is for none but Allah” (Al-Anam:57)

This means that all laws need to be derived from the Islamic sources which are the Qur’an, Sunnah, Ijma Sahabah and Qiyas. Whilst all laws, maxims and principles are contained within these texts their application is where mankind must use its own capacities to ensure the right rule is applied for the reality it came for.

To ensure this happens Islam has recommended a constitution for the Islamic lands, where the role of the ruler and positions of power are clearly defined and mandated a constitution where the relationship between the ruled and ruler are clearly delineated. All this ensures that society is aware of the laws it will be judged by, which cannot be changed at whim, this will ensure a multiple tier society does not develop, where different laws apply to different segments of society. It also ensures the elites cannot influence the laws.

Islam has enshrined both institutional and decisional independence for the judiciary which far exceeds what is seen in Western democracies. Islam institutionalised an independent high court called the Court of Unjust Acts (Mahkamat Mazalim). It is presided over by the most eminent and qualified judges (Qadi Muzalim) and granted extensive powers by the Shari’ah. It has the power to remove any official of state regardless of their role or rank, including, most importantly, the Khaleefah if he persists in pursuing a path that lies outside of the terms of his Bay’ah (contract of ruling).

Ordinary citizens who have a complaint against the state can register it with the Court. What is unique about the Court of Unjust Acts, compared to other judicial courts, is that the Government Investigations Judge (Qadi Muzalim) has investigatory powers and does not require a plaintiff to register a complaint before launching an investigation. This court will therefore constantly monitor the actions of all officials of the state and the legislation adopted to ensure it conforms to the Shari’ah and no oppression (mazlama) is committed against the people. The executive counterbalance to the power of this Court is by the Khaleefah in principle having the power to appoint and remove the Chief Justice and any judges below him.

The laws and Islamic independent judiciary work to enforce are derived from the Islamic sources, this restricts what can be enforced as law. As Islam’s fundamental source – the Qur’an is revelatory, what is right and wrong is defined and thus the ruler nor the judiciary can deviate from this. With the introduction of a constitution, which allows more detailed rules from the Islamic sources, society will clearly know where it stands with regards to those acts which entail punishments and fines if violated.

The US constitution is considered a model template, which empowers the President with many powers but then restricts them through various mechanisms as power corrupts. Accountability in Islam is guaranteed through the institutions of government, in the obligation to establish political parties and through an individual obligation on all the citizens to enjoin the good and forbid the evil. There are also a host of various mechanisms rooted in Islam which act as checks and balances and restrict and regulate the ruler.

The Khaleefah is given wide mandatory powers in Islam, this is different to what is the norm in democracies where power is shared with a cabinet or parliament. Whilst the West institutionalised this in an attempt to curtail the possibilities of a dictatorship in reality it has given rise to mob rule where the collective act in concert like any individual dictator.

Islam has mandated that authority belongs to the Ummah. The Khaleefah is not a king or dictator who imposes his authority on the people through coercion or force. The Khaleefah’s authority to rule must be given willingly by the Muslims through the Islamic ruling contract known as Bay’ah. Without this Bay’ah the Khaleefah cannot rule. After this his authority is restricted to the hukm shari i.e. he cannot change what the Islamic texts have defined as right and wrong.
Islam has institutionalised the Bay’ah contract as the method to appoint a ruler.

This was outlined in many ahadith, amongst them: Muslim narrated on the authority of Abu Hazim who said: “I accompanied Abu Hurayra five years and I heard him talk about the Prophet (saw) saying: ‘Bani Israel used to be governed by Prophets, every time a Prophet died, another came after him, and there is no Prophet after me. There will be Khulafa’a and they will number many.’ They said: ‘What would you order us to do?’ He (saw) said: ‘Fulfil the Bay’ah to them one after the other, and give them their due right, surely Allah will account them for that which He entrusted them with.” (Sahih Muslim). The Bay’ah is between two parties – the Khaleefah and the Muslims. It is the people who elect the ruler, through popular will.

(...)

The Bay’ah is a contract and as such it is allowed to add extra conditions to this contract that the Khaleefah must abide by, as long as these extra conditions do not violate the fundamentals of the contract. It would be allowed to restrict the Khaleefah to certain constitutional processes such as the empowerment of the Majlis al-Ummah (People’s Council) and the judiciary as counterbalances to the executive power of the Khaleefah.

Without the restriction on the term of office, the Khaleefah can focus on long term strategic planning for the state instead of short-term planning from one election to the next as we find in democratic systems. It also prevents corporate interests from hijacking the government agenda through campaign contributions that any Presidential candidate or party in the West must secure to achieve power.

The ruler possesses many executive powers such as appointing governors and mayors, developing the state’s foreign policy and accepting foreign ambassadors. He is however restricted to these and cannot go beyond this remit. The ruler’s role is restricted to the public sphere and so Islam would forbid him from interfering in the private lives of his citizens. So whilst the Khaleefah holds all executive powers within the Khilafah his powers are restricted by the Shari’ah.

The powers of the Khaleefah are further restricted in Islam by the establishment of the Majlis al-Ummah. This is an elected council whose members can be Muslim, non-Muslim, men or women. These members represent the interests of their constituencies within the state. The Majlis has no powers of legislation like in a democratic system but it does have many powers that act as a counterbalance to the executive powers of the Khaleefah. These include expressing dissatisfaction with the assistants, governors, and mayors and in this matter the view of the Majlis is binding and the Khaleefah must discharge them at once. It also includes selecting the list of candidates standing for the position of the Khaleefah, no candidate excluded from this list may stand and the decision of the Majlis is binding. The Majlis also decides how much the ruler is paid and the allowances he may get.

In modern times the most appropriate style of conducting the Bay’ah is through a general election, where all mature Muslims, male and female have a right to vote for the Khaleefah of their choice. The Muslim representatives of the Majlis al-Ummah will shortlist the candidates for the Khaleefah and the people then vote for one of the candidates of their choice.

Islam has ordered the establishment of political parties. Political parties in the Khilafah are established primarily to account the Khaleefah and his government. Their task is to safeguard the thoughts of Islam in society and to ensure the government does not deviate from the implementation and propagation of Islam. The right of the Khilafah’s citizens to establish political parties is established from the Holy Qur’an. No permission is required from the government to establish political parties. Although members of the government will in many cases be members of political parties. The Khilafah does not have a party system of ruling as found in Western democracies.

In addition to the institutionalised mechanisms of accountability discussed so far, accounting the Khilafah is a right of all citizens of the state whether Muslim or non-Muslim. Although their representatives in the Majlis al-Ummah will undertake this task on their behalf they still have a right to perform this task themselves. Political apathy is a growing problem in the West. General elections are seeing fewer people voting especially amongst the young. Growing individualism among society is leading people to ignore the problems facing their communities and wider society and be concerned only with themselves. Islam not only obliged political parties with the task of enjoining ma’aruf and forbidding munkar but also individuals.

A central argument of liberals is that after restricting religion to the private lives of individuals, the West has seen unparalleled progress. Secularism has been central to the period of enlightenment and the postmodern world we currently live in. However there is a consistent pattern across all democracies of corruption. The US may be the preeminent democracy in the world but it is also one of the most corrupt.

US politics is riddled with special interests, a revolving door between politics and big business, political favours and backhanders. Though on the surface elections occur every two years, the reality is that incumbents rarely lose. In 2008, 94% of incumbents won in the House of Representatives and 83% in the Senate. This isn’t by accident, due to the significant money advantage enjoyed by incumbents and the continued redistricting.

Democracies should have secularised money and politics and not religion and politics. In Islam the ruler is not an employee who gets paid a wage, since he is not hired by the Ummah. The Khaleefah is given a pledge of allegiance (Bay’ah) by the Ummah to implement the Shari’ah and convey the Islamic Da’wah to the world. Although the Khaleefah is not paid a wage an allowance is assigned to him from the Bait al-Mal to meet his needs.

This allowance is a compensation for him since he is kept busy with the obligation of the Khilafah and cannot work and pursue his own business interests. This allowance is determined by the Majlis al-Ummah who will decide through shura (consultation) how much the allowance should be. They are the elected representatives of the Ummah and giving them the ultimate decision prevents any abuse of the public funds by the Khaleefah.

The ruler, governors, delegated assistants and judges – all the positions of ruling – are not paid a wage but an allowance as compensation as they are unable to take on employment. In this way Islam ensures money is kept far away from ruling.

(...)

Individuals have the right to account any organ or employee of the state, regardless of rank or seniority, this includes the head of state. Complaints can be submitted to the Madhalim Office who will initiate a process of validating and following due process in establishing facts. This office has the subsequent power to stipulate punishments. Individuals, Muslims and non Muslims, are allowed the right to peaceful congregation and protest. They are also allowed to seek out support to make representations to the state on their behalf.

secret wiki #magick #conspiracy secret-wiki.de

Magic works and is used in many ways, at times unconsciously, at times deliberately.

Prestidigitators, stage magicians and charlatans contributed to the image of magic being banished into the realm of illusion, tricks, deception, sorcery and fairy tales. With this, more or less fear was created or control over magic conveyed through exposing tricks.

The original meaning and the sense of magic were lost in the process. For distinction, Aleister Crowley introduced the term "magick" to distinguish stage magic, illusionists and pseudo-sorcerers from real sorcerers. This article is about this kind of magic, as there is no German equivalent for the English word "magick".

imageThe four elements and the magic mirror are fundamental to magic.

Is magic real?

The average citizen does not "believe" in it or at least speaks little about it, but an astonishing number of people practice magic.

It is important to realise that magic works and is used on a daily base. Its power and its use can be great and delivers tangible results, although only few can actually manifest it on a large scale. But every disciplined mind can learn and practice it.

Some of the real practitioners do not want the masses to know that and how well magic works because they would lose this advantage in power. Therefore, they spread the belief that it is nothing but tricks and magic effects are the delusions of crackpots.

Recently, the knowledge of magic and its effects has been returning more and more to normal society, but generally, it is not talked about much.
During Christianisation, this folk-knowledge was lost and remains only rudimentary in wisdoms. Thus it was forc-ed to only be preserved and practiced in secret societies or family tradition. Since recent decades, ever better literature on the topic is becoming available, but the area is still strongly dominated by half-knowledge.

The very materialistically or scientifically socialised part of the populace stays firm in their belief in the non-existance of magic or connect magic with superstitious practices divorced from reality.

Demarcations

With “magical thinking”, which is also a stage of development in toddlers, one refers cause and effect selectively to oneself. This means they produce a strong correlation between his own powers of realisation and an event that could just as well have happened completely independently of his thoughts. Experience is dominated by egocentrism and the impression of being the centre of Creation, the point of origin of the universe’s power of Creation.

Such thought-magic is considered a pathological loss of reality in the manic phase in Manic-Depressives. Magical thinking however has another foundation, than gaining awareness and thus is only very limited in its effectiveness (generally just self harming).

Blessings are not viewed in the sense of magic. Here, the focus lies on the Divine, not on the own goals and intentions.

Healers can use magical rituals.

Fundamentals

Magic is the art and the science of bringing about changes through altered states of consciousness in accord with the will.
- Frater V.D.

Magic is the wilful influence over reality or as Bardon writes, the sacred science of all knowledge.
It works through various techniques to accomplish definitive goals. In this, magic applies the general Laws of the Mind.

Here, magic is a took and, taken by itself, completely neutral. It is just an option which the practitioner can use in any way. It can be compared with a knife, with which one can prepare food or harm someone else. Its effectiveness can be enormous with good magical schooling and correct usage and should not be underestimated.

A large part of the known effects of magic is based on strong projection of the magician upon the energy field of the addressed one (others or himself), so that his sensations and perception are altered. In this, the self-energy is frequently augmented through rituals or external energies. This can also lead to altered resonances within the different energy bodies of a person that attract corresponding experiences, for example what was once commonly known as a “bad luck” curse.

The options for working magic are diverse, for example:
* Training intuition and willpower
* Energetic work (for example with the 4 elements, energetic body training)
* Thought concentration and focussing
* Working with the subconsciousness
* Usage of foreign energies and powers (angels, (Light-) Masters, demons etc.)
* Working with symbols, archetypes and rituals (candles, visualisations, certain sequences of motion) or usage of amulets
* Spells of banishment or magic, invocations
* Tarot can be used as a way of magical initiation, but the Tarot is not to be equated to magic.
* Esoterics work magic, as long as the intention is to influence or manipulate reality energetically or through willpower. Generally speaking, esotericism is a path to enlightenment and does not contain magic. It does, however deal with the same foundational principles that form the foundation of magic, and for this reason it can result from it. The magical path to enlightenment is more concrete and practical in focus than esotericism, which is focussed on developing consciousness in any form.

An important principle of working magic is formulated in ”To Know, To Dare, To Will, To Be Silent”, which is one of the reasons why only few practitioners speak about it. Silence is part of the power of the manifestation, whereas speaking can disperse this power and expose it to opposed forces.

The practice of magic means to influence, to deliberately change things through force of will and at one's own discretion. Characteristically, the main focus here lies in the power of the human will – as opposed to ways of knowing that merely recognise that which is without using this insight: here, the usage is left to the Divine and techniques that optimise the bodily/subtle-energy conditions for the purpose of perceiving personal enlightenment (such as Yoga) are not generally understood as magic/magical forces.

More on occult, magical abilities also in the article Esotericism,
more on techniques in the article Energetic Self-Protection
more on the functional foundations in the article Laws of Life
and even more on magic in a FAQ on magieausbildung.de

White and Black Magic
White magic refers to magic used to heal or to help others. It also includes using magic to protect oneself or others. The intention is to use Light and “good”, benevolent forces. Most witch-cults call themselves white-magical. White magic is also used for the purpose of enlightenment.

Black magic refers to magic used in the pursuit of selfish and self-centered goals, for example in order to gain more money, property, power and success. It is seen as acceptable or even intended that others are harmed or attacked by this. A famous example are voodoo techniques that these days are still used mainly in African countries. Black-magical practices are mainly based on greed, envy, jealousy, anger/hatred and/or lust for power.

From this area stem the attempts to oblige foreign or entire societies into certain rituals to draw power from them. Often enough, these tactics are successful. It is common to wrap dark magic in a nice package and thus deceive. Not everyone who enters dressed in White has honest intentions. Black magic in particular likes to use deception and illusion and does so extensively. Furthermore, it leaves its followers in ignorance and wins through intimidation: in Adepts (those learning the way of magic), to stay dominant, and in the deceived “good” people (who frequently do not have any idea who they serve) simply so that they do what they would not do otherwise.

Tarot Card The Magician
imageThe Sorcerer of the Crowley Tarot in his three manifestations

In the Crowley Tarot Deck, publisher Urania has added all three versions of Frieda Harris’s drawings of the Magicician: the white magician (golden, left), the black magician (with a dark shadow in the background, right), and the magician transcendent (the juggler, at the centre. Crowley, however, had only authorised the sorcerer transcendent back then, which was the form to strive for.

The white and black magician are part of the dual system, of the dual plane, whereas the juggler has integrated and transcended the dual magical forces. He can use both forces – not according to his own volition but in accordance to the divine will.

Transcended dealing with the magical abilities is attributed to spiritual Masters and points to a difference between spiritual Masters and magicians.

Protection Against Magic
The best defence against unwanted magical influences is gaining awareness of the way magic works
In the article Energetic Self-Protection, various options for protecting oneself and locations are described. For a start, everyone can pay attention to the resonance. The ones most likely to deal with deliberate magical ham are people who work magic themselves or who did it in a potential previous life. Old connection can appear or be activated during certain procedures or stages of development. Especially white-magically oriented people frequently challenge nether spirits in polarity. This can lead to the magician being disturbed or influenced by their dark power or to the spirits trying to subjugate him.

imageNo one should move glasses, conjure spirits/ghosts or “play” with comparable things for amusement. If it is done “correctly”, the summoned and unused entity will easily turn against the practitioner.
When a dark guest enters the channel in an ill-conceived attempt at channelling, it is not trivial to get rid of him and successful help is rare.

Ultimately, such “games” result in an increased resonance towards magic of the lower or dark kind, which follows one like a shadow and adds a subliminal bad taste to all good works.

* Against general magical mass-manipulation, a clear mind, a lot of water and a healthy body help. It is always the unaware and weak minds that are susceptible.
* In clubs, it can be problematic if one is the target of magic while weakened (for example by alcohol, tiredness, consumption of drugs). In such a case, the magic can even be effective afterwards, but is normally resolved with a lot of pure water and self-centering. In exceptional cases, external help ie needed, for example by an essence.
* Similarly, harmful energies can be taken with oneself unconsciously at mass events, especially in places where magic is performed in ignorance. Unfortunately, this very fact is not known to the visitors of such events. Then this can also include smaller meetings. The knowledge on how to protect oneself or a good connection to the Divine (or to a divine person) are the best companions.

Positions of power can be named as a further endangered group. In such covens – reportedly in lodges – black magic is used frequently to accomplish economical goals.

Where are magical procedures performed?
* Magically effective procedures and rituals are widely used in religions. This frequently happens without the faithful being aware of it, via rituals and prayers.
* The hypnosis of today supposedly originated in the magical tradition as well, it works with the Subconsciousness and influences it.
* Many covens, lodges, neopagans and cults such as witches practice magic and teach it. Among them, most of them are likely honourable and harmless.
* Tantra, which more and more people are discovering for themselves, was original a spiritual method of enlightenment. However, Tantra is also used frequently magically for the manifestation and deepening of a bond with the wish-partner. When used with this (manipulative) purpose, Tantra counts as sexual magic. As targeted built-up sexual energy has a strong effect, it was used against demons in the past. However, it is advised against manipulation of the Kundalini energy because it can also cause damage if impurities are present.
One example of a magical sexual procedure is here – (in English) – with further types of magic here. (Submitter’s note: Links broken)
* Magical techniques are also used for manipulation of the masses.
* For example through religious symbols on vertices of power that change the base structure of the regional energy. (Christian crosses on the summits of mountains, energy intersections and churches, with the effect of binding the populace to the material)
* Symbols of corporations, ideologies and flags
* Modern advertising, as it utilises originally magical ways to deliver information (advertising) into the Subconsciousness. This is exactly what a magician does with himself, it is just that he determines the content and thus the goal himself.
* The massive proliferation, for example printed-on skulls and bones on many products have magical meaning in regards to the manipulation of society as well (corresponds to Saturn and among other things the preservation of existing structures)

Magic & (World) Politics
Secret, very powerful lodges work in the background and supposedly influence politics, banks and the economy. It is known that very many politicians, magnates, nobility, musicians and bankers in some orders and lodges. At times, they may be harmless, at times subverted and at times indeed part of a powerful network of lodges.

Whether secret lodges do indeed rule the world, but some things indicate their heavy influence. Especially the fact that this topic is avoided in movies and media is conspicuous. In documentaries, it is mostly Rosicrucians and Freemasons are portrayed (for example the membership of most US presidents in the Masonic Lodge). It is at least within the realm of possibility and should therefore worth consideration.
For the study of this topic, the following literature could be helpful:
* Banks, Bread and Bombs – Volume 1 by Stefan Erdmann
* Secret Societies and Their Power in the 20th Century 1 & 2 by Jan van Helsing
* Secret Societies 3rd War of the Freemasons by Jan van Helsing
* And The Truth Shall Set You Free – Part 1 by David Icke
* 334 ‰ Lie by H.M. v. Stuhl

Learning Magic
It is harder to cast magic than to protect oneself against it. It requires disciplines and constant practice, as well as continuous development of character. Another perspective assumes that we only remember, skills we already mastered in earlier lives or as a soul.
The practice of magical procedures is always tied into development of character and a form of therapy.
The short, easy way, is generally called the dark one.

imageIn black magic covens, the learning one (adept) will normally surrender his control completely and entrusts himself completely to a master or to a community. Those who want to leave such a coven apparently frequently suffer worldly or magically induced accidents.
*Various covens offer magical training. As most of them are structured pyramidally, the initiate does not know what the intentions of those ranking above him truly are. Disciples are often monopolised and pay either with (a lot of) money or with his energy and magical work. Interested people should therefore inform themselves in advance and select carefully.
* There are small covens and societies, some of them are public or can be found with a serious search.
* One core are the Laws which should be part of everyone’s basic knowledge and are by themselves completely uncontroversial. These laws, however, also find application within magic, as they represent an instruction for reality.
*Books inform about the methods up to self-training via literature.

* School of High Magic by Frater V.D.
* The Way To The True Adept by Franz Bardon
* Transcendental Magic: Dogma and Ritual of High Magic by Eliphas Levi

Original German Magie wirkt und findet in vielfacher Weise Anwendung, teils unbewusst, teils absichtlich.

Taschenspieler, Bühnenzauberer und Scharlatane haben dazu beigetragen, das Bild von Magie in das Reich von Illusion, Tricks, Manipulation, Betrug, Zauberei und Märchen zu verbannen. Damit wurde mehr oder weniger Angst erzeugt oder durch Entlarvung von Tricks eine Beherrschbarkeit von Magie vermittelt.

Die ursprüngliche Bedeutung und der Sinn von Magie gingen dabei verloren. Zur Abgrenzung wurde daher von Aleister Crowley der Begriff "magick" eingeführt, der Bühnenzauberei, Illusionisten und Pseudomagier von echten Magiern unterscheiden sollte. Der Artikel handelt von dieser Art Magie, wobei es keine deutsche Entsprechung gibt für das englische Wort "Magick".
Magie
Die vier Elemente & der magische Spiegel sind Grundlage der Magie

Gibt es Magie wirklich?

Der normale Bürger "glaubt" nicht daran oder spricht zumindest kaum darüber, jedoch wenden erstaunlich viele Menschen magische Praktiken an.

Es ist wichtig zu erkennen, dass Magie wirkt und täglich angewendet wird. Ihre Kraft und ihr Nutzen kann groß sein und liefert handfeste Ergebnisse, wenn dies auch nur wenige in großen Ausmaßen manifestieren können. Doch jeder disziplinierte Geist kann sie erlernen und anwenden.

Manche der tatsächlichen Anwender möchten nicht, dass die breite Masse erfährt, dass und wie wirksam Magie ist, weil sie dann diesen Machtvorteil verlieren würden. Deshalb verbreiten sie, es seien nur Tricks und Spinner würden sich magische Wirkungen einbilden.

Neuerdings kommt das Wissen um die Magie und ihre Wirkungen mehr und mehr wieder in die normale Gesellschaft zurück, dabei wird in der Regel wenig darüber gesprochen.
Durch die Christianisierung ging dieses Volkswissen verloren und ist nur noch rudimentär in Weisheiten verfügbar. Dadurch wurde es gezwungener-maßen, nur in geheimen Vereinigungen oder durch familiäre Überlieferung gepflegt, benutzt und erhalten. Seit einigen Jahrzehnten ist immer bessere Literatur zum Thema erhältlich, trotzdem herrscht noch viel Halbwissen in diesem Bereich.

Der sehr materialistisch oder wissenschaftlich geprägte Teil der Bevölkerung hält an der Nichtexistenz von Magie fest oder verbindet Magie mit realitätsfernen, abergläubischen Praktiken.

Wo wohnen die Dämonen?: Was Sie schon immer über Magie wissen wollten* von Frater V.D.

Abgrenzungen

Beim "magischen Denken", das auch eine Entwicklungsphase des Kleinkindes ist, bezieht der Mensch selektiv Ursache und Wirkung auf sich selbst. Das heißt, er stellt einen extremen Zusammenhang her zwischen seinen eigenen Verwirklichungskräften und einem Geschehnis, was ebenso-gut völlig unabhängig von seinem Denken passiert sein kann. Das Erleben wird beherrscht von Egozentrik und dem Eindruck, der Mittelpunkt der Schöpfung, der Ausgangspunkt der Schöpferkraft des Universums zu sein.

Als krankhafter Realitätsverlust gilt solche Gedankenmagie in der manischen Phase von Manisch-Depressiven. Magisches Denken hat jedoch eine andere Grundlage, als die Bewusstwerdung und ist daher nur sehr begrenzt wirksam (eher nur selbst-schädigend).

Segnungen werden nicht im Sinne von Magie betrachtet. Hier steht das Göttliche im Vordergrund, nicht die eigenen Ziele und Absichten.

Heiler können magische Rituale benutzen.
Grundlagen

Magie ist die Kunst und die Wissenschaft, mit Hilfe von veränderten Bewusstseinszuständen im Einklang mit dem Willen Veränderungen herbeizuführen.
Frater V.D.


Magie ist die willentliche Beeinflussung der Wirklichkeit oder wie Bardon schreibt, die heilige Wissenschaft allen Wissens[1]
Sie arbeitet mit verschiedenen Techniken, um definierte Ziele zu erreichen. Die Magie wendet dabei die allgemeinen Gesetzmäßigkeiten des Geistes an.

Die Magie ist dabei ein Werkzeug und für sich genommen völlig neutral. Sie ist nur eine Möglichkeit, welcher der Ausübende auf jede Art nutzen kann. Vergleichbar mit einem Messer, mit welchem man Nahrung zubereiten oder einem anderen schaden kann. Ihre Wirksamkeit kann bei guter magischer Schulung und korrekter Anwendung enorm sein und sollte nicht unterschätzt werden.

Ein Großteil der bekannten Wirkung von Magie beruht auf starker Projektion des Magiers auf das Energiefeld des Adressierten (andere oder er selbst), sodass dessen Empfindung und Wahrnehmung verändert wird. Die Eigenenergie wird dabei gerne mittels Ritualen oder Fremdenergien verstärkt. Das kann in den verschiedenen Energiekörpern einer Person auch veränderte Resonanzen hervorrufen, die entsprechende Erfahrungen anziehen, wie zum Beispiel früher landläufig ein sogenannter "Pech"-Fluch.
Hier beruht die gemachte Erfahrung nach dem Gesetz der Anziehung (Resonanz-Gesetz) nicht auf eigenen Glaubenssätzen sondern auf projizierten, in die Aura platzierten Elementen (Introjekte).

Es gibt vielfältige Möglichkeiten, magisch zu arbeiten, wie zum Beispiel:

Intuition und Willenskraft schulen
Energetisches Arbeiten (zum Beispiel mit den 4 Elementen, energetische Körperschulung)
Gedankenkonzentration und Fokussierung
Arbeiten mit dem Unterbewusstsein
Nutzen fremder Energien und Mächte (Engel, (Licht-) Meister, Dämonen u.ä.)
Arbeiten mit Symbolen, Archetypen und Ritualen (Kerzen, Visualisierungen, bestimmte Bewegungsabfolgen) oder Verwendung von Amuletten
Bann- oder Zaubersprüche, Anrufungen (Invokationen)
Tarot kann als magischer Einweihungsweg Verwendung finden, doch ist das Tarot nicht mit Magie gleichzusetzen.
Esoteriker arbeiten magisch, sofern die Absicht verfolgt wird, energetisch oder mit Willenskraft, die Wirklichkeit zu beeinflussen oder zu manipulieren. Grundsätzlich ist die Esoterik ein Erkenntnisweg und beinhaltet keine Magie. Jedoch befasst sie sich mit denselben Grundprinzipien, die der Magie zugrunde liegen, weshalb es sich daraus ergeben kann. Der magische Erkenntnisweg ist konkreter & praktischer angelegt als die Esoterik, die sich auf Bewusstseinsentwicklung ausrichtet, auf jedwede Art und Weise.

Ein wichtiger Grundsatz der magischen Arbeit formuliert sich in "Wisse, Wage, Wolle, Schweige", was mit dazu führt, dass nur wenige Ausübende darüber sprechen. Das Schweigen gehört zur Kraft der Manifestation, während das Sprechen diese Kraft zerstreuen und Gegenkräften aussetzen würde.

Die Anwendung von Magie bedeutet, zu beeinflussen, gezielt Dinge durch Willenskraft und nach eigenem Ermessen zu verändern. Kennzeichnend ist hierbei der Hauptfokus auf die Macht des menschlichen Willens - im Gegensatz zu Erkenntniswegen, die lediglich das anerkennen, was ist, ohne die Erkenntnis zu benutzen: die Verwendung wird hier dem Göttlichen überlassen und Techniken, die die körperlichen/feinstofflichen Bedingungen zur Wahrnehmung der eigenen Erkenntnis optimieren (wie Yoga), werden im Allgemeinen nicht als Magie bzw. magische Kräfte verstanden.

Mehr zu okkulten, magischen Fähigkeiten auch im Artikel Esoterik,
mehr zu Praktiken im Artikel Energetischer Selbstschutz
mehr zu funktionellen Grundlagen im Artikel Lebensgesetze
und noch mehr zu Magie in einem FAQ von magieausbildung.de
Weiße und Schwarze Magie

Von weißer Magie wird gesprochen, wenn damit geheilt oder anderen geholfen wird. Auch die Anwendung zum Schutz für sich selbst oder von anderen zählt dazu. Die Absicht ist, Licht und "gute", wohlwollende Kräfte zu nutzen. Die meisten Hexen-Kulte bezeichnen sich als weiß-magisch. Weiße Magie wird auch zu Erkenntniszwecken genutzt.

Von schwarzer Magie wird gesprochen, wenn eigennützige und eigenwillige Ziele verfolgt werden, wie beispielsweise mehr Geld, Besitz, Macht und Erfolg zu erhalten. Es wird in Kauf genommen oder gar beabsichtigt, dabei anderen zu schaden oder anzugreifen. Ein bekanntes Beispiel dafür sind Voodoo-Praktiken, die heute noch hauptsächlich in afrikanischen Ländern praktiziert werden. Die Basis schwarz-magischer Praktiken ist im wesentlichen Gier, Neid, Eifersucht, Ärger/Hass, und/oder Machtstreben.

Aus diesem Bereich kommen die Versuche, fremde oder ganze Gesellschaften auf bestimmte Rituale einzuschwören um daraus Energie zu schöpfen. Oft genug sind diese Taktiken erfolgreich. Es ist gängige Praxis, dunkle Magie in schöne Verpackung zu schlagen und damit zu blenden. Nicht jeder, der Weiß gekleidet daher kommt, verfolgt hehre Ziele.
Gerade die schwarze Magie arbeitet gerne und ausgiebig mit Täuschung und Blendwerk. Überdies lässt sie ihr Gefolge gerne in Unkenntnis und gewinnt durch Beängstigung: bei Adepten (lernende des magischen Weges), um überlegen zu bleiben und bei den geblendeten "guten" Menschen (welche oft nicht einmal ahnen, wem sie dienen) schlichtweg, damit sie tun, was sie sonst nicht täten.
Tarotkarte Der Magier
Der Magier des Crowley-Tarot in seinen drei Erscheinungs-Formen

Im Crowley-Tarot-Deck hat der Urania-Verlag seit 1986 alle drei Versionen von Frieda Harris' Zeichnung des Magieres beigefügt: den weißen Magier (goldfarben, links), den schwarzen Magier (mit einem dunklem Schatten im Hintergrund, rechts) und den transzendenten Magier (den Jongleur, in der Mitte). Crowley hatte damals jedoch nur den transzendenten Magier autorisiert, welches die anzustrebende Form war.

Der weiße und der schwarze Magier sind Teil des dualen Systems, der dualen Ebene, während der Jongleur die dualen magischen Kräfte integriert und transzendiert hat. Er kann beide Kräfte verwenden - nicht nach Eigenwillen sondern im Einklang mit dem göttlichen Willen.

Der transzendierte Umgang mit den magischen Fähigkeiten wird spirituellen Meistern zugeschrieben und weist auf einen Unterschied hin zwischen spirituellen Meistern und Magiern.
Schutz vor Magie

Der beste Schutz gegen ungewollte magische Beeinflussung ist die Bewusstwerdung, wie Magie wirkt.

Im Artikel Energetischer Selbstschutz werden verschiedene Möglichkeiten beschrieben sich und Räumlichkeiten zu schützen.
Grundsätzlich kann jeder die Resonanz beachten. Wer am ehesten mit bewussten magischen Schädigungen zu tun hat, sind Menschen, welche selbst magisch arbeiten oder dies in einem möglichen Vorleben taten. Alte Verbindungen können auftauchen oder aktiviert werden bei bestimmten Praktiken oder Entwicklungsstufen. Besonders weiß-magisch orientierte Menschen fordern in der Polarität gern niedere Geister heraus. Dies kann dazu führen, dass der Magier von deren dunkler Macht gestört oder beeinflusst wird oder die Geister versuchen, ihn zu unterwerfen .
Ausrufezeichen.png
Niemand sollte zur Belustigung Gläser-rücken, Geister beschwören oder vergleichbares "spielen". Wenn es "richtig" gemacht wird, richtet sich die gerufene und ungenutzte Wesenheit leicht gegen den Anwender.

Kommt bei unüberlegten Channeling-Versuchen ein dunkler Gast in die Leitung, wird man diesen nicht mehr ohne weiteres los und erfolgreiche Hilfe ist rar.
Letztlich entsteht durch solche "Spiele" eine verstärke Resonanz zur Magie der niederen oder dunklen Art, die einem wie ein Schatten folgt und allem gutem Handeln einen unterschwelligen schalen Beigeschmack beifügt.

Gegen allgemeine magische Massenbeeinflussung hilft ein klarer Geist, viel Wasser und ein gesunder Körper. Anfällig sind immer eher die unbewussten und schwachen Geister.
Problematisch kann es in Clubs sein, wenn man geschwächt (zum Beispiel durch Alkohol, Müdigkeit, Drogenkonsum) Ziel von Magie wird. In so einem Fall kann die Magie sogar noch nachher wirksam sein, erledigt sich aber in der Regel durch viel reines Wasser und Selbstzentrierung. Im Ausnahmefall braucht es fremde Hilfe, zum Beispiel durch eine Essenz
Ebenso können durch Massenveranstaltungen schädigende Energien unbewusst mitgenommen werden, besonders an Orten, an welchen in Unkenntnis magisch gewirkt wird. Leider ist es genau dann den Besuchern solcher Veranstaltungen häufig nicht bewusst. Das kann dann auch kleinere Treffen mit einschließen. Das Wissen darum, wie man sich schützt oder eine gute Anbindung ans Göttliche (oder an eine göttliche Person) sind die besten Begleiter.

Als gefährdete Gruppe können noch Machtpositionen genannt werden. In diesen Kreisen wird - angeblich von Logen - öfter schwarze Magie angewandt, um wirtschaftliche Ziele zu erreichen.
Wo werden magische Praktiken ausgeübt?

Magisch wirksame Praktiken und Rituale werden vielfach in Religionen angewendet. Dabei geschieht dies für Gläubige häufig unbewusst, durch verschiedene Rituale und Gebete.
Auch die heutige Hypnose soll aus der magischen Tradition entstammen, sie arbeitet mit dem Unterbewusstsein und beeinflusst dieses.
Viele Zirkel, Logen, Neuheiden und Kulte wie Hexen wenden Magie an und lehren sie. Unter diesen sind wohl die meisten ehrenhaft und harmlos.
Die "Macht der Gedanken" zu nutzen ist eine magische Praktik, da sie darauf abzielt, die Wirklichkeit über den Hebel der Gedankenkraft zu beeinflussen.
Tantra, das immer mehr Menschen für sich entdecken, war ursprünglich eine spirituelle Erkenntnis-Praktik. Tantra wird aber vielfach auch magisch angewendet zur Manifestation und Vertiefung einer Bindung an den Wunsch-Partner. Mit diesem (manipulativen) Zweck ausgeübt wird Tantra zu Sexualmagie gezählt. D

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.

Colby Malsbury #wingnut #conspiracy faithandheritage.com

I usually find the ubiquity of celebrity death watches on this world wide web of ours morbid, as everyone ought, but there’s no denying that the August 25 [2018] passing of one of the denizens of that list – the gorgon John McCain – made my day. Not just my day, either. For the first time in collective memory, both the extreme left and the extreme right had a common cause to celebrate in tandem:

image
[Picture with the text “John McCain is dead” written at the top, followed by a Political Compass in which each of the four quadrants has a picture of a cheering guy and a picture of a crying woman is at the center]

The pundit class always bemoans the lack of ‘bipartisanship’ these days. Well, here’s what you’re looking for, baby! For a couple of days, anyway.

That still leaves plenty of room for the maudlin middle – in both its liberal and especially risable cohenservative wings – to signal its collective virtue via expressions of sycophantic tribute, to placate I know not whom. Or, to put it a less delicate way, the brown-nosing underway in honor of Songbird’s memory is positively nauseating. Here’s a fun drinking game: take a shot every time you run across a news item referring to McCain as a ‘hero’. (Faith & Heritage assumes no responsibility for resulting liver damage or sustained spiritual trauma if you happen to be a Baptist.)

Of course, the cascade of crocodile tears culminated in a week-long funerary jaunt from coast to coast, with stops at every conceivably relevant venue – from the Arizona state Capitol to the DC Capitol to the National Cathedral to the Vietnam Veteran’s Memorial to the US Naval Academy. Such an unwieldy procession brings to mind nothing more dignified than one of the Rolling Stones’ interminable ‘farewell’ tours, or perhaps a spurious bleeding Marian icon making a pilgrimage through some of the more superstitious backwaters of rural Italy. At every stop, scads of crowds withstood late summer temperatures to pay their respects to Famous Dead Guy. The unlikeliest of illustrious potentates attended his funeral – all the surviving presidents, plus everyone from Joe Biden to Henry Kissinger to retired Diamondbacks outfielder Luis Gonzalez to Warren Beatty (!!!!) All of this, I might add, for a mere senator. His having been a presidential candidate as well had little to do with all this pomp and circumstance. I don’t recollect similar hosannas being lauded upon the passing of, say, George McGovern.

Well into the month of September, lamestream media outposts on the right and on the left engaged in a pitched battle of dueling banjos to see who could sing this stalwart warrior into Valhalla with the sweetest melody. Things got downright surreal when Stevie Wonder, of all people, dedicated a song to McCain during a concert. No word as to whether radio stations with an 80s format suspended airplay of Tina Turner’s “We Don’t Need Another Hero,” but given the trajectory I think that’s a given.

To paraphrase Creedence Clearwater Revival: Senator McCain, you are one fortunate son, sir. This astonishing national love-in permeated down to the level of us mere plebians. If you dared mention the fact that our dearly departed treasure had more than a couple of black marks on his record, your normie friends and family (assuming you have any) would have reacted as though you had sent your grandmother to live in a tent in the backyard during a polar vortex. “How DARE you???? Don’t you know he was a HERO??? A WAR hero???? What have you done with your life? Show some respect!!! You’re just a damned North Korean!!!!” Sound familiar? Maybe, if they were of a liberal bent, they would have qualified their indignation ever so slightly: “Yes, I didn’t agree with all his politics either, but that’s beside the point now!!! How can you sit there and speak ill of the dead??? You’re just a damned North Korean!!!!” Where do these people come up with their great ideas?

This, of course, leads to a wider theological question: where, exactly, is it written that to speak ill of the recently-departed dead is sin? If we are to affirm that it is indeed found in the Scriptures ‘somewhere’, then we also must reckon God a sinner, as He ordained the harlot Jezebel’s torso to be ‘disrespectfully’ dragged off by dogs after she had not been dead from her great fall even one day (II Kings 9:30-37), to cite just one example. Or could it just be that we don’t find such postmortem criticism cricket? Well, that’s just too bad, isn’t it? Marquis of Queensbury rules have not been canonized, last time I checked.

And leaving aside McCain himself for a second, of what possible benefit can it be to anyone to sing the praises of an unrepentant reprobate who has just passed on? In the New Age-y vernacular of the times, all funerals are a ‘celebration of life’. Who in their right mind would celebrate a life that had been utterly wasted on evil vanities? Anyone who would desire to be memorialized with lying tributes warrants nothing more than an unmarked grave. Such tributes can also be viewed as an egregious violation of the Fifth Commandment. Can any good be brought upon a mother or father by mealy-mouthed flatteries designed to act as the hollowest of reassurances rather than as a summation of a life to be learned from for those who yet walk upon the earth? We honor our ancestors. We don’t worship them.

More to the point of the subject at hand: I can find zero excuse for joining with the Consensus Chorus and lauding McCain as a hero.

It is not heroic to cause a fire on board an aircraft carrier that kills 134 crewmen because you ignited a Zuni rocket on your jet fighter after wet-starting it in a pointless show of bravado.

It is not heroic to get your daddy – the admiral in charge of the US Navy’s entire Pacific fleet – to intervene so that this shameful incident will be expunged from your record.

It is not heroic to get shot down over North Vietnam because you were flying too low – well within radar range – in direct contravention of orders. Again, because you were hotdogging.

It is not heroic to chirp like a canary towards your NVA captors so that you can get an extra Ritz cracker with your daily bowl of fishheads and rats.

It is especially unheroic to agree to broadcast Communist agitprop over North Vietnamese radio – which broadcasts would be duly re-aired on a wider frequency so that Voice of America could intercept them.

It is not heroic to justify this treason later in your career by whining about the ‘torture’ you underwent.

It is not heroic to divorce your first wife because she was ‘kind of a drag’ after undergoing years of therapy to recover from a near-fatal car accident.

It is not heroic to commit adultery against your first wife by jetting off for trysts across the country with your current wife.

It is not heroic to allow yourself to be wined, dined, and bribed by chief savings & loan crook Charles Keating, to blatantly lie about your involvement with him before television cameras, and to gain a reputation as the most unscrupulous of the notorious Keating Five…all in your freshman term in the Senate.

It is not heroic to make your mark in the Senate as its preeminent chickenhawk, gleefully acquiescing in any and every war that serves Israel’s interests, and to codify that status via stupid stunts like singing about bombing Iran.

It is not heroic to submit a bill calling for women to be subject to draft registration.

It is not heroic to have yourself photographed with Syrian ‘freedom fighters’ connected with ISIS, and proudly posting such on your Twitter feed.

It is not heroic to allow the laughably left-wing partisan Snopes to refute most of the above points as ‘conspiracy theories’.

And finally, it not only is not heroic but is exceptionally creepy to insist that everyone who attends your funeral services RSVP beforehand. What are you, a Rothschild?

This is only the stuff that is on the public record, as well. If we are to factor in the doubtless numerous skeletons in his closet, McCain’s life becomes all the more damning. Suffice it to say that while I am not a fan of Donald Trump, he was spot on the money when he said that it takes more than sitting in a tropical prison cell for half a decade to constitute a hero. I can see no good out of pretending otherwise now that Son of Cain is safely ensconced in Gehenna.

I can think of no better concluding remark than that proffered by Mark Dice: “Is John McCain’s funeral over yet?”

Mack Major #fundie facebook.com

Jesus said that when a man LOOKS at a woman to lust after her, he's already committed the adulterous act in his heart. *Matt 5:28

Fellas, did you know that LUST was an open doorway into the spirit realm?

Not only that: it's a one way door, meaning that whatever lies on the other side of that door has permission to enter your life by the simple act of you lusting after it.

Allow me to help some of you understand deeper level spiritual understanding:

The spirit realm is a very real inter-dimensional world that exists right alongside our three dimensional world of reality. To keep it simple, let's just say it's an extra layer of a deeper reality that we all swim in daily. Most just do so unaware.

The spirit realm is populated with different species of life too, just like the world we are most familiar with has different species of reptiles, mammals, birds, fish, insects, germs, etc.

Some of these species are extremely wicked. And they are highly intelligent. More intelligent in fact than humans are. And they hate you.

These species are what the bible refer to as unclean spirits, devils, demons, evil spirits, etc. And they're like really nasty bacteria, viruses or germs whose only purpose is to kill and destroy life in every way possible.

One of these species that exist in this realm are called spirits of lust. And their only purpose is to occupy the mind or body of any person who is willing to host them.

Once those spirits of lust enter into you, they enslave you, open you up for more spirits to come in, and ultimately use you to spread their sick virus into others.

Once you are no longer any good to them, they will shipwreck your life completely. And may even kill you. It may sound far-fetched, but I can assure you it's not!

When Jesus warned us not to lust after women, it had a deeper purpose than just stopping men from being "poon" hounds. He was actually showing you how to keep yourself from being invaded by one of these foul spirits of lust.

Your lust is the open invitation and legal grounds for these spirits of lust to enter you and control your life.

And once they enter, they don't leave easy. They'll bog you down, make you into a bonafide simp, steal your time, life and productivity from you. You won't be able to make much money; at least not as much as you should be making.

Because your whole driving focus, every free waking thought will be on seeking sexual gratification. For many of you, your computer hard drive and cell phone photos are proof of this very point.

I see you online too: timeline filled with photos of half-naked women. Quick to comment on any female who has a picture of herself up in something tight or revealing: "Daaaaang! You sexy!

Why you teasing me like that? Gorgeous! Stunning! Wife material!"
All evidence of extreme thirst, aka LUST.

You need to also be aware that certain environments are set up because they are conducive to filling any unsuspecting man who wander in with lust spirits. Examples of such places would be:

Strip clubs, night clubs, lounges, parties, comedy clubs, concert venues, X-rated movie theaters, Black bike weekends, beach parties, Greek frat festivals, college frat parties, bachelor parties, etc.

Basically, any place where women will be present dressed as skimpily and enticingly as possible is where you'll find plenty of lust demons lurking for new victims. And sad to say: this also includes many CHURCHES...

And please be aware that many women you see online or around you, showcasing all their lovely female assets, are really nothing more than secret agents of Satan sent to trap men's souls via lust.

So quit giving such women props and attention in the hopes that she'll give you a shot! That never works anyway, because women like that feed off your lust and attention. All they want is your worship anyway.

Who told us that lusting after women was what men are supposed to do? Men are supposed to control themselves, possess their bodies in honor, build and create things, establish families and lead.

But you can't do that if your thoughts are filled with sex 24/7.
SHAKE THOSE LUST DEMONS OUT OF YOUR LIFE TODAY!

If you've read thus far, I'd like to present an eBook I wrote that is available right away for immediate and instant download. It's titled:

'Diva, Goddess, Queen: Breaking The Power of Soul Ties, Lust and Sexual Demons'. You can download it here:

www.edendecoded.com/books/diva-goddess-queen

If you're a man who's struggling with lust, filled with that thirsty energy, and you want to break totally and completely free: download this ebook NOW.

If you desire to empower yourself against the wiles of wicked women and their lust spirits: Don't ignore this message.

The sooner you make an active effort to liberate yourself from the tyranny of lust-fullness, the sooner you'll regain your rights and freedom as a man!

Jesus Christ provides absolute and total freedom. And this freedom is available for whosoever will, today. That means YOU.

So download the ebook, and be sure to look to Jesus: who alone can powerfully drive those lust spirits out of your life once and for all.

God bless.